Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/19/1985 Adjourned Meeting r 99 SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 URBAN AREA ZONING ORDINANCE - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING The City Council met in session on this date at . 2:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, Yakima, Washington in a joint public hearing with the Yakima County Commissioners to review the proposed joint Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance. County Commissioners present were Chuck Klarich, Graham Tollefson and Jim Whiteside. County staff present were Dick Anderwald, Director of Planning and Mark Hinthorne,_Assistant ;Director of Planning. City Council members present were Mayor Clarence Barnett and ' Jerry Foy. Council member Jack Sparling present after 2:10 P.M. and Council member Lynn Buchanan present after 2:15 P.M. Council members Henry Beauchamp, Pat Berndt and Lynn Carmichael absent. City staff members II/ present were City Manager Dick Zais, Fred Andrews, City Attorney, Glenn Rice, Director of Community and Economic . Associate Planners Judd Black and Don Skone and Department Assistant II Marta Leon. 1 The meeting was called to order by Commissioner Tollefson. Commissioner Tollefson introduced the County Commissioners and County Staff. Mayor - Barnett introduced the Council members and City Staff. Commissioner Tollefson stated the purpose for this hearing is to consider adoption of a common zoning ordinance for the Yakima Urban Area Plan and reviewed the hearing procedure. Mr. Skone read the following correspondence into the record: letter addressed to Mr. Skone from Ron Whitaker, representing Southland Corporation, dated September 18, 1985, regarding Yakima Urban Area Zoning Ordinance - Grocery Stores - Permitted Uses Table 4 -1. Commissioner Tollefson requested that staff see to it that Southland Corporation receives a copy of the schedule for future hearings. He also stated that a letter received from Gordon Wonderctoday would be addressed by Mr. Wonder later in the . hearing. Mr. Skone reviewed Staff Report No. 38 regarding the text amendments to Draft 2 of the proposed zoning ordinance. Mayor Barnett stated he would like to be provided with a current draft of the Yakima '�rban Area Zoning Ordinance and also noted the following numerical errors in Report No. 38: 1) Page 22 Section 4.020.1 should be "v" not "iv "; 2) Page 36 Section ' 5.020 should be subsection .8 not .7; 3) Page 62 section 9.060 should read 9.080 and 4) Page 70. section 12.050 No. 16 should be No. 17. Mayor Barnett referred to .Section 7.060- Sitescreening Along Streets, of the report questioning whether the new language that is being added is now more general as it applies.to single family residences. Mr. responded that single family developments are exempt 4rom sitescreening standards. Brief discussion ensued with Mr. Hinthorne explaining sitescreening Standard A . and Mr. Skone explaining the new subsection to '12.020E- Application • Requirements. Commissioner Tollefson questioned if there is any public testimony on this report. Lou Alderman, Homeowners Association, in reference to the - new section 9.080- Private Road Standards requested clarification on this as it pertains to new development from private roads . ' ' easements. Mr. Skone noted that under Section 5.020.8 -this provides for access to new development. Responding to Mr. Alderman's inquiry of adoption and effective dates for the new zoning ordinance, Mr. Skone replied that adoption is scheduled for mid - November, therefore, its effective date would be January 1st of next year. It was MOVED by Whiteside, seconded by Klarich to the revisions made in Report No. 38 as technically amended in the previous discussion. Unanimously carried by voice vote. Beauchamp, Berndt and Carmichael absent. It was MOVED by Whiteside, seconded by Klarich to _ accept the revisions made in Report No. 38. Tollefson concurred and the Motion carried. . , Commissioner Tollefson then opened the hearing for general public testimony. Gordon Wonder, Noel Corporation representative, addressed his letter to the City Council and County Commissioners dated September 17, 1985 regarding Chapter 8'Section .070E- General Provisions. He listed the following reasons for his request to delete the aforementioned paragraph: 1) it is a narrow, targeted restriction which is aimed at companies that advertise consumable commodities; 2) it is a sign restriction that the public has not asked for; 3) there is no need to protect the public; 4) it harms only his company and 5) it also harms the merchants who use his signs. Commissioner Klarich questioned why the paragraph was inserted since it is not contained within the existing ordinances which the city and I EC) SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 URBAN AREA ZONING ORDINANCE - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING county are currently enforcing. Mr. Hinthorne distributed photographs, submitted by Mr. Wonder, depicting signs' with and without the advertising of a consumable commodity. Mr. Hinthorne stated that the provision was included for two reasons. The first being the type of image Yakima is trying to project, and secondly, keeping a handle on the size of signs would bring smaller signs into the districts. It was MOVED by Klarich, seconded by Whiteside to delete 8.070F of the proposed zoning ordinance. Tollefson did not concur, but Motion carried. It was MOVED by Foy, seconded by Sparling to delete 8.070F of the proposed zoning ordinance. Unanimously carried by voice vote. Beauchamp, Berndt. and Carmichael absent. Ines Rice, 4409 Arlington, questioned if the proposed Urban Area Plan extends beyond the plan that was adopted in 1976. Mr. Hinthorne explained that only one change has occurred since the last Urban Area Boundary was adopted in December of 1981; this being the area just south of Tieton Drive on the far western limits, consisting of the Pleasant Valley Estates Subdivision. Mrs. Rice requested a copy of the Urban Area Boundary Map which staff responded they would provide her with one. It was MOVED by Foy, seconded by Sparling directing preparation of the 3rd draft of the Urban Area Zoning Ordinance that incorporates the text changes made to date. Unanimously carried by voice vote. Beauchamp, Berndt and Carmichael absent. It was MOVED by Klarich seconded by Whiteside to direct staff to prepare a'third draft of the zoning ordinance including the text amendments made to date. Tollefson concurred and the Motion carried. It was MOVED by Foy, seconded by Sparling to direct staff to prepare a new draft zoning map incorporating the map changes made today by the City Council and the Board of County Commissioners as appropriate. Unanimously carried by voice vote. Beauchamp, Berndt and Carmichael absent. It was MOVED by Whiteside, seconded by Klarich to direct staff to prepare a new draft zoning map incorporating the map changes made today by the City Council and the Board of County Commissioners as appropriate. Tollefson concurred and the Motion carried. Mr. Skone reviewed the draft of the Examiner Ordinance noting the schedule calls for adoption of the aforementioned during the month of October. Discussion followed with Mr. Skone interpretting the various changes in the Examiner Ordinance. With regard to Section 2.23020 - Appointments and Terms - staff's recommendation for a two year term was rejected by the Council and ' Commissioners. Staff was instructed to consider amendments to Section 2.23.040 to address concerns regarding procedure for removal of the Hearing Examiner. The following sections were amended by the City Council and County Commissioners: 1) 2.23.060- deletion of "have the power to" and "as authorized or ... to" and adding "in accordance with" after the word "office "; 2) 2.23.110- deletion of "payment of reproduction costs" and adding "request" after "upon "; 3) 2.23.130 -in line 3 of paragraph, deletion of "registered" and add "certified" and deletion of the last sentence in this section; 4) Section 2.23.140 - deletion of "by any aggrieved person ... manner:" and replace this deleted language with language fran RCW 36.70.830; 5) 2.23.140b- deletion of previously proposed $25.00 and leave $75.00 as is and 2.23.140c -the first sentence amended to read "the notice of appeal shall specify the claimed issue(s), error(s) which the Board /Council is asked to consider on appeal and shall specifically state all the grounds for such appeal and 2.23.140e -in line 6 insertion of the verbage "a fifteen (15) day" after the word "grant" and in lines 13 and 14, deletion of the "administrative official, hearings examiner or legislative body" and insert the word "department "; 6) 2.23.160c- deletion of this subparagraph and 7) 2.23.190 - deletion . of this paragraph. (Buchanan absent after 4:10 P.M.) Mr. Skone reviewed the draft of the Interlocal Agreement. After a brief discussion on the proposed amendments, it was the general consensus of those present to make the following changes: 1) Part IV- Subparagraph B amended to read "the committee shall select a Chairman, from its membership ... "; 2) IV Subparagraph C line 8 to read "the Committee shall by 3/4 majority vote, recommend ..." and 3) Part VI subparagraph B, change 7 to 14 calendar days in line ,9 and in the last line delete "within fifteen (15) days of billing" and insert "semi - monthly according to County ". Discussion was temporarily interrupted to set the next meeting date for Thursday, November 7th at 2:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers. (Sparling absent after 4:30 P.M.) • Mayor Barnett commented that he testified years ago to the Regional Planning Commission regarding the appeal time being extended under SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 151 URBAN AREA ZONING ORDINANCE - CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING extenuating circumstances. He would like to see something of this nature inserted in the agreement. Commissioner Klarich stated he would like have a clause included in the agreement pertaining to indirect costs. Bill Hambelton, 615 So. 32nd Avenue, questioned the number of deputy assistants the examiner will employ and who will pay for his wages. Mr. Klarich explained that the examiner would be the primary and the deputy would act as an alternate when necessary. Mr. Hambelton also questioned who will pay for the examiner's office expenses. Mayor Barnett responded that it depends .upon the agreement between the contracting parties. . Mr. Skone commented that Report No. 39 was an informational report only. There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 4:45 P.M. to then meet on November 7th at 2:00 P.M. READ AND CERTIFIED. ACCURATE BY e/ 010 DATE /� 5 d� Council - , // cV0-1 -- g Council member ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor • •