The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUTC PKT 08-03-2009 City of Federal Way City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee August 3, 2009 5:30 p.m. City Hall Council Chambers MEETING AGENDA (Electronic version only) 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC COMMENT (3 minutes) 3. COMMITTEE BUSINESS Topic Title! Description Presenter Page A. Approval of Minutes: July 20, 2009 LeMaster 2 B. "Plat and Land Use Application Time Limit Barker 4 Extensions" and "Vesting Clarification" 4. OTHER Action Council or Info Date Time Action N/A 5 min. Action 9/01/09 20 min. (2) Ordinances 5. FUTURE MEEnNGSj AGENDA ITEMS: The next regularly scheduled LUTC meeting will be Monday, September 21, 2009. Please note that the August 17, 2009 LUTC meeting has been cancelled and the September 7, 2009 meeting is cancelled in observance of Labor Day. 6. ADJOURN Committee Members Unda Kachmar; Chair Jim Ferrell Dini Dudos City Staff Cary M. Roe, P.E, Assistant City Manager/Emergency Manager Darlene LeMaster; Administrative Assistant II 253-835-2701 G:ILUTClLUTC Agendas and Summa1ies 200918-03-09 LUTC Agenda.doc City of Federal Way City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee July 20, 2009 5:30 PM City Hall City Council Chambers MEETING SUMMARY Committee Members in Attendance: Committee Chair Kochmar and Committee Member Duclos. Committee Member Ferrell was excused. Staff Members in Attendance: Assistant City Manager Cary Roe, Public Works Director Marwan Salloum, Deputy Public Works Director Ken Miller, Streets Systems Project Engineer Brian Roberts, City Attorney Pat Richardson, Senior Traffic Engineer Jesse Hannahs, Surface Water Manager Will Appleton, and Administrative Assistant II Darlene LeMaster 1. CALL TO ORDER Committee Chair Kochmar called the meeting to order at 5:30 PM. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. 3. BUSINESS ITEMS Topic TitlelDescription Fonvard to Council N/A A. Approval of the July 6, 2009, LUTC Minutes Committee approved July 6, 2009 LUTC minutes as presented. Moved: Duclos Seconded: Kochmar Passed: Unanimously, 2-0 B. Approval of the Ordinance Creating North Lake Management District No.2 8/04/2009 Ordinance There was no public comment. Will Appleton presented information on this item and gave a very brief overview of the process to create a lake management district. Committee fonvarded Option #1 as presented. Moved: Duclos Seconded: Kochmar Passed: Unanimously, 2-0 c. 20th Place SW Emergency Slide Repair - Bid Award 8/04/2009 Consent There was no public comment. Brian Roberts presented information on this item, explaining that all of the bids received were below the engineer's estimate on this project. Staff is very confident that both the apparent low bidder and their subcontractors are qualified to do this work and that the work can be done within the bid amount. The FEMA reimbursable portion of this project is for the restoration of the road only. The retaining wall was not reimbursable under the FEMA guidelines. . Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented. Moved: Duclos Seconded: Kochmar Passed: Unanimously, 2-0 G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2009\07~20~09-Minutes.doc I ....~A r r.~~/,..._~_~__....._..:__ I"'______~..."'__ Land Use/Transportation Committee Page 2 July 20. 2009 D. Acceptance of Grant Funding for Transportation Improvement Projects 8/04/2009 Consent There was no public comment. Marwan Salloum presented information on this item. There was no discussion by committee members. Committee fonvarded Option #1 as presented. Moved: Duclos Seconded: Kochmar Passed: Unanimously, 2-0 E. Street Lighting on 20th Way S - S 324th Street to S 330th Street; 100% Design and Authorization to Bid 8/04/2009 Consent There was no public comment. Jesse Hannahs presented information on this item. There was brief conversation of if the bids came in lower than expected, would money go back into the CDBG fund. Me Salloum responded that funded projects do not often yield bids as low as we have seen with other construction projects. Reporting requirements of the CDBG Recovery Act are extensive and can influence bidding. CDBG funding also dictates how things must be bid in order to qualifY to receive the funds for the project. For this project both conventional and LED bulbs are being considered, pending bidding results of each option. Committee fonvarded Option #1 as presented. Moved: Duclos Seconded: Kochmar Passed: Unanimously, 2-0 4. OTHER 5. FUTURE MEETING The next regular LUTC meeting will be Monday. August 3,2009, at 5:30 PM in City Council Chambers. 6. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 5:47 PM. Attest: Darlene LeMaster, Administrative Assistant II COMMITTEE APPROVAL: Linda Kochmar, Chair Recused Jim Ferrell, Member Dini Duclos, Member G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2009\07-20-09-Minutes.doc ClTV or Federal ay CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT DATE: July 28, 2009 To: Linda Kochmar, Chair Members of the Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTe) FROM: -Por Greg Fewins, CDS Directo;l1::- Deb Barker, Senior Planner \)\? SUBJECT: Code Amendment for Plat and Land Use Application Tirne Extensions and Code Amendment for Vesting Clarification MEETING DATE: August 3, 2009 A. POLICY QUESTIONS Should the City of Federal Way approve amendments to the FWRC Title 18 "Subdivisions" and Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code" regarding Plat and Land Use Application Time Extensions code arnendments, and should the City approve amendments to FWRC Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code" regarding Vesting Clarification code arnendments? B. BACKGROUND Planning Commission Public Hearing Process On July 1,2009, staff electronically forwarded the draft Planning Commission staff report on the proposed code amendments to Stakeholders and interested citizens. Three e-mail comments were received, from ESM Consulting Engineers, Lakehaven Utility District, and H. David Kaplan, all indicating no comrnent and! or support of the arnendments. One comment letter dated July 20, 2009, frorn Sarn Pace, Housing Specialist with the Seattle-King County Association of Realtors, was electronically submitted to the Planning Commission (a copy of this letter is included in the Planning Commission minutes). The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed code amendments on July 22,2009. During this public hearing, the Planning Commission had the opportunity to consider written and oral testimony from citizens and representatives from the local development community. (The staff reports and minutes from this rneeting is included in your packet. ) On July 22, 2009, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to approve the staff recommended code amendments. K:\2009 Code Arnendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUTC\LUTC Memo.doc City Council Committee Stair Report Plat and Land Use Application Time Extension and Vesting Clarification Code Amendments Meeting Date: August 3, 2009 Page 1 C. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS Some of the key provisions of the proposed code amendments include: · Vesting for Use Process I, II, III, and IV applications is proposed to be changed from the time that an application receives land use approval to the time that an application is determined to be complete, consistent with subdivision vesting provisions. · Currently, an applicant has 180 days to provide additional information or corrections as requested by the City or face project cancelation. This I80-day tirne line for Subdivision and Use Process I, II, III, and IV applications is proposed to be extended on a case-by-case basis, subject to criteria. · Currently, short plats and BSP applications must be completed within one year of approval. The code is proposed to be changed to allow up to five years for completion of the required improvements to short plat or BSP applications, consistent with preliminary plat construction timelines. · Currently, an approved short plat, BSP, or preliminary plat or Use Process I, II, III, or IV application is allowed a one-tirne one-year extension following the allotted construction timeline or the project approval expires. The amendment proposes that two-year extensions be made available to allow for the completion of approved subdivision and Use Process II, III, and IV applications, subject to criteria and Director approval. Process I applications must be complete within one year and would be allowed a one-time one-year extension. D. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS As noted in the agenda bills, the Planning Commission recommends approval of the code arnendments contained in the Draft Adoption Ordinance for FWRC Title 19.15.045 "Completeness of applications" regarding Process I, II, III, and IV vesting provisions. The Planning Commission also recommends approval of the code arnendments contained in the Draft Adoption Ordinance for FWRC Title 18 "Subdivisions" and FWRC Title 19 "Zoning and Development Code" which contains proposed amendments that provide plat and land use application time lines and extensions. K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUfC\LUfC Memo.doc City Council Committee Statf Report Plat and Land Use Application Time Extension and Vesting Clarification Code Amendments Meeting Date: August 3, 2009 Page 2 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 1,2009 ITEM #: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18 "Subdivisions," and Title 19 "Zoning and Develol)ment Code" regarding plat and land use application time extensions and related amendments. POLICY QUESTION: Should the City approve amendments to the Title 18 "Subdivisions, " and Title 19 "Zoning and Development Code, " regarding plat and land use application time extensions and related amendments COMMITTEE: Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC) CATEGORY: o Consent o City Council Business MEETING DATE: August 3,2009 ~ Ordinance o Resolution o o Public Hearing Other STAFF REpORT By: Senior Planner Deb Barker __ _._........... _oo........ ."___ ._____. n..... _.... . ...... m _....._ .. ........._...............................__...._..._...... .._~ ____~!'=~!:_.g~~~~i~y..J:?~y~I~p-~~~t.~~yi~~~._ Background: The proposed amendment addresses a request to amend subdivision and zoning regulations by extending approval tinlelines in light of current economic conditions which have resulted in the housing market downturn, tightening credit markets, and generally poor conditions for development activity. Amendment provisions target Subdivision applications for short plat, Binding Site Plan (BSP), and preliminary plat as well as applications for Land Use Process I, II, III, and IV. The amendment will provide extension opportunities to the 180-day request for information/correction timeline; \V111 allow a five-year construction period for short plat and BSP applications; will provide additional/longer extensions for subdivision and land use projects; and address other clarifications as deemed necessary. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 22, 2009, and recommended that the City Council approve the proposed amendments as recommended by staff The Planning Commission recommendation is included in the adoption ordinance. Attachments: (1) Draft Adoption Ordinance for plat and land use application time extensions which contains the proposed amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission, amending FWRC Title 18 "Subdivisions" and FWRC Title 19 "Zoning and Development Code;" (2) Staff Report to the Planning Commission for the July 22, 2009, Public Hearing which includes exhibits A through L; and (3) Draft Minutes ofthe July 22, 2009, Planning Commission Public Hearing. Options Considered: (I) Adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation as contained in the Draft Adoption Ordinance; (2) Adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation as modified by the LUTC; or (3) Do not adopt the amendments. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council approve Option # I; adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation as contained in the Draft Adoption Ordinance. CITY MANAGER ApPROVAL: ~ Committee Council DIRECTOR ApPROVAL: ~ Committee Council COMMlTTEE RECOMMENDATION: Forward Option #1; adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation as contained in the Draft Adoption Ordinance to full Council on September 1, 2009, for first reading. Linda Kochmar, Chair Jim Ferrell, Member Dini Duclos, Member K:12009 Code AmendmentslPlat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vestingILUTClagenda bill tpr FWRC 18 & 19.doc PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION(S): 1sT READING OF ORDINANCE (09/01109): "[ move to forward the ordinance to a second readingfor enactment on the September 15, 2009, consent agenda. " 2ND READING OF ORDINANCE (09/15/09): "[ move approval of the LUTC's recommendation to approve the code amendments, which are contained in the Adoption Ordinance. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: o APPROVED o DENIED o TABLEDIDEFERREDINO ACTION o MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) COUNCIL BILL # I ST reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # REVISED - 02106/2006 K:\2009 Code AmendmentslPlat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LlJfC\agenda billJpr FWRC 18 & 19.doc Attachment 1 - Draft Adoption Ordinance for plat and land use application time extensions; amending FWRC Title 18 "Subdivisions" and FWRC Title 19 "Zoning and Development Code" ORDINANCE NO. 09- AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to plat and land use application time extensions; amending FWRC 18.05.080, 18.30.260, 18.35.220, 19.15.050, 19.15.100, and 19.15.110; repealing FWRC 18.30.270, 19.65.110, and 19.70.160; and adding new sections to FWRC 18.05.090 and 19.15.075. (Amending Ordinance Nos. 09-594,07-573,07-554,00-375,97-291, 92-133, and~p-43) WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need to periodicaUymqg~f.Y Title 18 of the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC), "Subdivisions," and ~~tJ~, 19:: of th(f:::~EWR,"".,:,"',,\ C, "Zoning and /.':/;~~;$'&~ ,;/ -'~"""" .,::::~t(~~;rj\::. Development Code," in order to conform to st~t and f~deral law, codlif;ldrn.,~nistrative i.fr;):,1,~~.::t:?' practices, clarify and update zoning regulations ;~ d;rJ;4necl:fFy, and improv~the efficiency -'''-7~''~W . .~t~/,?"" '''<<'z-i;?'Z';.. . .~r~f' of the regulations and the development r~0~~~process; and:::~,~ WHEREAS, this ordinance, contatnifl.g~m~wiments to J.~tfment regulations and the "u, 'm]?:::::", , text of Title 18 FWRC and Title 19 FWRC, h~ cqplpHeU:iWU9.tfltocess VI review, chapter 19.80 FWRC, pursuant to chj;l; :fftr.JVRC; and\>,'" 'J!::: "Jzer. \ riq., '~\>"'" ,.:" WHEREAS, the~~e ~IJR0~~ in the lq~t regional, and national housing markets, ~J;//,&~#x?-'::!'.;.,,,.. .:0 ,., , ';;.:f"~/;0&-;$0~W:}::0.:/d/ reduced de~d:tqf:~~}Y hots~4}ighterfftfgiare"dit market, difficulty in obtaining the financing nec'J~,:i~ COmpl:;~:'\hct~~raIlY poor conditions for development activity have '\):';>>' ",., resulted ina~!!Jlation whereg~velopers of new housing, subdivisions, and commercial projects ,........ ...... .......... ....... ......... ...... ......... ....... ...".... -. ...... .......... ...... - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .u...... H... ....... ...... .......... ... ... .......... ...... ........h .... .......... ..... ....... ..... are unable to final~~\gevelopment proposals in a timely manner; and WHEREAS, th~Master Builders of King County and other stakeholders in the building industry believe that bold actions are needed at all levels of government to spur housing and economic recoveries; and Ordinance No. Page 1 of 14 Rev 3/09 Land Use, K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LlITC\ORDlNANCE for FWRC 18 &19.doc WHEREAS, in order to prevent the expiration of development applications or approvals during this economic downturn, extensions of the expiration dates of certain development related applications and approvals are needed; and WHEREAS, the expiration of a development application or approval can have significant financial impacts to a developer and also adversely affects the fitl,~jchiLinstitutions and other ...... .. investors which have provided financing in support of a devel<?priierit~p)posal; and ....... .......... ...... .......... ...... ........ ...... .......... ..... ........ .... - .......... WHEREAS, the national scale of the housingm@:,ketdowntJtij~M:d tightening credit .............. .......... .............., .......... ....... ...... .......... ...... .... .......... .....- .... .......... .,.. - .-. ..... ..... ...... '.. ......... ..... .. .......... ...... .......... ..... .......... . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ..-....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... .. -...... markets have severely affected many builders and@yelopers i.n King Countyangp1ar.1,Y of these ................. ... ............ ... .......... . . . - . . . . . . . . . .. .......... builders and developers are now struggling financially;{ihd .......... ...... ....-.-... ...... WHEREAS, construction relate~:eEtivity is a signitl81tJax generator and provides much %.&ili));." .<H ... . ... needed revenue to local governments to fin~c€1.ijp~f5! public servi.tt~fand '*.'. A~?;. ..:.':.<. ':;:%- ?';":%"~';-<<'-" .:.;. ~:. '//";::~~"0y.,,- _ , ,'/ WHEREAS, FWRC.~i~.le 18 and FMtfJ:f~f~..,for extensions of development -::(\)\l~)?Y\}~\:::.: -;~~7!f:/r permit applications an4~pprovaI~mcluding shoit~plats, prelIminary plats, binding site plans, and ,.::::{}fit:;.. \r/{~ '1%. ./::-:....-:-::;:;:~:>>>. .\?:::: '~?1 . -. Use Process I, II, III, alidIv....... .(lppl~f3H9Ils but limitlmf number and duration of such extensions; .............u....u .i7 ........--.--..."-.- ......................,.."_..._".-.'......_-.... ',y and WHEREAS, maintaining the viability of development applications and approvals will also help to ensure that the development industry is in a position to respond more quickly once favorable economic conditions return; and Ordinance No. Page 2 of 14 Rev 3/09 Land Use, K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUfC\ORDlNANCE for FWRC 18 &19.doc WHEREAS, the Council finds that it is in the best interest of citizens of Federal Way and the local economy to provide flexibility and modify procedures for extending development related applications and approval, subject to criteria; and WHEREAS, the proposed regulations are categorically exempt from environmental ,,;;~.;.;:-- review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) pursuant t9;)P~-€,)97-11-800(20); and 4@Jf~ ' WHEREAS, the draft staff report was electronicar.!:i$!f(5ttl'g~d on July 1, 2009, to '4h.''''?.':>?,.. ;q~_ ...~~;.~!~',.r. stakeholders and interested citizens for review and comm.ent~~:,which rglfiited in one comment letter submitted by Sam Pace with the SeattlelKi:~;I~~::~l~~rs; and "1"., WHEREAS, the Planning Commission propea)l.~~n~p;~ted:l: duly noticeq?~ublic hearing on these code amendments on July 22, 2~tQ9; and forwardeda:f@fommendation of approval to the City Council; and 't~.~\tljl1!~!!j.< '-;t . ,w~J.:-;'''}' :\ "%" --'~;f~i?&@.' , , :.} WHEREAS, the ~~'~n~::rrransport\i~~ihe Federal Way City Council considered these code:~~~driii~t~on August '\,2009, and recommended adoption of the text amendments as recg::;;'~1,~~,,_~I&;::::c:~sion ~~:;~jj~:TY'~.CrL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, W A~MlpTON, DO O_~ ASti't).LL;ows: ';Y''';~:1*$t;~. "'...J/ se2i1~,,1. Findings. 'Ie CitYCouncil of the City of Federal Way makes the following ';0@4:, :~ ";:y#;-:, %1 fi. . h ")'/'&0.-, M: mdmgs WIt resW#'fi.t%!,JO the nt..o../posed amendments. p~/;w~,. 1?J?-:- """.: Ar ;., (a) These at'dt' amendments are in the best interest of the residents of the City and 7 will benefit the city as a whole by aiding the local economy and helping the construction industry survive the economic downturn so as to preserve investments made in the development permitting processes. Ordinance No. Page 3 of 14 Rev 3/09 Land Use, K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUfC\ORDINANCE for FWRC 18 &19.doc (b) These code amendments comply with Chapter 36.70A RCW, Growth Management. (c) These code amendments are consistent with the intent and purpose of Title 18 FWRC and Title 19 FWRC and will implement and are consistent with the applicable provisions ( d) These code amendments bear a substantial the of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan. not adversely affect, the public health, safety, and welfa;~~,%::-:", ./}]}/ . ' ./~ ,.:%'I'hr These code amendments have follq~tl the prqper procedure iJW'~~,/,')~;~;.. .~ r'%~~, .~~@/, ,.i4:-;;.-- '..~. ,.~t~~;$~:/ ;;@{i;'" Section 2. Conclusions. Pursuan~::t2 19.80 FWRC 'i.;~.35 FWRC, and based upon the recitals and the findings set forth in ~'~t~lt)tll~ti~ede;:r-~{;itY Council makes the \::::,.::':',:.:,':'::\::::,.... .'''''' following Conclusions of Law with respect tqtht;@ec:ismn~!:J~pteria necessary for the adoption 1~~%iff;:;,/ ...... ............. Ai?$?f&'k1'@,%;f~ of the proposed amenq.ments: ""1-. j,Mf~", ". .fY;N~~~$~% %@ '::::::':': ,./' (a) The .' prdf(~.~ti F*.(: amendmentWare consistent with, and substantially '-'Wf%> ..l?%!'r{/,'prw;'%:"''''' .. ..",:., *~i'2': .;~7=>>;yt~A:::.ii:.;"",:';:;;"" //., ...~1~2}~N:::.(/ . "Z//.W&%.6.;~;'~~W>>~'/ ;;....:;;~/ -. ......:.:.:.:.:-...-.... .. ,..-;t/"'~m: '"I' ~-:.;.:?a;-I''';::';.y/~;;;,.;:~//~/' implement,J~IQUg)1~~&Fe ~~ay C6inpre'lltnsive Plan goals and policies: .::{p>:--- . ':::::::))~:;:::r~~:::.> '/~t~.. ; LUG2 Devei6~i:~:effic[_.liftimely development review process based on a publiclpd~~~t partn1S"hip. (e) FWRC. LuP4 .n... '< ........ - . "HH .. .... -.. Maximize e!ftciency of the development review process. ..-....... .-... ...H..... ..... .......... .u.. ..n..... .... ..H...... .... ......--.. .... .......... .... EDG6 Th~:&~!X:Wlll encourage and support existing businesses to remain and/or expa~Wtheir facilities within Federal Way. ED? 15 The City will continue to implement a streamlined permitting process consistent with state and federal regulations to reduce the upfront costs of locating businesses in the City. ED? 18 The City will periodically monitor local and regional trends to be able to adjust plans, policies, and programs. Ordinance No. Page 4 of 14 Rev 3/09 Land Use, K\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUTC\ORDINANCE for FWRC 18 &19.doc HP8 Consider the economic impact of all development regulations on the cost of housing. HP9 Maximize efficiency in the City's development review process and ensure that unnecessary time delays and expenses are eliminated. Continue to provide streamlined permitting processes for development that is consistent with the FWCP and FWCC, and that has no adverse impacts. );.~;.. HP 10 Encourage community input, where appropriate, i~ft~4,evelopment permit process by providing thorough and timely infor~tfon to the public. lj:;f?;:::'~'10{}kf.:. HP 11 Continue to assist developers with housing'ti{6posalg;.1~e earliest possible opportunity, including preapplication IIl@~~ings., to prod.l?rojects that can be reviewed quickly and maximize theirablhfytoreceive p~l'l~~/ ..... .::;:?~./ v... (b) The proposed FWRC amendmeIW';~~M.: a subst~l1tial relations~'1t~;fthe public ....... ...jj/ . - -. - -. -.. .... health, safety, and welfare because it responds to curten~thational economic conditions that ':~;:i:;;;:;";.._ --::)::}>:::: impact local land development and li~.g::-related indusHl~$by modifying development '~;'~ff~j~;:~" ./ regulations to provide for flexibility during'(ne dew:'Itt~~.J1t review process that is not provided \..~If"("{:?i$.t~0:i/ in the current code; andc:latines and refinei;,;;v:ffrious rei~ttd codes in order to increase the ..::::}:::::-.:.".... ......:::<~\~:}::?;::;:;; .~;:'/ "'::)):-- "\}~{.:..-. (y~~;. efficiency of the deyetppwent revt~w process. '~~ ",' "::::::=:::::\::::" ::::\> .~@;:~;:;::( "::::~U~t~?:::> ./?::>:::: _'. ._.".. :~~.. (c) The proposed~l;l1efH1~ljt~inJh~ffest interest of the public and the residents of .S' ... .i../;\ the City~"::"e!~s i~~fClVides f~;:::ibility in development review timelines, which #1."'~t!3'~" .) resti(t;~~~~tinued devela~'ent withirithe City, thus aiding the local economy, and ensuring ~}~r~:im. ..::::" ~".~$i%).;, :~;ri;?:' *%ll.-,. <;f.;:%:'. that housing c~~Jemain rea9Xtic. ;0.'<<22:,;'/" -we:?.-, //~J/ Section 3. 4J.l$~ilon is added to chapter 18 FWRC to read as follows: -~~;;' ;;::;Y 18.05.090 Lap~e of Approval- Time Extension (1) Application. No less than 60 days prior to lapse of approval under FWRC 18.30.260 and FWRC 18.35.220, or prior to lapse of approval of any precedin!! time extension !!ranted under this section. the applicant may submit a written request in the form of a letter with supportin!! documentation to the department of community development services reQuestin!! extension of those time limits of up to two years. (2) Criteria. An extension request shall satisfy the followin!! criteria to be approved: Ordinance No. Page 5 of 14 Rev 3/09 Land Use, K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUfC\ORDINANCE lor FWRC 18 &19.doc (a) Except for the first request for time extension. the applicant has made substantial pr02ress to complete the plat~ (b) There are circumstances beyond the applicant's control which prevent compliance with the time limits of FWRC 18.30.260. 18.35.220. or any previously 2ranted extension~ (c) The extension will not create or continue conditions that constitute a code violation or an attractive nuisance. contribute to erosion and sedimentation problems~ or impact the public health. safety. and welfare~ and (d) Whether either physical conditions in the vicinit~iff::the plat or codes and requirements of the city. applicable a2encies. and utili!.rffoviders have chan2ed to a such a de2ree since initial approval that it would be1C6nti':.arv to the public interest to extend the life of the plat. includin2 but not limit~ to s1i~factors as: i. Whether the adoption of new codesA'nd/or siNWlards would ''''...''u.<- .,.",-,. substantially affect proiect lavout and stormdtaIiia2e desi2n~::0)~Wj~~ n. The adequacy of miti2atioJiand/or impact fees toilar,,ess the cost -:...<.:......:-. "/-/'0',"'" ,... of miti2ation at the end of the expiratiol1:penod~:)'~;?~&'" iii. Whether the delayed proiect)s.anilfibediment to oth~f development proiects in the vicinity as a resulf6ttraffic concurrency reserved capacity. '\%::..<;:::.:. The director may conditi6h#tbeextension reQtn~stto satisfv criteria (c) and (d) as a p P ro P ria te.'(:;:ri;0{i*~0:ih.,?i In order to demonstrate coni,liance~l.~Jhe critefia of FWRC 18.05.090(2). '".... I'z'%".y/'i';:;;/;~.-:..,-'_ _ . the applicant may also provide pertinenLd'OcutHi:nfatien of financial backin2. lease acceptance. or o!~:ei~~~commitmeN~*ecured ti,Uie developer and/or a2ent as well as applic~~k projee~timelines witll, milestones and dates of anticipated I ..:....:.............. :C.. comp ehon~i>.?'f:0::. . /:/ (3) Fee. Theanp.licant$~~ll include wit;li@the letter of request the hourlv fee as established by thet:ltv. Tbete.tiuest willrttJt be accepted unless it is accompanied by the r~~''O:urlv f~~L>>.. ..) /#4) RevieJ{;;ift~qJf~s. Eaell'l"eQuest for extension will be reviewed and decided upon ,i4lt~ the director itiFommunitYdevelopment services who may 2rant up to a two-year 4,0-:"ej{~nsion(s) of apJjf(f~;fl1. ....... > -!-/./~d'/_,///.,,<< .< (5j~fJAppeals. Any'ite:rson a22rieved bv the 2rantin2 or denvin2 of a request for a time ~~&.sion unde,utbis section may appeal that decision. The appellant must file a letter of'.n:eal indi~tin2 how this decision affects the appellant's property and presentin2'~lf~reu.t~tnt material or information supportin2 the appellant's ~-://'-'/";"'''''/Z/ contention. TH.'(Wii'ppeal will be heard and decided upon usin2 the appeal process described in FWRC 18.30.140 et seQ. Anv short plat time limit. pursuant to Chapter 36.70B RCW, upon the city's processin2 and decision upon applications under this title may, except as otherwise specifically stated in this title, may be modified bv a written a2reement between the applicant and the director of community development services. (6) Retroactive applicabilitv. The provisions of this section shall be retroactive to active and valid short plat, bindin2 site plan. and preliminary plat applications. Ordinance No. Page 6 of 14 Rev 3/09 Land Use, K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUTC\ORDlNANCE for F\,vRC 18 &19.doc Section 4. A new section is added to chapter 19 FWRC to read as follows: 19.15.075 Final decisions and effect of the decision Upon a decision becomin2: final. the applicant may en2:a2:e in activity based on the decision. provided applicable permits have been approved. (a) Director. Decisio.ns o.f the Directo.r of Co.mmunitv Develo.pment Services beco.me final subiect to. the fo.llo.win2:: (1) If a written notice of appeal is received within the..appeal period. the decision shall not become final until the appeal process is~o.ffi:ulete and the citv issues a final decision'i.n (2) If no appeal is submitted within the 14-cal~ndaf?(:la.v appeal veriod. the decision shall become fmal on the first calendar davfollowUI~t~e expiration of the appeal period',il';1i;/-. ..:. (b) Hearin!! Examiner. If a decision o.f th~Ji~iarit! e~aminer i~t~~final decision of the citv. it mav be reviewed under FWRC.;.~-9.70.260.Where the hearlllgexaminer's decision is not the final decision of the city(~i~f, decis[&Jl.mav be appeal~linder FWRC 19.70.170 and is subiect to subsectiort;(~)o.Ltms'se.ction./ '~"':%""" . :;;.:::;:.,. (1 ) A!!encv decision appeals. The decisiou:.1j~fthe hearin2: examiner on an a2:encv decision appeal is the final decision of the~itr..excePt where the proposed proiect involves:-)... "::;{~ili;h.. .............'..... .,';.;u'''<< .~ i. An approval. othe!tfulJ1:~~ite plan apii.~t1. involvin2: a school (FWRC 19.195.100). a communitv'tf?creati~~~~~a (FW~ 19.195.120). a 2:overnment facility(FWRC 19.195.1.?0).Jluubliclltilitv (FWRC 19.195.140). or a ublic ark FWRtw..1if:.il 5.160 locafedin an SE . suburban estates RS sin le- family residenti~ti), or:. :iimultifamiIV)zone~ or ,_:;;.;_;_:,.-;. 'cr..-_;:;../.> >:::: 4J;i~>~<\ site pfiin approval fora public utility located in a BN (nei2:hborh()od&~~ess).j~.<=. (communitvbnsiness). or OP (office park) zone. .:.,....'.. ./-;~>rt'/I'///*//. ': _ ,.'.. ........ . Hi. SI7iDMjDUe-itw::WldecHWRC Titles 14 and 15. ".(25Uther caseY&~cases'~8t~1ffect to subsection (1) of this section. decisions o.ftl1.e hearin2:ii.amine?lf~me final: .,}. i.Ifrto applM~f~the hearin2: examiner's decision is submitted within . .......:....;:<:::::. '<.:<--,,"::: :-:/,/;::(-,/, theaJ~peal period.o:nthe firsli-falendar day followin2: the expiration of the 14- .....-..... ."0. '/ calen~~r-dav appealp:eriod~ H. ii. If a\Vritten notice of appeal of the hearin2: examiner's decision is receivedW.!~~n the~ppeal period. when the city issues a final decision after the appeal procijssisc6mplete. Section 5. FWR:C 18.05.080 shall be amended to read as follows: 18.05.080 Application cancellation. ill If an applicant for a boundary line adjustment, lot line elimination, binding site plan, short subdivision plat, preliminary plat, final plat, alteration of plat, or vacation of subdivision fails to provide additional information to the city within 180 days of being notified by mail that such information is requested, the application shall be deemed null Ordinance No. Page 7 of 14 Rev 3/09 Land Use, K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUfC\ORDINANCE for FWRC 18 &19.doc and void and the city shall have no duty to process, review, or issue any decision with respect to such an application. (2) Extension request. No less than 30 days prior to the lapse of the 180-day notification by the city under FWRC 18.05.080(1), the applicant for a short plat. bindin1! site plan. or preliminary plat application(s) may submit a written request in the form of a letter with supportin1! evidence to the department reQuestin1! an extension of the 180-day time limits and documentin1! the followin1!: a That circumstances be ond the a licant's control r.event com liance with the time limits of FWRC 18.05.080(1 )~ .,~Y~~'i'~"", (b) That the applicant is makin1! substantial pro1!re~lh respondin1! to the request for information so that review of the applicati!t1iif~ be furthered when that information is submitted~ and1.1'I'cii."" (c) The number of additional calendar daysn:eces$ary to ri't'tttide the requested . . .>,.>,,"........,..,.,>. .. '~.re:!:-~ In~ormatlon .,....,....::'?" ..... '0",""&,. 11 '."'."'.' "~~" 3 Review rocess. Are uest for an extensioh to theJ80-da time limt",wiIlbe reviewed and decided u on b the direct6tbased ontes onses to crit;.;r/.~ FWRC 18.05.080(2). '."""'""""",.."",,,., "',. j:f/ (4) Retroactive applicabilitv. Administrative exte~~~n to the 180-day time limit shall be retroactive to those valid bindin1! site plan. shoftsubdivision. and preliminary ':;'>~:';':'/" "'::>>::;:>'-:': plat applications currently unde€ii~view.( ':~~~"$;~JlWJ~th,., """Ym'"",,"""" Section 6. FWRC 1830.260 shall be '~fenae"J.f_~~;~ folJows: ,.,.,.,.."..... . r1~" /.it!fY ''''%~f~&", 18.30.260 Effect -:;Sboftolat dDuratIO'.,Wnpproval. Xp .",..... ...,.,....,.., ,r., " (1) Short p1a,k~pprovifl~99:11 expire on&4ive year~ from the date of the director of communitY4ey~lqpment s~fyices approval~?aid. approval shall constitute acceptance of short subdivisioiFl~*9ut a~~[9c;:sign and shaifJrlclude all conditions, restrictions, and other req~irementst~qq..i[eHbyth(}Aig:fl9rbf community development services as part of sh~sti_~~t$J~11;~ppr~'~;,ptyappf&~~rof ~ short subdivision shall not c.o~~titute . ~yroval for l~ttl$l..&armgq1!H~radmg, vegetation removal, or any other activities which ^"{~herwise requir2]iWfulits froill.thctity. ,V~>~1:i{t~~,Prior to const~it~jon ofifuprovements pursuant to short plat approval, engineering dnlW~~~c for public itlroverrients shall be submitted for review and approval to the depart.t",ofpublic jWrks, Lakehaven utility district, and city of Tacoma public utilities departmt!riV~p pemM~ to begin construction or site work shall be granted until final approval o('i~:!iJ.k.J1;.yplans, including storm drainage; the payment of all pertinent fees; and the submi(t~fi.bf performance securities as may be required. .;/ Section 7. FWRC 18.35.220 shall be amended to read as follows: 18.35.220 Duration of approval. Preliminary plat approval shall expire five years from the date of city council approval, unless the applicant requests an extension as provided in FWRC 18.05.090. from the hearing examiner. The request for extension must be submitted to the department of Ordinance No. Page 8 of 14 Rev 3/09 Land Use, K:\2009 Code Amendments\PIat and LUA Extensions\PIat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUTC\ORDlNANCE for FWRC 18 & I 9. doc community development services at least 60 days prior to the expiration date of the preliminary plat. The department of community development services shall schedule and ad'/ertise a public hearing in accordance ','lith FWRC 18.35.100. In considering whether to grant the extension, the hearing examiner shall consider the follov:ing in the public hearing: ( 1) Whether substantial progress has been made toward completion of the entire plat, or the initial phase of the plat, if the preliminary approval included phasing. (2) Whether conditions in the vicinity of the subdivision have c,inged to a sufficient ~::;: e::!n":,,:,;a~:::::r= ~::~::.::~~;: ~:oval or may allow dIViSIon of the plat mto separate phases, eac~t.n explfatlon date and no .. ;$'~/ ""'~: further opportumty for extensIon. '~ ." ,";'. ~ ~i1$ft., ,}"",. ~"" ~. Section 8. FWRC 19.15.050 shall be amended,Jgf~~das follows: ,q,~. 19.15.050 Application cancellation,y,.t". '~f' ill If an applicant fails to provide additionaFin....fQrm::ttibhtQ the city witbffi 180 days of ..H.... ...... . being notified by mail that such information is req~~~d, the application shall be deemed null and void and the city shall h!i!X~ no duty to proceS~~J~view, or issue any decisions with respect to such an applicatioftf'fftif:b,,>, . (2) Extension request. No less t~:a0aW~t!~~~~,prior to tfi~~pse of the 180-dav notification bv the city under FWRC 19:1'S~ij5,Dll). the auolicant may submit a written request in theform of a lett~.wi.!ltf~uii{fd!~~~evidence to the department requestin2 an extelision~of the time Iindis' and dociiWients the followin2: ........ ..............._...... .., .r. (a) Th~~Circunist~t.:~es bevondi~e applicant's control prevent compliance with the timeliltlits of FWRC 19.15.050tl)~ .. ".> <:':"':"/'":-" ::<<::_- 'r;.;:' :.,.{ (b) Thatth.e~pplic~~tis makin2 sifWstantialpr02ress in respondin2 to the request!()~inform.a~~~sh:tlblt~~:vi~lV()ffhe application can be furthered when that inf?!mafi.oll~:~llbmitt~;...and .<} (c) 11i~n..~fllbero:f~~~tional calendar days necessary to provide the .;~~uested inforriia~i~n. .'j,} J~lReview fJrociss~A request for an extension to the 180-dav time limit will be revle,!~ and decide~upon bv the director based on responses to criteria is FWRC 19.15JJ5!(~).) (4) Relrq~<:!ive al!l!licahilitv. Administrative extension to the 180-dav time limit shall be retro~~~i.yeio those valid Process I. II. III. or IV applications currently under review.t' Section 9. FWRC 19.15.100 shall be amended to read as follows: 19.15.100 Lapse of approval- Generally. (1) Use Process L The applicant must substantially complete construction for the development activity. use of land. or other actions approved and complete the applicable conditions listed in the Process I decision within one year after the final decision of the city on the matter. or the decision becomes void. If a land use petition Ordinance No. Page 9 of 14 Rev 3/09 Land Use, K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUTC\ORDINANCE for FWRC 18 &19.doc is filed under Chapter 36.70C RCW in Kin2: County superior court, the time limits of this section are automatically extended bv the len2:th of time between the commencement and final termination of that liti2:ation. (2) Use Process II, III, and IV. An applicant must begin construction or submit to the city a complete building permit application for the dey~lopment activity, use of land or other actions \vithin one year after the final decision approving the matter, or the decision becomes void. The applicant must substantially complete construction for the development activity, use of land, or other actions approved an<l:fomplete the applicable conditions listed in the Use Process D, DI, and IV decision:w:jh:tttfive years after the final decision of the city on the matter, or the decision beS9~s void: If a land use petition is filed under Chapter 36.70C RCW in King C9:~#ny~pp~rior court, the time limits of this section are automatically extended by the,.J,engthOt!'Ywe between the commencement and final termination of that litig~~I~.lf.the devet~i,f,Rent activity, use of land, or other action approved under this chapt$pAncl~des phased co~!1NFtion, the time limits o~ this section may be extended in t~~~ision OI;tthe applicatiort;i;~m;3~~~)Y for completion of subsequent phases ,f$f"~ffi'?",. ',<:;."",;",,:::::,:;:; . /;:--. :;;W~ ~~;:- .::::::~:::~;., '--'WM~~m. /{1?:~i~" ..... .~~~?:::;:::.:. /.~i/." .'(/.-. '~%t%.. .(~:/ ''l,. Section 10. FWRC 19.15.100 shaH be amended t6Wja''as follows: <>~fo/ft);~, 19.15.110 Lapse of approval- Tim:~~!tension.'~~ifi.0~~>;. (1) Application. No less than 30d~Vs.plaf!Qr to the lap's~~ga:pproval under FWRC 19. 15. 100 for substantially complefill2: c()rtit~~ti()n or p,.r.. to lapse of approval for any proceedin2: time extension 2:raDl~ u.~d~rffils:~~~tion, the,-an. applicant may submit a written ql??Jl~I~!1,p request inth~rorm of a]etter with supporting documentation,~~;the deMrl'lipent requestigg a one time extension of those time limits of up to two v~atii~~re )'ear.ii*~ \}. . ... (2) Criteria. TIf'~t~quest~,st demonstrat~)llat the applicant is looking substantial progres~.8f.1the de;Y~wefifY_~tj~~fland, or other actions approved under this chap~~f~~n~t~ircum$~n~es bcyS//1.t~ applicant's control prevent compliance with the"fime lim.itseiFWRCL9t:1S 100; An extension request shall satisfy the followin2: \~~~~eria to be arihr~V~d:;'~W%'~y/ . . . i (a) Except rot"tbe firs!J:feQuest for tIme extenSIOn, the applicant has made substalltial pro2:ressto completed the proiect (IJi) There are circumstances beyond the applicant's control which prevent compliart~~~th th~time limits of FWRC 19.15.100, or any previously 2:ranted extenSl.on. ..:.........:.;... ....;.; , .\:((::::;>../;.. (c) Thel~xtension will not create or continue conditions that constitute a code violation or alfattractive nuisance, contribute to erosion and sedimentation problems, or impact the public health, safety and welfare~ and (d) Whether either physical conditions in the vicinity of the plat or codes and requirements of the city, applicable a2:encies, and utility providers have chan2:ed to a such a de2:ree since initial approval that it would be contrary to the public interest to extend the life of the plat, includin2: but not limited to such factors as: i. Whether the adoption of new codes/standards would substantially affect proiect layout and storm draina2:e desi2:n; Ordinance No. Page 10 of 14 Rev 3/09 Land Use, K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUTC\ORDINANCE for FWRC 18 &19 doc ii. The adequacv of mith!ation and/or impact fees to address the cost of miti2:ation at the end of the expiration period; iii. Whether the delaved proiect is an impediment to other development proiects in the vicinitv as a result of traffic concurrencv reserved capacitv. The director mav condition the extension request to satisfv criteria (c) and (d) as appropriate. In order to demonstrate com liance with the criteria G FWRC 19.15.110 2 the applicant mav also provide pertinent documentation 0 % : 0~"ncial backin2:. lease acceptance. or other such commitments secured bv the.Llveloper and/or a2:ent as well as a licable ro. ect time lines with milestones a..ftf': of antici ated It. "w'?"'8 comp e Ion. .~~~ '. (3) .Fee. The appl~cant shall in~lu~e, with the li~l~:i~t~quest, ff1:_~~rlv .fe.e as estabhshed by the City. The apphcatIon request wIll not be acceptedf".j~ss it is ......... 'fX~ accompanied by the required hourlv fee..;:.",. "".:;-, . oj . ( 4) Revie~ l!roc~ss and t~meline.. Afl ~ch:~~~est a'Ec~tion for a tiir{"ftension Will be admmistratlvely reviewed and decided iil:1gR,b~,~hedlfector who mav 2:rant up to a one-vear extension of time to substantiallv com.e!~~e construction and complete applicable conditions of approval for approved lJsil1rocess I application(s) after final decision and mav 2:rant uD'{i~atwo-vear extensiBfiof time to substantiallv com lete construction and com i~tf$M:~,..C ble conditiMil::ofa roval for a roved Use Process II. III. or IV applicatidn.(s).' "':;:;%a%,},-",;;... .i'} ~.:.. ..;1';;/'l/.Z~'~"''l''''l'% . '.' . . (5) Appe~ls. Any p~r~on w~o is ag~v,~!!.)~y tfitfWUg or de~ymg .of a request for a time extensiOn un4~;m'tQ:m$.~ctIon may a~ '~l that decj$I<:)ll as proVided In FWRC 19.65.120. The(tpp~ll~riKm9~t file a lett~pf appeal ihdicating how the decision on the time extensiQll./:tff'ects the ~ppellant' s prop~~y and presenting any relevant material or '-::-- '';::::::::::::::::-. .:-....'..." '/'/.1' __ .II'.- information suppo1't:~p,g the Mmellant' s co nt'-f6n. The appeal will be heard and decided upon usiI,1$processIy-.g~rsuai~:12?B.lMfPt~r'')6. 70B RCW, any time limit upon the city's proc~tn~..i~!decisi(mUpon appIlCaHons under this title may, except as otherwise A6"tifi~a~lY";t~(~ti;~hi~ti~~~,"~q~Odified by a written agreement between the applicant ..,@~fB9 the director'{:;;";~i:: ,,'; ." <.'~t{('i:zRetroactive tiliflcability,l:Extensions approved under this section shall be retfO'~~~ve onlv for 'tn1>se active and valid Use Process I. II. III. or IV applications. .Z;;(, ~ ~t.i~.z.~} '/;%?~f;." :::;!1 Section rtf~~i)YRC 1~30_270is hereby repealed as follows: '<:~;~!~;j~:t::~r_ ..;:~;~iP7 18.30.270 Effe~tiW'Time extension. (1) No less than 30 days prior to lapse of approval under FWRC 18.30_260, the applicant may submit a ',witten application in the form of a letter ""'/ith supporting documentation to the department of corrnnunity development services requesting a one time extension of those limits of up to one year. (2) The applicant shall include, with the letter of request, the fee as established by the city and reasons for said request. The application will not be accepted unless it is accompanied by the required fee. Ordinance No. Page il of 14 Rev 3/09 Land Use, K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LVA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUfC\ORDINANCE for FWRC i8 &19.doc (3) The director of community development services may grant a one year extension of short subdivision appro','al '.yith an expiration date and no further opportunity for extension. (4) The request must demonstrate that the applicant is IlKlking substantial progress on the approval and conditions of approval, and that there are circumstances beyond the applicant's control'..vhich prevent compliance '''lith the time limits ofF'NRC 18.30.260. (5) }~ny person aggrie\'ed by the granting or denying of a request for a time extension under this section may appeal that decision. The appellant mustJiJe a letter of appeal indicating how this decision affects the appellant's property l.\l~{~F-e~pnting any releT/ant material or information supporting the appellant' s content~~:The appeal '.vill be heard and decided upon using the appeal process described in:,gwm:@::J8.30_140 et seq. Any ""%-' "..:8//;:;:'.." time limit, pursuant to Chapter 36.70B RCW, upon t~tity's P~~&.~sing and decision upon a~plications u~der this title may, except as8~~r,;is}.:~ specifiW~!I"stated in this tit.le, be modIfied by a Vlntten agreement between th,~apphcant and the dtr_w of commumty . _-:':~0 %~ dev:elopment serYIces"<~li.ft,>.. .' "~/<<'" ... '00;W>>Y ::;:;0/;:r P" y ./ . ......d_. ...... .........- ...... Section 12. FWRC 16.65.110 is hereby repealdJ.~lol!Qws! (c) SEPt.. appeals under FWRC Titles 14 and 15_ (2) Other cases. In cases not subject to subsection (1) of this section, decisions of the hearing examiner become final: (a) If no appeal of the hearing examiner's decision is submitted 'vvithin the appeal period, on the first calendar day following the expiration of the 14 calendar day appeal period; (b) If a written notice of appeal of the hearing examiner's decision is received within the appeal period, 'Nhen the city issues a final decision afY~r the appeal process is complete. ....-. -......... ...... P-"'-' ...... .......... p-.. ......... ...... .......... ...... ." ....... Section 14. Severability. The proVISIons of this. ofgrance'arl>geclared separate and ~~.... "'...""""\",., severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, pa~G.I11ffH;>'s~bdivisio~,~~~Jipn, or portion of iIt',.).. ..... this ordinance, or the invalidity of the app1icati~W{(~&of to ~};:. person or circq~tance, shall not affect the validity of the remainder of the ordina:~J~:~idity of its ap~~ication to any other persons or eircumstances"~~iii')ii(;l"', '~'4'f' Section 15. Conections. The City d~rk artdt11"@ipqqifiers o,f,2{his ordinance are authorized <::':". ../::::<<:::::::>>:':;::::::::::-.".. -;." .... ..... . ............ to make necessary correcti~ff:~.~~tJll.'S ordinanctiu, Huding, bat-hot limited to, the conection of .;~tP~..-_ \:>. ::>" scrivener/clerical eIJ4f.!eren~'~rdinance n~fuperil1g, section/subsection numbers and any ''':1'~ iii" ;~~~ ,.~;:~ /:/, references thereto. '~B. #"*'$2:,::')$/.%2;:;:: .' "~.,W~A'/./ . "/"//1:')qgf}k~:,. ;;;.//t/ ,. ~~~WJ;,. N,. ~ ~~,W :?~:{kf;;:-::/ "..._..._...__ ___ ......... :;:80,.. Y.;,-",;zvi7 ........ ................... ~./,8 .~c:lction 16. HRat~!~~~ion. .,~~~.act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date,t'!IR~jmldinance is :,. rati~ affirmed ....-... .. ........ ....... ..... ....... . -.. -... -. ....... .......... . ..... .......... ....... ......... ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... ....... SectioHlq,Effective:Qate. This ordinance shall be effective five (5) days after passage ... .. ..... .... -. -. . -... ."- ..... .--....- ..... .. ..... ..... .......... ..... .......... ..... .......... .... .......... ... .......... ..... ........ .... .......... .... ........ .... .... ... .... .---...... ..... and publication as pH?Y1gyg~by law. Ordinance No. Page 13 of 14 Rev 3/09 Land Use. K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUTC\ORDINANCE for FWRC 18 &19.doc PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this day of ,200_ CITY OF FEDERAL WAY ATTEST: /':;',-, MAYOR1ACKDOVPY#~~ , ~V~.,~ 11', '/,., rqJ~./ '.."', ;-7A'0~" / .//~~~~ ''W;&~ "~it.r~%ff' ~~J~fP 1?~ ./" CITY CLERK, CAROL MCNEILLY, CMC APPROVED AS TO FORM: FILED WITH THE PASSED BY THE PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: OROINAN 1:'i~4';W:'~":;. . . ~';'(W~;~.:;//,. x;;:-';~>. )" Ordinance No. Page 14 of 14 Rev 3/09 Land Use, K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUTC\ORDINA1~CE for FWRC 18 &19.doc Attachment 2 - Staff Report to the Planning Commission for the July 22, 2009 Public Hearing with Exhibits A through L CITY Of Federal Way STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Commission Meeting of July 22, 2009 Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18 - Subdivisions and Title 19 - Permits and Review Processes Federal Way File No. 09-101017-00-UP Report prepared by Senior Planner Deb Barker I. PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT The proposed text amendments are intended to aid in economic recovery by providing flexibility with increases to extension deadlines and approvals for a variety of applications. In addition, vesting for land use applications is proposed to be clarified II. BACKGROUND Due in large part to the national economic recession., the regional housing market has severely declined and the ability for (commercial and home) builders and developers to secure credit from financial institutions has become considerably more difficult. The local building industry has been significantly impacted by these issues and is faced with the on-going threat of job losses and business closures in land development and housing related industries. Stakeholders in the building industry believe that bold actions are needed at all levels of governrnent to spur housing and economic recoveries. One of the actions suggested by the Master Builders of King County as part of a housing stimulus plan at the local level includes extending the tirne period applicants have to submit an application for a complete final subdivision or short subdivision approval. Taking this action may allow home builders increased opportunities for debt recovery and provide the time needed to obtain financing and comp lete construction. In addition to extending time limits for subdivisions, the City believes that extending time limits for land use permits can further the recovery of the industry and improve some inconsistencies in the existing codes. Vesting is a term that signifies the point at which a project is guaranteed the codes upon which a project must be designed arid processed_ The city's codes currently establish vesting at various points, leading to inconsistency and confusion. Staff's proposal to establish vesting of land use permits and approvals at the point of submitting a cornplete application, consistent with subdivision applications, I also provides the building industry the certainty that codes would not be changed in mid-process, potentially impacting their application. It is in this spirit that this code arnendment is prepared. I Vesting for subdivision applications is covered under RCW 58.17.033. .;.~ The current Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) includes the following expiration timelines and points of vesting: Type of Permit Summarized Current Time Line Vestine Date Preliminary plat City code requires that responses for additional information be At complete provided within 180 days of the request, or an application can application be considered void. Preliminary plat applications expire five years from date of approvaL The Hearing Examiner can grant a one-time, one-year extension. Recorded preliminary plats vest for five years from date of recording. Short plat and BSP City code requires that responses for additional informatiou be At complete provided within 180 days of the request, or an application can application be considered void. Short plat applications expire one year following director approval- The director can grant a one-time, one-year extension. Process 1, U, m, IV City code requires that responses for additional information be At date of complete provided within 180 days of the request, or an application can building permit be considered void. The applicant must submit a complete application or of building permit withiu one year of land use approval or the land use approval approval expires. The project must be constructed within one and five years following approval with one-time, one-year extension or the application expires. Building Permit Under the International Building Code (IBe) a complete Complete building permit application shall expire within 180 days. application Extensions up to 90 days are available subject to written request with justifiable cause demonstrated. Building permit applications toll until the SEP A appeal period concludes. Issued building permits also expire 180 days from issuance. Extensions up to 180 days are available subject to written requests and justifiable cause demonstrated. 2 urrun ofEXlshn Code ary g III. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS The following is a summary of the proposed amendments_ Subdivisions - FWRC Title 18: (a) City code currently requires that responses for additional information be provided within 180 days of the request, or an application can be considered void The purpose of this amendment is to provide an extension of that timeline while ensuring that the applicant has not abandoned the project 3 Staff recommends administrative extensions to the 180-day timeline for resubmitting additional infonnation for short plats, binding site plans, and preliminary plats subject to criteria and situational conditions_ A nominal fee would be required with the extension request. The administrative extensions to the 180-day timeline would be retroactive to those subdivision applications currently under review (Exhibit A - FWRC /8.05.080 Application Cancelation). (b) City codes currently require that a short plat be completed within one year of approval or the short plat expires. The purpose of this amendment is to extend the short plat construction timeline so that it is consistent with the five years of time allowed for construction of a 2 mc related information from mc 105.3.2 and mc 105.5 is provided tor reference only. No changes to any mc provision are proposed with this code amendment It is proposed that the number and timeline of 180 day extensions provided for pending preliminary plats, short plats, and binding site plan applications be based on compliance with criteria. Staff Report to the Planning Commission Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Page 2 09-10 10 17/DodD 10m :-i preliminary plat. Staff recommends that approval deadlines for short plat applications increase from one year to five years (Exhibit B - FWRC /8.30.260 Short plat duration approval). (c) Currently, aU infrastructure such as roads and utilities required for those preliminary plat, short plat, or binding site plan applications4 that have received preliminary approval must be installed within a specific timeline from the date of preliminary approvaL The City code currently provides only a one-time, one-year extension of these time lines, and requires that the Hearing Examiner review preliminary plat extension requests. This amendment proposes to increase the extension time line from one year to two years for all short plat and preliminary plat applications, and allow additional extension opportunities for those short plat and preliminary plat projects that have been approved but are not completed within the required timeline. It is further proposed that the Director of Community Development Services would review and grant each extension request subject to circUlU'itances and compliance with criteria,s and it is proposed that this extension opportunity be made retroactive in order to address those active and valid preliminary plat, short plat, and BSP applications that have received preliminary approval, have received their only extension opportunity, and face expiration as they are still not completed. Staff recommends that two-year extension opportunities shall be available for approved short plats, binding site plans, and preliminary plat applications subject to criteria and administrative review; and appealable to the Hearing Examiner. The extensions shall be retroactive to those active and valid projects granted preliminary plat, short plat, or binding site plan approval (Exhibit C - FWRC 18.05.090 Lapse of Approval -- Time Extension). (d) Currently, city code requires that approved short plats be completed within one year of approval or the short plat expires. As noted in (b) above, short plat timelines are recommended to be consistent with preliminary plat timelines, and extended from one year to five years. The five-year timeline reference is proposed as 18.30_260 to the "Subdivisions in General" section of the FWRC. The one-year timeline reference would therefore be deleted from the short subdivision portion of the FWRC. Staff recommends that in order to provide for a consistent subdivision completion timeline shown in FWRC 18.05.090, Duration of Approval, the section known as FWRC 18.30.270 would be deleted (Exhibit D - Deletes FWRC /8.30.270 Effect- Time Extension). (e) Currently, extension provisions are individually located in short plat and preliminary plat sections of the FWRc. As noted in (c) above, the subdivision code is proposed to be modified to allow for consistent timeline and extension opportunities for short plats and preliminary plats. Staff recommends that in order to consolidate timeline and extension opportunities for preliminary plats, timeline and extension references in FWRC 18.35.220 would be moved to FWRC 18.05.090, Duration of Approval (Exhibit E - FWRC /8.35.220 Duration of Approval). Permits and Review Processes - FWRC Title 19: (a) As noted above, vesting is a term that signifies the point at which a project is guaranteed the codes upon which a project must be designed and processed_ The city's codes currently establish Use Process I, II, III, and IV land use applications vesting at the time a land use decision is issued, while subdivision applications vest at the time of a complete application. 6 The proposal to establish land use permits vesting at the point of submitting a complete ~ Binding site plans are processed under the provisions of short subdivision per FWRC 18.20_020. ) The number of extension opportunities for approved preliminary plats, short plats, and binding site plans shall be based on compliance with criteria. 6 Vesting for subdivision applications are covered under RCW 58.17.033_ .;..-.( Staff Report to the Planning Commission Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Page 3 09-10 10 17/Doc ID. 5()75-t application would make vesting milestones consistent with subdivision provisions. Applications that are not complete when submitted require that more information be submitted Those Use Process applications would vest after required information is provided and a letter of completeness is issued by the City. An applicant would not be able to alter or choose vesting dates without formally withdrawing a current land use application. To eliminate inconsistency and confusion, staff recommends that the vesting of Use Process I, II, III, and IV applications be changed from land use approval to the date the application is determined to be complete. It is also recommended that Use Process applications that require additional information to be considered complete would not vest until after determined complete based on a letter of completeness. A complete land use application will be defined, and vesting rights would not be waivable (Exhibit F - FWRC 19./5.045 Use Process - Completeness of Applications). (b) City code currently requires that responses for additional information be provided within 180 days of the request, or an application can be considered void The purpose of this amendment is to provide an extension of that timeline while ensuring that the applicant has not abandoned the project. Administrative extensions to the 180-day timeline for resubmitting additional information would be available subject to criteria and situational conditions; would be subject to a nominal fee; and if approved, would be retroactive for valid Process I, II, III, or IV applications.7 Staff recommends administrative extensions to the 180-day timeline for resubmitting additional information for Use Process I, U, III, and IV applications subject to criteria and situational conditions, and subject to a nominal fee. Administrative extensions to the 180-day timeline would be retroactive to valid Process I, II, III, and IV land use applications currently under review (Exhibit G - FWRC /9./5.050 Application Cancelation). (c) Language discussing "final decisions" and '<effects of the decision" is located in both sections on Use Process III and Use Process IV. In an effort to consolidate duplicative language, this amendment proposes to consolidate and relocate this language into the "permits and review processes" section so that it is applicable to all Use Process I, II, III, and IV applications. Staff recommends that duplicative language on final decisions and effects of the decision be merged and moved to the Permits and review processes section (Exhibit H - FWRC 19.15.075 Final decisions and effect of the decision). (d) Currently, an applicant for a Process I, II, III, or IV application must begin construction or submit to the city a complete building permit application for development activity, use of land, or other actions within one year of the final decision, or the decision becomes void. In addition, the applicant must substantially complete the construction for the development activity, use of land, or other actions and complete the applicable conditions in the decision within five years after the final decision or the decision becomes void The purpose of this amendment is to eliminate the tirneline for submitting a complete building permit application for approved Process II, III, and IV applications since work approved under these applications is typically rnore complex and a timeline to submit a building permit is not practicaL The amendment further proposes to allow five years to complete work following the Process n, III, or IV decision. In contrast, Process I applications focus on a limited aspect of the project, are typically less complicated, and thus do not require additional time limit extensions to complete the work.. Staff recommends that the applicant substantially complete construction for the development activity, use of land, or other actions approved and comp lete the applicable conditions listed in the decision within one year of the Process I decision, or within five years 7. It is proposed that the number and timeline of 180-day extensions provided lor Use Process I, IT, III, and IV applications be based on compliance with criteria Staff Report to the Planning Commission Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Page 4 09-1010171DodD 50754 of the Process II, III, or (V decision., or those decisions become void (Exhibit I ~ FWRC /9. /5. /00 Lapse of Approval - Generally). (e) Currently, city code provides a one-time extension of only one year for an applicant to complete all of the work approved under a Use Process I, II, III, and IV decision following the initial one year construction tirneline. The purpose of this amendment is to provide greater . flexibility for developers and builders by increasing extension timelines frorn one year to two years for all Process II, III, and IV applications that have been approved but are not completed within the required tirneline_ The amendment also proposes that the Director of Community Developrnent Services review and grant each extension request subject to circumstances and compliance with criteria,8 and that this extension opportunity be made retroactive in order to address active land use applications that have received preliminary approval, received their only extension opportunity and, face expiration as they are still not completed. As previously noted, Use Process I applications are typically less complicated, and generally do not require additional tirne limit extensions to complete the work. Staff recommends that one year extension opportunities be available for approved Process I applications subject to criteria and administrative review; that two-year extension opportunities be available for approved Process II, HI, and IV applications subject to criteria and administrative review; and appealable to the Hearing Examiner. Extens ion provisions would be retroactive to valid and active land use Process I, U, HI, and IV applications currently under review (Exhibit J - FWRC /9. /5. / /0 Lapse of Approval-- Time Extension). (t) Currently, the effect of a Process III decision is referenced in FWRC 19.65.110. As noted in (c) above, in order to eliminate duplicative code provisions and ensure that the effect of decision is consistent for all use process decisions, it is recommended that FWRC 19.65.110 Effect of decision be deleted as it is moved to FWRC 19.15.075 (Exhibit K - Deletes FWRC /9.65.1[0 Effect of the decision). (g) Currently, the effect of a Process IV decision is referenced in FWRC 19.70.160. As noted in C above, in order to eliminate duplicative code provisions and ensure that the final decision and effect of decision is consistent for all use process decisions, it is recommended that FWRC 19.70.160 Final decisions and effect of decision be deleted as it is moved to FWRC 19.15.075 (Exhibit L - Deletes FWRC /9_ 70. /60 Final decisions and effect of the decision). IV. PROCEDURALSUMMARY The Project is procedurally exempt from State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A) review under WAC 197 -11-800( 19) (Procedural Actions). Public Notice of the July 22, 2009, public hearing was published and posted on July 4,2009, in accordance with the City's procedural requirements. There were no public comments. V. DECISIONAL CRITERIA FWRC 19.80.130 provides criteria for zoning text amendments. The following section analyzes the compliance of the proposed zoning text amendments with the criteria provided by FWRC 19.80.130. The City may amend the text of the FWRC only if it finds that: S The number of extension opportunities for approved Use Process I,lL IlL and IV applications shall be based on compliance with criteria. ..,::< Staff Report to the Planning COnnnlssion Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Page 5 09-10 10 17/oodD. 50154 1. The proposed amendments are consistent with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan. The proposed FWRC zoning text amendments are consistent with the following goals and policies contained in the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP): LUG] LUP4 EDG6 EDPI5 EDPI8 HP8 HP9 HPIO HPII Develop an efficient and timely development review process based on a public/private partnership. Maximize efficiency of the development review process. The City will encourage and support existing businesses to remain and/or expand their facilities within Federal Way_ The City will continue to implement a streamlined permitting process consistent with state and federal regulations to reduce the upfront costs of locating businesses in the City. The City will periodically monitor local and regional trends to be able to adjust plans, policies, and programs. Consider the economic impact of all development regulations on the cost of housing. Maximize efficiency in the City's development review process and ensure that unnecessary time delays and expenses are eliminated. Continue to provide streamlined permitting processes for developrnent that is consistent with the FWCP and FWCC (sic), and that has no adverse impacts. Encourage community input, where appropriate, into the development permit process by providing thorough and timely information to the public. Continue to assist developers with housing proposals at the earliest possible oPPOrhmity, including preapplication meetings to produce projects that can be reviewed quickly and maximize their ability to receive permits. 2. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to public health, safety, or welfare. The proposed FWRC text amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, or welfare because it responds to current national economic conditions that impact local land development and housing related industries by modifying development regulations to provide for flexibility during the development review process that is not provided in the current code; and clarifies and refines various related codes in order to increase the efficiency of the development review process. 3. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the residents of the City. Approval of the proposed code amendment would benefit the City as a whole as it provides for flexibility in development review timelines, which results in continued development within the City, thus aiding the local economy, and ensuring that housing costs remain realistic. VI. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW AND ACTION Pursuant to FWRC 19.80.050(b), the City Council may review City-initiated changes to the text of the zoning code from time to time at the Council's discretion_ The Planning Commission is being asked to review the proposed changes to the zoning code and forward a recommendation to the City Council. FWRC Chapter 19.80, "Process VI Review," establishes a process and criteria for zoning code text amendments. Consistent with Process VI review, the role of the Planning Commission is to review and evaluate the zoning code text regarding any proposed amendments; to determine whether Page 6 09-10 10 17/Doc. W ;0754 .....~ Staff Report to the Planning Corrunission Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) the proposed zoning code text arnendment meets the criteria provided by FWRC 19.80.130; and to forward a recommendation to City Council regarding adoption of the proposed zoning code text amendment. Consistent with the provisions of FWRC 19.80.240, the Planning Commission may take the following actions regarding the proposed zoning code text amendments: I. Recommend to City Council adoption of the FWRC text arnendments as proposed; 2. Modify the proposed FWRC text amendments and recommend to City Council adoption of the FWRC text amendments as modified; 3. Recommend to City Council that the proposed FWRC text amendments not be adopted; or 4. Forward the proposed FWRC text amendments to City Council without a recommendation. VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the above staff analysis and decisional criteria, staff recommends that the following amendment to FWRC Title 18 Subdivisions and FWRC Chapter 19.15 Permits and Review Processes as outlined in Section U above be recommended for approval to the City CounciL I. Arnendments as set forth in Exhibit A, to FWRC 18.05.080, Application Cancelation 2. Amendrnents as set forth in Exhibit B, to FWRC 18.30.260, Short Plat Duration Approval 3. Amendrnents as set forth in Exhibit C, to FWRC 18.05.090, Lapse of Approval- Time Extension 4. Amendrnents as set forth in Exhibit D, to FWRC 18.30.270, Effect - Time Extension 5. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit E, to FWRC 18.35.220, Duration of Approval 6_ Amendrnents as set forth in Exhibit F, to FWRC 19.15.045, Completeness of App lications 7. Amendrnents as set forth in Exhibit G, to FWRC 19.15.050, Application Cancelation 8. Amendrnents as set forth in Exhibit H, to FWRC 19.15.075, Final Decisions and Effect of the Decision 9. Amendrnents as set forth in Exhibit [, to FWRC 19.15.100, Lapse of Approval- Generally lo. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit J, to FWRC 19.15.11 0, Lapse of Approval- Time Extension 11. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit K, to FWRC 19.65.110, Effect of the Decision 12. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit L, to FWRC 19.70.160, Final Decisions and Effect of the Decision EXHIBITS Exhibit A., to FWRC 18_05.080, Application Cancelation Exhibit B, to FWRC 18.30.260, Short Plat Duration of Approval Exhibit C, to FWRC 18.05.090, Lapse of Approval- Time Extension Exhibit D, to FWRC 18-30.270, Effect - Time Extension Exhibit E, to FWRC 18.35.220, Duration of Approval Exhibit F, to FWRC 19_15.045, Completeness of Applications Exhibit G, to FWRC 19_15.050, Application Cancelation Exhibit H, to FWRC 19_15_075, Final Decisions and Effect of the Decision Exhibit I, to FWRC 19.15.100, Lapse of Approval- Generally Exhibit J, to FWRC 19.15.110, Lapse of Approval- Time Extension Exhibit K, to FWRC 19.65.110, Effect of the Decision Exhibit L, to FWRC 19.70.160, Final Decisions and Effect of the Decision ~A Staff Report to the Planning Conurussion Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Page 7 09-1010171Doc m 50754 Proposed Text Amendments In Relevant Part Submitted to Planning Commission July 22, 2009 EXHIBIT A . PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18, ~~Subdivisions" 18.05.080 "Application Cancelation" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ...~ Exhibit A (Provides extension to the 180-day timeline) 18.05.080 Application cancellation. ill [f an applicant for a boundary line adjustment, lot line elimination, binding site plan, short subdivision plat, preliminary plat, final plat, alteration of plat, or vacation of subdivision fails to provide additional information to the city within 180 days of being notified by mail that such information is requested, the application shan be deerned null and void and the city shan have no duty to process, review, or issue any decision with respect to such an application. (2) Extension request. No less than 30 days prior to the lapse of the 180-day notification by the city under FWRC 18.05.080(1 ), the applicant for a short plat. bindin2 site plan. or preliminary plat application(s) may submit a written request in the form of a letter with supportin2 evidence to the department requestin2 an extension of the 180-day time limits and documentin2 the followin2: (a) That circumstances beyond the applicant's control prevent compliance with the time limits of FWRC 18.05.0800 ); (b) That the applicant is makin2 substantial pr02ress in respondin2 to the request for information so that review of the application can be furthered when that information is submitted; and (c) The number of additional calendar days necessary to provide the requested information. (3) Review process. A request for an extension to the 180-day time limit will be reviewed and decided upon by the director based on responses to criteria in FWRC 18.05.080(2). (4) Retroactive applicability. Administrative extension to the 180-day time limit shall be retroactive to those valid bindin2 site plan, short subdivision, and preliminary plat applications currently under review. (Ord No. 07-554, 9 5(Exh. A(2)), 5-15-D7; Ord. No. 00-375, 9 5, llJ-3-DO. Code 2001 920-22.) .... 09-101011 Doc.1D 50155 EXHIBIT B PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18~ "Subdivisions" 18.30.260 "Effect - Short plat duration approvar~ (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) " 09-101017 Doc. I.D 50755 Exhibit B (Short plat approval would be valid for 5 years) 18.30.260 Effect - Short plat dDuration approval. (1) Short plat approval shall expire ene five year~ from the date of the director of community developrnent services approvaL Said approval shall constitute acceptance of short subdivision layout and design and shall include all conditions, restrictions, and other requirements required by the director of conununity development services as part of short subdivision approval. City approval of a short subdivision shall not constitute approval for land clearing or grading, vegetation removal, or any other activities which otherwise require permits from the city. (2) Prior to construction of improvernents pursuant to short plat approval, engineering drawings for public improvements shall be submitted for review and approval to the department of public works, Lakeha ven utility district, and city of Tacoma public utilities department. No permits to begin construction or site work shall be granted until final approval of all utility plans, including storm drainage; the payment of all pertinent fees; and the submittal of performance securities as may be required (Ord No. 07-554, ~ 5(Exh. A(2)), 5-15~7; Ord. No. 97-291, ~ 3,4-1-97. Code 2001 ~ 20-106.) s 09-101011 ODe. LD. 50155 EXHIBIT C PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18, "Subdivisions" 18.05.090 "Lapse of Approval- Time extension" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) "-4 09-101017 Doc. 10. 50755 Exhibit C (NEW section for time extension for short plat, BSP, and preliminary plat applications) 18.05.090 Lapse of approval- Time extension (1) Application. No less than 60 days prior to lapse of approval under FWRC 18.30.260 and FWRC 18.35.220, or prior to lapse of approval of any precedin1! time extension 2:ranted under this section, the applicant may submit a written request in the form of a letter with supportin1! documentation to the department of community development services requestin2: extension of those time limits of up to two years. (2) Criteria. An extension request shall satisfy the followin1! criteria to be approved: (a) Except for the first request for time extension. the applicant has made substantial pr01!ress to complete the plat~ (b) There are circumstances beyond the applicant's control which prevent compliance with the time limits of FWRC 18.30.260, 18.35.220, or any previously 1!ranted extension; (c) The extension will not create or continue conditions that constitute a code violation or an attractive nuisance, contribute to erosion and sedimentation problems; or impact the public health. safety, and welfare; and (d) Whether either physical conditions in the vicinity of the plat or codes and requirements of the city, applicable a1!encies, and utility providers have chan1!ed to such a det!:ree since initial approval that it would be contrary to the public interest to extend the life of the plat, includin1! but not limited to such factors as: i. Whether the adoption of new codes and/or standards would substantially affect proiect layout and storm draina2:e desi2:n; ii. The adequacY of miti2:ation and/or impact fees to address the cost of mitigation at the end of the expiration period; iii. Whether the delaved proiect is an impediment to other development projects in the vicinity as a result of traffic concurrency reserved capacity. The director may condition the extension request to satisfy criteria (c) and (d) as appropriate. In order to demonstrate compliance with the criteria of FWRC 18.05.090(2). the applicant may also provide pertinent documentation of financial backing, lease acceptance, or other such commitments secured bv the developer and/or agent as well as applicable project timelines with milestones and dates of anticipated completion. (3) Fee. The applicant shall include with the letter of request the hourly fee as established by the city. The request will not be accepted unless it is accompanied by the required hourly fee. (4) Review process. Each request for extension will be reviewed and decided upon by the director of community development services who may 2:rant up to a two-year extension(s) of approval. (5) Appeals. Any person a2:grieved by the 2:rantin2: or denying of a request for a time extension under this section may appeal that decision. The appellant must file a letter of appeal indicatin2: how this decision affects the appellant's property and presenting any relevant material or information supporting the appellant's contention. The appeal will be heard and decided upon using the appeal process described in FWRC 18.30.140 et seQ. Any short plat time limit. pursuant to Chapter 36.70B RCW, upon the city's processing and decision upon applications under this title may, except as otherwise specifically stated in this title, be modified by a written a2:reement between the applicant and the director of community development services. (6) Retroactive app/icahilitv. The provisions of this section shall be retroactive to active and valid short plat, binding site plan, and preliminarv plat applications. s 09-101017 Doc. tD. 50755 EXHIBIT D PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18, "Subdivisions" 18.30.270 "Effect - Time extension" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) 09-101011 Do<:. LD. 50155 Exhibit D (Moved to 18.05.090) 18.30.270 Effect Time extension. (1) No less than 30 days prior to lapse of appro-.'al under FWRC 18.30.260, the applicant may submit a written application in the form of a letter 'mth supporting documentation to the department of cornrrumity development services requesting a one time extension of those limits of up to one year. (2) The applieil.nt shall include, with the letter of request, the fee as established by the city and reasons for said request. The application '.[.rill not be accepted unless it is accompanied by the required fee. (3) The director of cormnunity development services may grant a one year extension of short subdivision approyal 'l.rith an expiration date and no further opportunity f-or extension. (1) The request mnst demonstrate that the applicant is making substantial progress on the apprm'al and conditions of appfO'.'al, and that there are circumstances beyond the applicant's control 'Nhich prc'lent compliaoce 'Nith the time limits of FWRC 18.30.260. (5) .^.ny person aggrie','ed by the granting or denying of a request [-or a time extension UR<:ler this section may appeal that decision. The appellant must file a letter of appeal indicating how this decision affcets the appellant's property and presenting any releyant material or information supporting the appellant's contentioR_ The appeal ':.rill be heard and decided upon l.:I:Sing the appeal process described in FWRC 18.30_110 et seq_ Any time limit, pursuant t-o Chapter 36.70B RCW, UpOR the city's processing and decision upon applications under this title may, except as otherwise specifically stat-ed in this tit-le,--ee modified by a ':flitteR agreement between the applicant and the director of cormnunity de','elopment servlCes. (Ord. No. 07 551, ~ 5 (Eldi. /\(2)),5 1507; Ord. 1':0. 97 291, ~ 3, 1 I 97_ Code 2001 ~ 20 107.) " 09-101017 Doc.I.D. 50155 EXHIBIT E PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18, "Subdivisions" 18.35.220 "Duration of approval" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ....k" 09-101011 Doc. W. 50755 Exhibit E (from Preliminary plat; most moved to 18.05.090) 18.35.220 Duration of approval. Preliminary plat approval shall expire five years frorn the date of city council approval, unless the applicant requests an extension as provided in FWRC 18.05.090. from the hearing examiner. The request for extension must be submitted to the department of cormmmity development services at least 60 days prior to the expiration date of the preliminary plat. The department of community development services shall schedule and advertise a public hearing in accordance ....'ith f'NRC 18.35.100. In considering ......'hether to grant the extension, the hearing examiner shall consider the following in the public hearing: (1) 'Nhether substantial progress has been made toward completion of the entire plat, or the initial phase of the plat, if the preliminary approval included phasing. (2) Whether conditions in the vicinity of the subdivision have changed to a sufficient degree since initial approval to v.'ilrrant reconsideration of the preliminary plat. The hearing examiner may grant a one year exteflSion of preliminary plat approval or may allow division of the plat into separate phases, each with an expiration date and no further opportunity for extension. (Ord No. 07-554, ~ 5(ExlL A(2)), 5-15-07; Ord. No_ 97-291, ~ 3,4-1-97; Ord. No. 90-41, ~ 1(16.120.10 - 16_120.50),2-27-90. Code 200 I ~ 20-131.) ..< 09-101017 Doc. LD. 5Q7>5 Exhibit F (Defines use process vesting) 19.15.045 Completeness of applications. (l) Within 28 calendar days of receiving an application, the city shall determine whether the application is complete, with reference to FWRC 19.15.040. Prior to the 28-day deadline, a letter of completeness shall be issued indicatin1?: the date the application is deemed complete, if the city deems the application to be complete, or, if the city determines the application to be incomplete, the city shall notitY the applicant of what needs to be submitted for a complete application. In this written detennination, the city shall also identify, to the extent known to the city, the other agencies of local, state, or federal government that may have jurisdiction over some aspect of the proposed development activity. An application may be deemed complete under this section even if the city docs not provide a '.vritten determination to the applicant as required (2) If an application was found incomplete and an applicant submits additional information, the city shall notify the applicant in writin1?: within 14 days the date '.vhether the application is deemed complete or whether further additional information is necessary_ (3) Additional information. A detennination of completeness shall not preclude the city from requesting additional information or studies, either at the time of the letter of completeness or subsequently, if new information is required or if there are substantial changes in the proposed action. (4) Vestinf!. A proposed Use Process I. n. III. or IV application shall vest to and be considered under the zonin1?: code and other land use control ordinances. in effect on the land at the time a fullv completed application for Use Process I. II. III. or IV has been submitted to the city. In the event that the city requests supplemental or specific information to find an application complete. the Use Process I. II. III. or IV application shall vest to those codes in effect on the date that all requested supplemental or specific information is submitted. A complete application shall be defined as set forth in FWRC 19.15.040 and based on requirements in related handouts. Vested ri1?:hts shall not be waivable pursuant to the Vested Ri1?:hts Doctrine. (Ord. No. 09-594, ~ 19, 1-6-09_ Code 2001 ~ 22-33.5.) ..~ 09-101011 Doc. lD. . 50156 EXHIBIT F PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processes" 19.15.045 "Completeness of applications" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) .."l< EXHIBIT G PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processes" 19.15.050 "Application cancellation" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) .:" 09-101017 Doc. 1.0. 50156 Exhibit G (Provides extension to the ISO-day timeline) 19.15.050 Application cancellation. rulf an applicant fails to provide additional information to the city within 180 days of being notified by mail that such information is requested, the application shall be deemed null and void and the city shall have no duty to process, review, or issue any decisions with respect to such an application_ (2) Extension request No less than 30 days prior to the lapse of the 180-dav notification bv the city under FWRC 19.15.050(1), the applicant mav submit a written request in the form of a letter with supportine evidence to the department reQuestine an extension of the time limits and documents the followine: (a) That circumstances bevond the applicant's control prevent compliance with the time limits of FWRC 19.15.050(l)~ (b) That the applicant is makinl! substantial prOl!ress in respondinl! to the request for information so that review of the application can be furthered when that information is submitted~ and (c) The number of additional calendar days necessary to provide the requested information. (3) Review process. A request for an extension to the 180-day time limit will be reviewed and decided upon by the director based on responses to criteria in FWRC 19.15.050(2). (4) Retroactive applicabilitv. Administrative extension to the 180-day time limit shall be retroactive to those valid Process I, II, III, or IV applications currentlv under review. (Ord No. 97-291, S 3,4-1-97. Code 2001 S 22-34.) Q9-IOIOll Doc. I.D 50756 EXHIBIT H PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processes" 19.15.075 "Final decisions and effect of the decision" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ....~ 09-101011 Doc. 1.0. 50756 Exhibit H (NEW SECTION combining "Final decisions and elTect of the decision" and moving it trom Process III and N sections to section 19.15 - Use process overview) 19.15.075 Final decisions and effect of the decision Upon a decision becominf! final, the applicant may enf!af!e in activity based on the decision, provided applicable permits have been approved. (a) Director. Decisions of the Director of Community Development Services become final subiect to the followinf!: (l) If a written notice of appeal is received within the appeal period, the decision shall not become final until the appeal process is complete and the city issues a final decision. (2) If no appeal is submitted within the 14-calendar-dav appeal period, the decision shall become final on the first calendar day followinf! the expiration of the appeal period. (b) Hearin1! Examiner. If a decision of the hearinf! examiner is the final decision of the city. it may be reviewed under FWRC 19.70.260. Where the hearinf! examiner's decision is not the final decision of the city, the decision may be appealed under FWRC 19.70.170 and is subject to subsection (2) of this section. (1) A1!encv decision appeals. The decision bv the hearinf! examiner on an af!enCV decision appeal is the final decision of the city, except where the proposed project involves: i. An approval, other than a site plan approval, involvinf! a school (FWRC 19.195.100), a community recreation area (FWRC 19.195.120), a f!overnment facility (FWRC 19.195.150), a public utility (FWRC 19.195.140), or a public park (FWRC 19.195.160) located in an SE (suburban estates), RS (sinf!le-familv residential), or RM (multifamilv) zone~ or ii. A site plan approval for a public utility located in a BN (neif!hborhood business), BC (community business), or OP (office park) zone. iii. SEPA appeals under FWRC Titles 14 and 15. (2) Other cases. In cases not subject to subsection (1) of this section, decisions of the hearinf! examiner become final: i. If no appeal of the hearinf! examiner's decision is submitted within the appeal period, on the first calendar dav followinf! the expiration of the 14-calendar-dav appeal period~ ii. If a written notice of appeal of the hearinl?: examiner's decision is received _lvithin the appeal period, when the city issues a final decision after the appeal process is completi' "--4 09-101011 Doc. /.D. 50756 EXHIBIT I PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processes" 19.15.100 "Lapse of approval - Generally" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ,i< 09-101017 Doc. 1.0. 50756 Exhibit I (Establishes the time that Use Process l, IT, ill, and [V applications are valid) 19.15.100 Lapse of approval- Generally. (1) Use Process L The applicant must substantiallv complete construction for the development activity. use of land. or other actions approved and complete the applicable conditions listed in the Process I decision within one year after the final decision of the city on the matter. or the decision becomes void. If a land use petition is filed under Chapter 36.70C RCW in Kin1! County superior court, the time limits of this section are automaticallv extended bv the len1!th of time between the commencement and final termination of that liti2ation. (2) Use Process II, Ill, and IV. f.n applicant mU5t begin construction or submit to the city a complete building permit application for the development acti'nty, U5e of land or other actions '.vithin one year after the final decision apprO'nng the matter, or the decision becomes void The applicant must substantially complete construction for the development activity, use of land, or other actions approved and complete the applicable conditions listed in the Use Process II. III. and IV decision within five years after the final decision of the city on the matter, or the decision becomes void.. If a land use petition is filed under Chapter 36.7OC RCW in King County superior court, the time limits of this section are automatically extended by the length of time between the cormnencement and final termination of that litigation. If the development activity, use of land, or other action approved under this chapter includes phased construction, the time limits of this section may be extended in the decision on the application,. to allow for completion of subsequent phases. (Orcl No. 09-594, ~ 23, 1-6-09. Code 2001 ~ 22-39.) 09-101lJ11 Doc. I.D. 50156 EXHIBIT J PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processesn 19.15.110 "Lapse of approval- Time extension" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ...~i;r: 09-101017 Doc. to. 50756 Exhibit J (Time extension for Use Process applications) 19.15.110 Lapse of approval- Time extension. (1) Application. No less than 30 days llPrior to the lapse of approval under FWRC 19.15.100 for substantially completine construction or prior to lapse of approval for anv proceedine time extension eranted under this section, the,an applicant may submit a written application request in the form of a letter with supporting documentation to the department requesting a one time extension of those time limits of up to two years. one year. (2) Criteria. The request trRlSt demonstrate that the applicant is making substantial progress on the de<.relopment actiTnty, use of land, or other actioI15 approved Wider this chapter and that circwnstances beyond the applicant's control prevent compliance with the time limits ofPWRC 19.15.100; An extension request shall satisfy the followine criteria to be approved: (a) Except for the first request for time extension., the applicant has made substantial proeress to complete the project~ (b) There are circumstances beyond the applicant's control which prevent compliance with the time limits of FWRC 19.15.100, or any previously eranted extension; (c) The extension will not create or continue conditions that constitute a code violation or an attractive nuisance, contribute to erosion and sedimentation problems, or impact the public health, safety and welfare; and (d) Whether either physical conditions in the vicinity of the plat or codes and requirements of the city, applicable aeencies, and utility providers have chaneed to such a de1!ree since initial approval that it would be contrary to the public interest to extend the life of the plat, includine but not limited to such factors as: i. Whether the adoption of new codes/standards would substantially affect project lavout and storm drainaee desien~ ii. The adequacy of mitieation and/or impact fees to address the cost of mitieation at the end of the expiration period~ iii. Whether the delayed project is an impediment to other development proiects in the vicinity as a result of traffic concurrency reserved capacity. The director may condition the extension request tosatisfv criteria (c) and (d) as appropriate. In order to demonstrate compliance with the criteria of FWRC 19.15.110(2), the applicant may also provide pertinent documentation of financial backine. lease acceptance., or other such commitments secured bv the developer and/or aeent as well as applicable project timelines with milestones and dates of anticipated completion. (3) Fee_ The applicant shall include, with the letter of request, the hourly fee as established by the city. The application request will not be accepted unless it is accompanied by the required hourly fee. (4) Review process and timeline. AD Each request application for a tirne extension will be administratively reviewed and decided upon by the director who may erant up to a one-year extension of time to substantially complete construction and complete applicable conditions of approval for approved Use Process I application(s) after final decision and may l?:rant up to a two-year extension of time to substantially complete construction and complete applicable conditions of approval for approved Use Process II. [II, or IV application(s). (5) Appeals. Any person who is aggrieved by the granting or denying of a request for a time extension under this section may appeal that decision as provided in FWRC 19.65.120. The appellant must file a letter of appeal indicating how the decision on the time extension affects the appellant's property and presenting any relevant material or information supporting the appellant's contention. The appeal will be heard and decided upon using process IV. Pursuant to Chapter 36.70B RCW, any time limit upon the city's processing and decision upon applications under this title may, except as othelWise specifically stated. in this title, be modified by a written agreement between the applicant and the director. (6) Retroactive a/Jplicabilitv. Extensions approved under this section shall be retroactive only for those active and valid Use Process I, n. III. or IV applications. (OTd No. 09-594, ~ 24. 1-6-09. Code 2001 ~ 22-40.) 09-101017 Doc. 1.0. 50756 EXHIBIT K PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processes" 19.65.110 "Effect of the decision" (City File No. 09-1010 17-00-UP) ...."i" 09-101017 Doc I D. 50756 Exhibit K (lVIove this section to 19.15 and combine with Process [V language) 19.65.110 Eff-ect of the decision. Upon a decision becoming final, the applicant may engage in acti,,'ity based on the decision, provided applicable permits have been apprO'led. Decisions become final subject to the follo./,'ing: (1) If a '.'Jutten notice of appeal is received ,..;ithin the appeal period, the decision shall not become final lUltil the appeal process is complete and the city issues a final decision. (2) If no appeal is submitted 'v'.'ithin the 11 calendar day appeal period, the decision shall become final on the fIrst calendar day foUo'l;ing the expiration of the appeal period. .(t 09-HlHlI1 Doc.I.D. 50756 EXHIBIT L PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processes" 19.70.165 "Final decisions and effect of the decision" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ..:\: 09-101017 Doc. ID. ;0756 Exhibit L (lVlove this section to 19.15 and combine with UP language) 19.70.160 Final decisions and effect of the decision. Upon a decision becoming final, the applicant rmy engage in activity based on the decision, provided applicable pennits have been approved [f a decision of the hearing examiner is the final decision of the city, it may be reviewed under FWRC 19.70.760. Vlhcre the hearing C)~aminer' s decision is not the final decision of the city, the decision may be appealed under FWRC 19.70.170 and is subject to subsection (2) of this section. (1) Agency decision appeals. The decision by the hearing examiner on an agency decision appeal is the final decision of the city, except 'Nhere the proposed project in'v'olves: (a) 1\n appro'..al, other than a site plan approval, invoh'ing a school (FWRC 19.195.100), a cormnunity recreation area (FWRC 19.195.(20), a government facility (FWRC 19.195.(50), a public utility (FVlRC 19.195.(10), or a public park (FWRC 19.195.160) located in a SE (suburban estates), R.S (single family residential), or Rl...t (multifamily) zone; or (b) A site plan approval for a public utility located in a BN (neighborhood bU5iness), BC (community bU5iness), or OP (offIce park) zone. (c) SEP,\ appeals under F'NRC Titles 11 and 15. (2) Othe.- cases. [n cases not subject to subsection (I) of this section, decisions of the hearing examiner become final: (a) If no appeal ofthc hearing examiner's deciSiOn is submitted within the appeal period, on the first calendar day follo'/:ing the eKpiration of the 1'1 calendar day appeal period; (b) If a written notice of appeal of the hearing cKaminer' s decision is received within the app0al period, when the city issues a [mal decision after the appeal process is complete_ (Ord No. 09-594, S 92,1-6-09; Ord. No. 07-573, S 26,12-4-07; Ord. No. 00-375, ~ 15, 10-3-00; Ord. No. 97-291, ~ 3,4-1-97; Ord. No. 92-133, S 3(150.70),4-21-92; Ord. No. 90-43, S 2(150.70),2-27-90. Code 2001 S 22-446.) .;.ir 09-101017 Doc.ID 50756 Attachment 3 - Draft Minutes of the July 22, 2009 Planning Commission Public Hearing CITY OF FEDERAL WAY PLANNING COMMISSION July 22, 2009 7:00 p.m City Hall Council Chambers MEETING MINUTES Commissioners present: Merle Pfeifer, Hope Elder, Lawson Bronson, Wayne Carlson, Tom Medhurst, and Tim O'Neil. Commissioners absent: Sarady Long (excused). Staff present: Senior Planner Margaret Clark, Senior Planner Deb Barker, Planning Manager Isaac Conlen, Public Works Deputy Director Ken Miller, Assistant City Attorney Amy Jo Pearsall, and Administrative Assistant Tina Piety. Chair Pfeifer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of July 1,2009, were approved as written. AUDIENCE COMMENT None ADMINISTRATIVE REpORT Ms. Piety announced that the next Planning Commission meeting will be September 16,2009. We will have public hearings on two proposed code amendments. COMMISSION BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARING - Plat & Land Use Application Time Limit Extensions and Vesting Clarification Ms. Barker delivered the staff presentation. The intent of the proposed code amendments is to provide flexibility in city review processes and timelines. The proposed amendments will allow more time to submit information before an application is canceled; will allow more time to complete an approved application as long as the applicant meets the criteria; and will give a consistent and early vesting time for applications. A draft of the proposed amendments was given to the stakeholders group and three responses were received. Lakehaven Utility District and ESM stated they approved of the proposed amendments. Sam Pace of the Seattle King County Realtors sent a letter (attached) that was forwarded to the Commissioners. His main concern was with the short plat timeline (he recommended seven years). Ms. Baker spoke to him about this issue and he stated he did not have an opportunity to read the staff report before preparing his letter. She explained to him that the proposed amendments increased the construction period to five years and allows for two year extensions. Ms. Barker believes the proposed amendments address his concern about the timing of projects. The proposed amendments will increase the time limit to five years and will allow two year extensions as long as the criteria are met. Public Comment Wayne Snoey, Covington resident, Federal Way landowner, member Covington City Council - He supports the spirit of the proposed amendments. He stated that the residential and commercial real estate industries are in terrible shape. It is very difficult for developers to obtain funding, so K:lPlanningCommmion\2lJO'1\Meeting SummllI}' 07-22..Q9.doc Planninl!: Commission Minute" P<.:lIfT13 ') Tn1__......... ",^^^ Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 July 22, 2009 extending the time limits will help by giving them more time to obtain funding. The real economic stimulus will happen at the local level, as with the proposed amendments. Garrett Huffman, Master Builders Association (MBA) - He stated this is excellent work. He passed out three handouts. The first is a table showing what other jurisdictions are doing and/or proposing for time extensions. He stated he has meet with staff on this issue. He commented that we may lose half the builders in this region because they are unable to obtain funding due to the economy_ Extensions will be a great help. The other two handouts deal with the law. On page 8 of the 10 page handout, he has bolded some information regarding vesting. It states in part that a local government, "... may not cause vesting of application to be contingent on future events or decisions...." He feels the proposed vesting amendment (city staff report Exhibit F) allows for this and therefore is illegal and should be deleted. The third handout has case law on the vesting issue. Other than the vesting issue, the MBA supports the proposed amendments. Commissioner Elder asked for the city's legal opinion on the vesting issue. Ms. Pearsall replied that the legal department reviewed the staffs proposal and feel it is legal. The language clarifies that vesting will occur when the application is complete and is not contingent on future events or decisions. The language says that if information is missing and thereby the application is incomplete, the city will request that information and will wait until the missing information is submitted before declaring the application complete. Once the decision is made that the application is complete, then it is vested. Commissioner O'Neal asked Mr. Huffman what he feels is onerous about the proposed vesting. Mr. Huffman replied he is concerned that the city could request additional information or studies that are not on the list of what must be submitted with the application and the city would say the project is not vested until it is all approved. The application should be vested when it is submitted and the city cannot legally require additional studies before vesting the project. Ms. Pearsall commented that the proposed language states that vesting will occur with submission of a complete application, and the code lists what constitutes a complete application. Mr. Huffman responded that just because it is in the code does not necessarily mean it is legal. Commissioner 0 'Neal asked if a limit is proposed for how many extensions an applicant may request. Ms. Barker replied there is no limit to the number of extensions an applicant may request as long as they meet the criteria. Commissioner Medhurst commented that the proposed amendment make common sense. He asked staff whether there was anything in the proposed amendments they may want to change once the economy improves. Ms. Baker replied that staff considered a sunset clause, but they agree the proposed amendments make common sense and decided not to place a sunset clause. Mr. Miller commented that short plats tend to be infill and the city has received complaints from neighbors about properties where work has been started, but nothing has been done for years. It is for this reason staff that included the criteria that substantial progress be shown if an applicant is seeking a second extension. Commissioner Carlson commented that staffhas done a good job with these proposed amendments. He does have a concern. A project is not vested until the application is deemed complete, which could include a number of reports. He understands that city staff will need to review the reports to insure they contain the appropriate information, but he is concerned that staff could hold up the process because of a disagreement with the preparer of a report over a specific piece of information within a report. He requested that staff add language along the lines of stating that reports need only to meet the professional "standard of care." Commissioner Bronson agreed. Commissioner Bronson asked why Use Process I is not included with the proposed amendments. Ms. Barker replied that given the types of projects that are assigned to a Use Process I, staff does not foresee any such K:\PIanningCommission\2OO91Meeting SWIlIIl3Iy 07-22-OO.doc Plannin!! Commission Minute.:: P!lCTP 1; T...l...r "'l ....i\f\O Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 July 22, 2009 project needing an extension. They are less complex, minor land use decisions and very few Use Process I projects need more than a few weeks to complete and many need only a few days. Commissioner Bronson asked if there is an appeal process if the requirements for a complete application appear onerous to the applicant. He is concerned that a technical argument between staff and an engineer could delay an application being deemed complete and thereby would delay vesting. Ms. Barker replied that she is not aware of an appeal process because there has not been an issued decision. At such times, a concerned applicant will speak with the department director. It is not a formal appeal with fees and paperwork, but that is an option for them to take their concerns higher. Mr. Bronson commented this is a concern for him because he is currently involved with a project with the federal government that is delayed because of a technical argument between two professionals. There needs to be some mechanism that can be used to move the process along. Commissioner O'Neil asked to clarify whether the discussion is about vesting. Commissioner Bronson replied he is talking about getting to the point of vesting. If a government professional and an outside professional are involved in an argument there is no way to go around that arbitrary behavior. Mr. Conlen commented that Deb is correct. Typically at the start of the process there is not a point for an appeal other than an informal discussion between the applicant and the planner's supervisor or department director. However, typically within 28 days of the application being submitted, the city is required to issue a decision as to whether or not the application is complete. The city will issue a letter and that is a decision that could be appealed. So there is a chance to appeaL Commissioner Carlson moved (and it was seconded) to recommend the City Council adopt the proposed amendments as presented by staff. The motion passed unanimously. The public hearing was closed. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS Mr. Conlen informed the Commission of the status of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). Staff had been waiting for comments from the state Department of Ecology and has received them. Staff is now editing the SMP in light of these comments and plan to bring it back to the Planning Commission in September or October. AUDIENCE COMMENT Wayne Snoey, Covington resident, Federal Way landowner, member Covington City Counci/- He thanked the Commission for their work on the proposed amendments. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. K:\Planning Commission\2OO9\Meeting Summaty 07-22-09.doc Seattle..King County REAL TORS@ 12410 SE 32nd Street, Suite 100, Bellevue, WA 98005 (425) 974-1011 . TF: (800) 540-3277 . Fax: 425-974'1032 TO: City of Federal Way Planning Commission Chairman Merle Pfeifer & Commissioners Hope Elder (Vice Chair), Lawson Bronson, Wayne Carlson, Tom Medhurst, Sarady Long and Tim O'Neil, DELIVERY: c/o: Margaret Clar~ Senior Planner, (253) 835-2646, marearet.cJark(ii1citvoffederalwav.com Tina Piety, Administrative Assistant II, (253) 835-2601 tina.piety(ii1cityoffederalwav.com Deb Barker, Senior Planner; and deb.barker(ii1citvoffederalwav.com FROM: Sam Pace, Housing Specialist, SeattleKing County REAL TORS@ DATE: July 20, 2009 RE: Plat and Land Use Application and Permit Time Limit Extensions Dear Chairman Pfeifer and Members of the Planning Commission: My name is Sam Pace. I'm a Housing Specialist with the Seattle-King County Association of REAL TORS@ and I'm writing to you on behalf of our 7,500+ members. I will be unable to attend the July 22nd Planning Commission meeting to testify at the Commission's Public Hearing on Plat and Land Use Application and Permit Time Limit Extensions. I'm out-of-town on vacation with my family, but this issue of such importance I thought it necessary to provide you written comments on the subject. I request that these be made a part of the Public Hearing Record. I provided similar written comments to the City Council back in March 2009. Since that time, several other cities, as well as the King County Council, have already enacted extension ordinances. I want to share with you our Association's support for (and underscore the importance ot) the City adopting a Local Economic Stimulus plan. One key piece of such a stimulus plan that we request the City adopt is Extending the life of plat and land use applications and permits (and eSfJeciallv "short plats") including those that were in the City's permitting pipeline on or after January 1,2008. We recommend extending the life of short plats to seven years, (or at least to five years plus annual one-year extensions after the fifth year, similar to the way the City currently treats subdivisions and building permits). Seven years, like the King County Council adopted (retroactive to 2004) is the preferred approach As you know, consistent with existing state law, the City allows 9-lot short plats, and deserves credit and recognition for doing so. In addition, the City allows permits for subdivisions and buildings to be valid for five years, plus annual renewals beyond the fifth year. The City's deserves credit for this approach as welL It is appropriate for the City to provide time frames for the validity of short plats that are similar to those the City provides for subdivisions and building permits. We recommend seven years. TO: DELIVERY: FROM: DATE: RE: PAGE: Chairman Merle Pfeifer and' Members of the Federal Way Planning Commission c/o Margaret Clark, Tina Piety and Deb Sacker Sam Pace, Housing Specialist, SeattleKing County REAL TORS@ July 20, 2009 Plat and Land Use Application and Permit Time Limit Extensions 20fJ As you also know, the construction of homes and plats is stalled due to the national (and world) fmancial crisis that is dramatically constricting access to the capital needed to complete construction of plats and homes. That financial crisis is not the fault oflocal builders/property owners who fmd themselves in the position of unintended victims (like so many other small to medium-sized businesses in our local communities). It is important that the City extend the life of those plats (and especially "short plats") and permits, rather than allowing them to expire. Allowing them to expire, and requiring builders to re-do, re-submit, and re-pay for work that has already been done, and already submitted to the City: . Increases the Costs of Housing . Hurts Housing Affordability for working families . Places homebuilders (and the jobs they provide for local workers) in greater peril. Some observers of the industry indicate that perhaps as many as half the firms may not be able to survi ve the current financial crisis. . Allowing the permits/applications to expire also.has the potential to divert City resources for review of other projects - such as construction the Council wants to see happen Downtown - to redo staff work on residential projects once the market begins to recover; and . All of that, in-turn, delays the City's receipt of sales tax on "sticks and bricks" used in construction of plats and homes, as well as REET revenues the City receives when the lots and homes sell. Additionally, viewing this situation from a "macro economics" perspective, I anticipate that when credit markets start to recover and builders once again have access to capital, we're going to see a continued constraint on housing supply (relative to the pent-up demand for homes) that will artificially increase housing prices above more normal market levels. While it may seem counter-intuitive given current inventory levels, this imbalance between supply and pent-up demand will be the result of the "lag time" between the remaining/surviving builders regaining access to credit for working capital, and the time it takes to complete construction of the plats and homes. Importantly, and unfortunately, there are likely to be far fewer builders available to meet that demand, resulting in longer lag times and higher price increases. Depending upon the number of construction fIrms that go under, I anticipate this will happen for a period of about 6 to 18 months while the construction industry once again begins building homes that, when finished, will be sold to the families of local workers. It's important for the City to do its small part to help avoid unnecessarily exacerbating that imbalance between supply and pent-up demand when the market starts to recover. Extending the life of plats (and esoeciallv "short plats" which currently receive disparate treatment) is an important contribution the City can make to help mitigate this problem. Making the extensions retroactive for projects that were in the City's pipeline on or after January 1, 2008, (or even 2007, when many construction fIrms began to experience the lenders' constricting access to working capital) will help to mitigate the damage being done, and avoid future damage. TO: DELIVERY: FROM: DATE: RE: PAGE: Chairman Merle Pfeifer and' Members of the Federal Way Planning Commission c/o Margaret Clark, Tina Piety and Dilb Barker Sam Pace, Housing Specialist, SeattleKing County REAL TORS@ July 20, 2009 Plat and Land Use Application and Permit Time Limit Extensions 20fJ A very recent study by a number of noted economists and researchers in our state found that Housing (both directly and indirectly) accounts for approximately 20% of the State's GDP and 24% of the payroll in Washington State. Additionally, each 1,000 home sales result in 935 jobs, $37.5 million in wages and $126 million in economic activity. It's an important economic driver for our economy. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Sincerely, SEATILEKlNG COUNITREALTORS@ ~PAa Sam Pace, Housing Specialist cc: David Crowell SKCAR Governmental Affairs Committee COUNCIL MEETING DATE: September 1,2009 ITEM #: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19.15.045 "Completeness of applications" regarding vesting for use process applications. POLICY QUESTION: Should the City approve amendments to Title 19.15.045 "Completeness of applications" regarding vesting of use process applications? COMMITTEE: Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTe) CATEGORY: o Consent ~ o City Council Business 0 STAFF REpORT By: Senior Plarmer Deb Barker MEETING DATE: August 3, 2009 Ordinance Resolution o Public Hearing o Other ....._~_~!:'!:~<?I.II:~~i~XQt:yt:I?12I.II:t:~~_.~~~t:s Background: The proposed amendment addresses a request to amend zoning regulations in order to provide consistency in vesting standards. The amendment provisions specifically target the vesting of Use Process I, II, III, and IV applications, which presently vest to codes in effect at the time of a land use decision_ The amendment will allow Process I, II, nI, and IV applications to vest and be subject to codes in effect at the time the Use Process I, II, III, or IV application is determined to be complete. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 22, 2009, and recommended that the City Council approve the proposed amendment as recommended by staff. The Planning Commission recommendation is included in the adoption ordinance. Attachments: (I) Draft Adoption Ordinance for FWRC Title 19_15.045 "Completeness of applications" which contains the proposed amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission amendrng FWRC 19.15.045; (2) Staff Report to the Planning Commission for the July 22, 2009, Public Hearing with Exhibits A through L, and (3) Draft Minutes of the July 22, 2009, Planning Commission Public Hearing. Options Considered: (1) Adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation as contained in the Draft Adoption Ordinance; (2) Adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation as modified by the LUTC; or (3) Do not adopt the amendment. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council approve Option #1; adopt the Planning Commission's. recommendation as contained in the Draft Adoption Ordinance. CITY MANAGER ApPROVAL: ~ Committee Council DIRECTOR ApPROVAL: ~ Committee Council COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Forward Option #1; adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation as contained in the Draft Adoption Ordinance to full Council on September 1,2009, for first reading. Linda Kochmar, Chair Jim Ferrell, Member Dini Duclos, Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION(S): 1ST READING OF ORDINANCE (09/01109): "I move to forward the ordinance to a second reading for enactment on the September 15 consent agenda. " 2ND READING OF ORDINANCE (09/15/09): "I move approval of the LUTC's recommendation to approve the code amendment, which is contained in the Adoption Ordinance. " K:\2009 Code AmendmentslPlat and LUA ExtensionslPlat & LUA time limits and vestingILUTClagenda bill for Vesting FWRC 19.doc Page I of2 (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: o APPROVED o DENIED o TABLEDIDEFERREDINO ACTION o MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED - 02/06/2006 COUNCIL BILL # 1 ST reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUTClagenda bill for Vesting FWRC 19.doc Page 2 of2 Attachment 1 - Draft Adoption Ordinance for FWRC Title 19.15.054 "Completeness of Applications" ORDINANCE NO. 09- AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to land use application vesting; amending FWRC 19.15.045. (Amending Ordinance Numbers 09-594 and 90-43) WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need to periodically mocUfy:Jitle 19 of the Federal <.:;:::.;>, . "': Way Revised Code (FWRC), "Zoning and Development Code,"~A::9:f4er to conform to state and . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..,,' ,-..-.....'... .-;(:::> <:::::::::::::::::. .-::::::::::' -';::::::::::-:::::. federal law, codify administrative practices, clarify and.vpd.~te zonlng.;f~gulations as deemed ;;:;:.;-;:;.. "::-. .,::;;::::::~:~::::-. .,.. ':::::::::::::::;::~. necessary, and improve the efficiency of the regul<l~i6hs and the developIrt~~~~eview process; and WHEREAS, this ordinance, containing amendment$~q development regulations and the ,'-',. '.......'........... ". ""...... . '" ....... ," ......,..... .c.......;....'.'. ..._....._..._ ..'...'...0'..0'.. text of Title 19 FWRC, has complied wi~R~~B9~WkVI review,2~l1ttL}9.80 FWRC, pursuant to chapter 19.35 FWRC; and . . . . . . . . ... .. .....-. .'.'.',', ...-.-.-.-,-.-,.....-..,....-,.,.. ,"0' .-.'...... '.-....,,,.,',-.',.,',..',..'.. .'.-,-. .-C,'.',. ...,-.-.-,'.-,......-.', ..._ _,,_.. "'_'d.' ......., ...... ..,,-.-,. '."-'.".'-'-' ..,..'....,... .". .,'". """'.' WHEREAS, thes.~V~f~~9wnturn in th~local, regi()h~l, and national housing markets, .., .. ............. """ ',.,,-.-.", .,... .. ,...--. "." ...." ....... . .".... ",........ -.',', "-." ....-."..... ., ......-:-.. ...,.,.,.....,....'..../.',... ,.. ................. '" .. .. , '.,..,., ........... , ."" ...................... " , . , . ' . , . . . , . . . , . . . . . , . . . . . '.'" ",..............,..,....-,- ., financing nec~~~l:l;ryt.9 compl~~~>apr8j&tt;lji!(y~rtsulted in a situation where developers of new ,.,..... "'.-- ,'. .........,. .., ' ,. .., - . ., ... . . .. ...,..,...., '.'.'.._......_... ............... ...............,.. ."........ ..",,".. .......,..... ..._,-,..... ,..... ......... , ...."...... .......... ........... .-.._..........,'. ...-.".".... ........'.... . --,., . ",.." ........ ..d....... __" ..... ....... ., '.'c.-.-.-.-.-,-.', ....-,-...._,_.. ....... . . "'d_'. __,. " .. obtain litidtis.e approval irl~timelymanner which, in the case of commercial projects, may ,'_..-,','.,'" ,. . . , , . . . . . . , - . '''''''.. ".. .-,-."" .." .....-.... " '-".'>:-":", .':'> WHEREAS,<V~~t~l:lgis a term that signifies the point at which a project is guaranteed the codes upon which a project must be designed and processed; and WHEREAS, FWRC Title 19 currently provides for vesting of Process I, II, III, and IV land use applications at the time the land use decision is issued, or alternatively, when a complete building permit application is submitted; and Ordinance No. Rev 3/09 Land Use, Page 10f6 K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUTC\ORDINANCE for Vesting FWRC 19.doc WHEREAS, in today's economic climate and dismal development market, a developer may not be financially able to submit a complete building permit application or may be interested in extending review and approval processes in order to have a market for their project, while preserving the code provisions under which the project was designed and developed; and WHEREAS, significant financial impacts to a developer al1gt6 financial institutions and other investors which have provided financing in support of~r(fevel(ip.l11ent proposal can occur ~.~.- - ":."':", ".. . :-:>::. -";::;:;:;:::::;>:.-, <:-:.' "::::>:;::;:;::,::- WHEREAS, establishing an earlier vestiQg~a.:te for 13:11d use applicat:t8#~would make .:::;:.-.--.-.:::;:;:::::;:<:>. -:-:>. ";:/:-::;:;:/ "';:;:;:::-::-:::-<-::<::'- :::-:<;";:- '::-::;.;::-:-:<:-. .<>::-::<:', .;<<." ...-........'.. .,.......,.,.. . .. L.d ...... .... Process I, II, III, and IV vesting milestones consisteIlF:w:~~Wsi1.bdivision provisions and would provide the developer with the certairiti' that code requir~tiJtnts will not change after an ','.' ...-....-.,..'... application is determined to be complete; an9 ...... ".""'''''''' ...-", ',',', ...... ..,......... ........ .. .............. ....... .c................,.... ".'_'>>:';':',' <-:........ ...,..'.'..,'.'.'....... ',",".',','," ..... .-............ '''''-',' .".'.".;.. -;....,.............., -.-.'..','....-... '~..'.' ....,.,.... ...:....... ...............,....... .,.-.,'-....'.. <IHEREAS, thedlWt stafft~pOrt was electronically forwarded on July I, 2009, to letter submitted b);':!ll~W Pac:;~\vith the Seattle/King County Realtors; and . . . . . . . . . - . , . , . ....."... ..... .,......'........... ,-..,......' .."...... ...... WHEREAS, th~Planning Commission properly conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the code amendments on July 22, 2009; and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the City Council; and Ordinance No_ Rev 3/09 Land Use, Page 20f6 K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUTC\ORDINANCE for Vesting FWRC 19.doc WHEREAS, the Land Use/Transportation Committee of the Federal Way City Council considered these code amendments on August 3, 2009, and recommended adoption of the amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ....., """.." Section 1. Findings. The City Council of the City off:eder&t~flY makes the following .. ',,',," ....',..,v.,. findings with respect to the proposed amendments. (a) ..;:;:;:;:." - <;:;:; ::~:_;",::." The code amendments are in the ~*~~i~nterest of:t~e residents ofit~~;S;~ty and will . . .... .-..... ~ ........ .n....' .... ",....... u""'" .. ......... .......... ... .......... ............ .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., .... . . . ........" ....... .... .. benefit the city as a whole by providing consistency wltlj:i~9pted sl:tbdivision vesting provisions . ........'......,'... and providing certainty in the developm~j:l:tpermitting proces~~$;>> :~:~:(:>~\:?:::._:._.:.. - '-:;:::::::::::::::::..". -::::::::::::'::>:>>>::::::',- '<;:;:::::;:;:;::::-.. ./" (b) The code amendments comJly~ifli.:;~%?ter 36.70A.:~eW, Growth Management. ,",'," .,..........-.....-.........-. '.. d. . ............ .__ ,... ............... ." ..., .,........--..... .., . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......, ,'.',-.',',','.',-.',-.'.-.'.-,',-,'..-- '.' ,',',' ....-,.. ._..-,......-.-,-.-,-,.,.,...,.. .. -.... _....,.,-,.,... (c) The code a,m~HWnents are c6~},~~erit ;itIl~~~;lntent and purpose of Title 19 .;.;.;.:.;....,;."" , .. . . . .'.;-;.;-:.;,;.;.' .~ Comprehensive Plan. .<;:::::;:;:;:;:;:. , . , ';';'.-:;:;:;:;.> :.;.;.~..-....".'.' . u..u............ ..u............., '" ..u.,........... .-.-..,:.'.'....-',.,..,..-. .",........ ...,.-:>;.:-;.;,;-:.,'.'.... (d)<Tl1eB.8~~:a,men:d~~:Ii!lS bear a'sUbstantial relationship to, and will protect and not ..."... q q.... ... .. adversel}i~ffect, the publiC'~~illth, siif~~yrand welfare. FWRC. Section 2. Conclusions. Pursuant to chapter 19.35 FWRC, and based upon the recitals and the findings set forth in Section 1, the Federal Way City Council makes the following Conclusions of Law with respect to the decisional criteria necessary for the adoption of the proposed amendments: Ordinance No. Rev 3/09 Land Use, Page 3 of6 K\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUfC\ORDINANCE for Vesting FWRC 19.doc (a) The proposed FWRC amendments are consistent with, and substantially implement, the following Federal Way Comprehensive Plan goals and policies: LUG2 Develop an efficient and timely development review process based on a public/private partnership. LUP4 Maximize efficiency of the development review proS#,$,$: ",',',' '", ,,','C,' ,', . . . . . . BDP 15 The City will continue to implement a streamljn~g.p~rmitting process consistent with state and federal regulationsJ9redu~~~he upfront costs of locating businesses in the City. ........... '"-,." "d'" . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . H.... d"""" ,;.<>))}:;\. .:; "::::r:~:~:!<-:... .:;.;-.-" -':':'" ...,............. BDP 18 The City will periodically monitor JQc~l and regional tren&:tqpe able to adjust plans, policies, and programs. .................. .. ,qq.'" HUH' ...... .......... 'HUH <}}:}\" '':<;:::;;}:::::::'' .,:;:,., HP9 Maximize efficiency in the City' s dev~18pm~ri.t review process and ensure that unnecessary time delays and expenses aie~~i!pinated. Continue to provide streamlined permittingti~9sesses for devel()p~nt that is consistent with the FWCP and FWCC, andt1iatP~]:lo adverse imp~q~Ei Co',-,',',',',-,',,',-.-,. ,:,:-,",,',', """',' .... ,....,..',' ..........,.......,.-... ..........'.. . ............. .........'. '::~\. ...::<:<:)?)(::\:-: . >:::>: .' HP 11 Continue to assist developef~ withn6U$m~pr()posals at the earliest possible opportunifYripfluding preappFs#ion md::tingsto produce projects that can be review:~4quick:lyand maximiz~their abilitY to receive permits_ .... .........'.. '.'.' :"""',- ..,.,.,..,.....,.. '.'.' . :::.:-:/?;::..-:::\U:/\ >:? ~ (b) Thepr8pg~~d FW~e amendmentsb~ar a substantial relationship to the public ::\:::::::',: '.::;:::::::::;::::/:::::-., '''H. ...... ...... .d ........ ..... (2)< The proposedatnendments are in the best interest of the public and the residents ... ...., .., . ,"'. ,...." . ,." . .'...'...'....'. ..., .......... ...., .... ....., ',......... .., of the City of F~g:tral Way as they provide for certainty in development review process, which Section 3. FWRC 19.15.045 shall be amended to read as follows: 19.15.045 Completeness of applications. (1) Within 28 calendar days of receiving an application, the city shall determine whether the application is complete, with reference to FWRC 19.15.040. Prior to the 28- day deadline, a letter of completeness shall be issued indicatin2: the date the application is deemed complete. if the city deems the application to be complete, or, if the city Ordinance No. Page 4 of 6 Rev 3/09 Land Use, K\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUTC\ORDINANCE for Vesting FWRC 19.doc determines the application to be incomplete, the city shall notify the applicant of what needs to be submitted for a complete application. In this written determination, the city shall also identify, to the extent known to the city, the other agencies of local, state, or federal government that may have jurisdiction over some aspect of the proposed development activity. i\n application may be deemed complete under this section e'len if the city does not provide a written determination to the applicant as required. (2) If an application was found incomplete and an applicant submits additional information, the city shall notify the applicant in writin2: withi.n::l4. days the date whether the application is deemed complete or whether fu~~f:;dditional information is necessary~ .'::;;:~~::~:;;;::((:t;;;;:. (3) Additional information. A determination of cOI11P!eteng~~~hall not preclude the city from requesting additional information or studies, ~.itR~.at the Htlj~'9fthe letter of completeness or subsequently, if new informatiQ~:ismhmlHred or itt~~r~are substantial changes in the proposed action..:...,:}:: (4) Vestim!. A proposed Use Process I~I~~~.:I.!I, or IV::.ipplication shaU:,:!~~tto and be considered under the zonin2: code and olbttJandus~.control ordinarices, in effect on the land at the time a fuDv completed aPD61~~~()u:fortJse Process I~'II, III, or IV has been submitted to the citv.}n the event tha{tH~::~itv requests supplemental or specific information to find anapYlication compleie'Mtlle Use Process I, II, III, or IV application shall vest to those coa~sl~:!!!~ct on the da:t~~:.itall requested supplemental or specific informad6n i:~:su.bnitted. A comv1ete application shall be .... ,~.."."..,. .-.. ,,', defined as set forth in FWRC 19.15ili!40 a~~:bi~!~:~~Eequirements in related handouts. Vested rights shall not bewaiviible Plifsilint to the Vested Ri2:hts Doctrine..................... .....,'.'....... .......... ...... .,.,...... . . ... - . - . .-.. .........., Section 4_ SevedtiiHHty. J?:J1~ PfQYlslons Qrthis ordinance are declared separate and d.... .."....".. _, /:;::;:;::' ':::;:;:;;;:;:;:;:;:;::-,'<::<:::.:::.> this .ptai~~nce, or the in~~J~~~~y ofth~;application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall . ........ ....., 'U''''''. '""" not affect tlieM~lidity of thet~mainder of the ordinance, or the validity of its application to any ......,.~, ..-... , . .. . . , , . , . . . . ' . ..;.;..;.... '.........;.;.;.;..: to make necessary corrections to this ordinance including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener/clerical errors, references, ordinance numbering, section/subsection numbers and any references thereto. Ordinance No. Rev 3/09 Land Use, Page 5 of6 K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LUTC\ORDINANCE for Vesting FWRC 19.doc Section 6. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective five (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal .ytiY this day of ,200_. '...'..v.','.','...... ,',,",. """-','>'-" '.",':,::::-:;; . "\} ..:::~::::::::::::::-. CITY OF EJ$mEML W A y<i:;~:t,::.: ~.' . ......;-:-' MA YOR,j~~~fJbVEY ATTEST: :.<..~:<.:~:::::::- ."""... . ."...... d. ,.....,',... " .,...... .......-.-.,.'.'. ,;,;,:,:<<,;,/,.;.;-;. "-:.;.;.;.;.;.:.;.;.' CITY CLERK, CAROL MC,NpJLL Y, CMC ..,................. ...,.......-... ....... .... ........"........ ............... . APPROVED AS TOij'@RM: CITY A TTORNl3;y,pA TRie~,A.RIe~~$()N Ordinance No. Rev 3/09 Land Use, Page 6 of6 K:\2009 Code Amendments\Plat and LUA Extensions\Plat & LUA time limits and vesting\LlITC\ORDINANCE for Vesting FWRC 19.doc Attachment 2 - Staff Report to the Planning Commission for the July 22, 2009 Public Hearing with Exhibits A through L Federal Way STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Planning Commission Meeting of July 22, 2009 Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18 - Subdivisions and Title 19 - Permits and Review Processes Federal Way File No. 09-101017-00-UP Report prepared by Senior Planner Deb Barker L PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT The proposed text amendments are intended to aid in economic recovery by providing flexibility with increases to extension deadlines and approvals for a variety of applications. In addition, vesting for land use applications is proposed to be clarified H. BACKGROUND Due in large part to the national economic recession, the regional housing market has severely declined and the ability for (commercial and home) builders and developers to secure credit from financial institutions has become considerably more difficult. The local building industry has been significantly impacted by these issues and is faced with the on-going threat of job losses and business closures in land development and housing related industries. Stakeholders in the building industry believe that bold actions are needed at all levels of government to spur housing and economic recoveries. One of the actions suggested by the Master Builders of King COWlty as part of a housing stimulus plan at the local level includes extending the time period applicants have to submit an application for a complete final subdivision or short subdivision approvaL Taking this action may allow home builders increased opportunities for debt recovery and provide the time needed to obtain financing and complete construction. In addition to extending time limits for subdivisions, the City believes that extending time limits for land use permits can further the recovery of the industry and improve some inconsistencies in the existing codes. Vesting is a term that signifies the point at which a project is guaranteed the codes upon which a project must be designed arid processed_ The city's codes currently establish vesting at various points, leading to inconsistency and confusion. Staff's proposal to establish vesting of land use permits and approvals at the point of submitting a complete application, consistent with subdivision . applications, I also provides the building industry the certaiIity that codes would not be changed in mid-process, potentially impacting their application. It is in this spirit that this code amendment is prepared. I Vesting tor subdivision applications is covered under RCW 58.17.033. ...'4 The current Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) includes the following expiration timeLines and points of vesting: Type of Permit Summarized Current Time Line Vestinl?; Date Preliminary plat City code requires that responses for additional information be At complete provided within 180 days of the request., or an application can application be considered void. Preliminary plat applications expire five years from date of approvaL The Hearing Examiner can grant a one-time, one-year extension. Recorded preliminary plats vest for five years from date of recording. Short plat and BSP City code requires that responses for additional information be At complete provided within 180 days of the request., or an application can application be considered void. Short plat applications expire one year following director approvaL The director can grant a one-time, one-year extensiolL Process I, [I, III, IV City code requires that responses for additional information be At date of complete provided within 180 days of the request., or an application can building permit be considered void. The applicant must submit a complete application or of building permit within one year ofland use approval or the land use approval approval expires. The project must be constructed within one and five years following approval with one-time. one-year extension or the application expires_ Building Permit Under the International Building Code ([BC) a complete Complete building permit application shall expire within 180 days_ application Extensions up to 90 days are available subject to written request with justifiable cause demonstrated. Building permit applications toll until the SEP A appeal period concludes. Issued building permits also expire 180 days from issuance. Extensions up to 180 days are available subject to written requests and justifiable cause demonstrated. 2 =at)' 01 >>"'slmg Cooe III. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS The following is a summary of the proposed amendments_ Subdivisions - FWRC Title 18: (a) City code currently requires that responses for additional information be provided within 180 days of the request, or an application can be considered void The purpose of this amendment is to provide an extension of that timeLine while ensuring that the applicant has not abandoned the project. 3 Staff recommends administrative extensions to the 180-day timeline for resubmitting additional information for short plats, binding site plans, and preliminary plats subject to criteria and situational conditions. A nominal fee would be required with the extension request. The administrative extensions to the 180-day timeline would be retroactive to those subdivision applications currently under review (Exhibit A - FWRC 18.05.080 Application CancelationJ (b) City codes currently require that a short plat be completed within one year of approval or the short plat expires. The purpose of this amendment is to extend the short plat construction timeline so that it is consistent with the five years of time allowed for construction of a 2 !BC related information from IDC 105.3.2 and IDC 105.5 is provided for reference only. No changes to any IDC provision are rro~osed with this code amendment. It IS proposed that the number and timeline of 180 day extensions provided for pending preliminary plats, short plats, and binding site plan applications be based on compliance with criteria. Staff Report to the Planning Corrunission Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) ....4 Page 2 09-10 10 17/00<. ID. 50754 preliminary plat. Staff recommends that approval deadlines for short plat applications increase from one year to five years (Exhibit B - FWRC /8.30.260 Short plat duration approval). (c) Currently, all infrastructure such as roads and utilities required for those preliminary plat, short plat, or binding site plan applications4 that have received preliminary approval must be installed within a specific timeline from the date of preliminary approval. The City code ctUTently provides only a one-time, one-year extension of these time lines, and requires that the Hearing Examiner review preliminary plat extension requests. This amendment proposes to increase the extension timeline from one year to two years for all short plat and preliminary plat applications, and allow additional extension opportunities for those short plat and preliminary plat projects that have been approved but are not completed within the required timeline. It is further proposed that the Director of Conmnmity Development Services would review and grant each extension request subject to circumstances and compliance with criteria,s and it is proposed that this extension opportunity be made retroactive in order to address those active and valid preliminary plat, short plat, and BSP applications that have received preliminary approval, have received their only extension opportunity, and face expiration as they are still not completed Staff recommends that two-year extension opportunities shall be available for approved short plats, binding site plans, and preliminary plat applications subject to criteria and administrative review; and appealable to the Hearing Examiner. The extensions shall be retroactive to those active and valid projects granted preliminary plat, short plat, or binding site plan approval (Exhibit C - FWRC /8.05.090 Lapse of Approval- Time Extension). (d) Currently, city code requires that approved short plats be completed within one year of approval or the short plat expires. As noted in (b) above, short plat timelines are recormnended to be consistent with preliminary plat timelines, and extended from one year to five years. The five-year timeline reference is proposed as 18.30.260 to the <'Subdivisions in General" section of the FWRC The one-year time line reference would therefore be deleted from the short subdivision portion of the FWRC Staff recommends that in order to provide for a consistent subdivision completion timeline shown in FWRC 18.05.090, Duration of Approval, the section known as FWRC 18.30.270 would be deleted (Exhibit D - Deletes FWRC /8.30.270 Effect- Time Extension). (e) Currently, extension provisions are individually located in short plat and preliminary plat sections of the FWRC As noted in (c) above, the subdivision code is proposed to be modified to allow for consistent timeline and extension opportunities for short plats and preliminary plats. Staffrecomrnends that in order to consolidate timeline and extension opportunities for preliminary plats, timeline and extension references in FWRC 18.35.220 would be moved to FWRC 18.05.090, Duration of Approval (Exhibit E - FWRC /8.35.220 Duration of Approval). Permits and Review Processes - FWRC Title 19: (a) As noted above, vesting is a term that signifies the point at which a project is guaranteed the codes upon which a project must be designed and processed_ The city's codes currently establish Use Process I, II, III, and IV land use applications vesting at the time a land use decision is issued, while subdivision applications vest at the time of a complete application. 6 The proposal to establish land use permits vesting at the point of submitting a complete ~ Binding site plans are processed under the provisions of short subdivision per FWRC 18.20_020. ) The number of extension opportunities for approved preliminary plats, short plats, and binding site plans shall be based on compliance with criteria 6 Vesting for subdivision applications are covered under RCW 58-17_033_ s Staff Report to the Planning Commission Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Page 3 09-10 10 17/Doc to. 50754 application would make vesting milestones consistent with subdivision provisions. Applications that are not complete when submitted require that more information be submitted Those Use Process applications would vest after required information is provided and a letter of completeness is issued by the City. An applicant would not be able to alter or choose vesting dates without formally withdrawing a current land use application. To eliminate inconsistency and confusion, staff recommends that the vesting of Use Process I, n, rn, and IV applications be changed from land use approval to the date the application is determined to be complete. rt is also recommended that Use Process applications that require additional information to be considered complete would not vest until after determined complete based on a letter of completeness. A complete land use application will be defined, and vesting rights would not be waivable (Exhibit F - FWRC 19.15.045 Use Process - Completeness of Applications). (b) City code currently requires that responses for additional information be provided within 180 days of the request, or an application can be considered void The purpose of this amendment is to provide an extension of that timeline while ensuring that the applicant has not abandoned the project. Administrative extensions to the 180-day timeline for resubmitting additional information would be available subject to criteria and situational conditions; would be subject to a nominal fee; and if approved, would be retroactive for valid Process I, [I, HI, or IV applications.7 Staff recommends administrative extensions to the 180-day timeline for resubmitting additional information for Use Process I, II, HI, and IV applications subject to criteria and situational conditions, and subject to a nominal fee. Administrative extensions to the 180-day timeline would be retroactive to valid Process I, [I, HI, and IV land use applications currently under review (Exhibit G - FWRC 19.15.050 Application Cancelation). (c) Language discussing "final decisions" and "effects of the decision" is located in both sections on Use Process HI and Use Process IV. In an effort to consolidate duplicative language, this amendment proposes to consolidate and relocate this language into the "permits and review processes" section so that it is applicable to all Use Process I, H, HI, arid IV applications. Staff recommends that duplicative language on final decisions and effects of the decision be merged and rnoved to the Permits and review processes section (Exhibit H - FWRC 19.15.075 Final decisions and effect of the decision). (d) Currently, an applicant for a Process l, H, HI, or IV application IllliSt begin construction or submit to the city a complete building permit application for development activity, use of land, or other actions within one year of the final decision, or the decision becomes void. In addition, the applicant must substantially complete the construction for the development activity, use of land, or other actions and complete the applicable conditions in the decision within five years after the final decision or the decision becomes void The purpose of this amendment is to eliminate the timeline for submitting a complete building permit application for approved Process n, m, and IV applications since work approved under these applications is typically more complex and a timeline to submit a building permit is not practical. The amendment further proposes to allow five years to complete work following the Process n, rn, or IV decision. In contrast, Process I applications focus on a limited aspect of the project, are typically less complicated, and thus do not require additional time limit extensions to complete the work. Staffreconnnends that the applicant substantially complete construction for the development activity, use of land, or other actions approved and complete the applicable conditions listed in the decision within one year of the Process I decision, or within five years 7. It is proposed that the number and time line of 180-day extensions provided for Use Process L II, ill, and rv applications be based on compliance with criteria Staff Report to the Planning Commission Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) ..~ Page 4 09-10 10 17/Doc. to. 50154 of the Process n, III, or IV decision. or those decisions becorne void (Exhibit [- FWRC 19. 15./00 Lapse of Approval - Generally). (e) Currently, city code provides a one-time extension of only one year for an applicant to complete all of the work approved under a Use Process I, U, HI, and IV decision following the initial one year construction timeline. The purpose of this amendment is to provide greater flexibility for developers and builders by increasing extension timelines from one year to two years for all Process II, m. and IV applications that have been approved but are not completed within the required timeline. The amendment also proposes that the Director of Community Development Services review and grant each extension request subject to circumstances and compliance with criteria. S and that this extension opportunity be made retroactive in order to address active land use applications that have received preliminary approval, received their only extension opportunity and. face expiration as they are still not completed As previously noted. Use Process I applications are typically less complicated. and generally do not require additional time limit extensions to complete the work. Staff recommends that one year extension opportunities be available for approved Process I applications subject to criteria and administrative review; that two-year extension opportunities be available for approved Process II. III, and IV applications subject to criteria and administrative review; and appealable to the Hearing Examiner. Extension provisions would be retroactive to valid and active land use Process I, II, HI, and IV applications currently under review (Exhibit J - FWRC 19.15. I /0 Lapse of Approval - Time Extension). (t) Currently, the effect of a Process III decision is referenced in FWRC 19.65.110. As noted in (c) above, in order to eliminate duplicative code provisions and ensure that the effect of decision is consistent for all use process decisions, it is recommended that FWRC 19.65.110 Effect of decision be deleted as it is moved to FWRC 19.15.075 (Exhibit K - Deletes FWRC 19.65./10 Effect of the decision). (g) Currently, the effect of a Process IV decision is referenced in FWRC 19.70.160. As noted in C above, in order to eliminate duplicative code provisions and ensure that the final decision and effect of decision is consistent for all use process decisions, it is recommended that FWRC 19.70.160 Final decisions and effect of decision be deleted as it is moved to FWRC 19.15.075 (Exhibit L - Deletes FWRC /9.70./60 Final decisions and effect of the decision). IV. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY The Project is procedurally exempt from State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A) review under WAC 197-11-800(19) (Procedural Actions). Public Notice of the July 22,2009, public hearing was published and posted on July 4, 2009, in accordance with the City's procedural requirements. There were no public comments. V. DECISIONAL CRITERIA FWRC 19.80.130 provides criteria for zoning text amendments. The following section analyzes the compliance of the proposed zoning text amendments with the criteria provided by FWRC 19.80.130. The City may amend the text of the FWRC only if it finds that: & The number of extension opportunities tor approved Use Process I, II, III, and IV applications shall be based on compliance with criteria. .:' Staff Report to the Planning Commission Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Page 5 09-101017/00c I.D. 50154 1. The proposed amendments are consistent with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan. The proposed FWRC zoning text amendments are consistent with the following goals and policies contained in the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP): LUG2 LUP4 EDG6 EDPl5 EDPl8 HP8 HP9 HPIO HPll Develop an efficient and timely development review process based on a publidprivate partnership. Maximize efficiency of the developrnent review process. The City will encourage and support existing businesses to remain and/or expand their facilities within Federal Way. The City will continue to implement a streamlined permitting process consistent with state and federal regulations to reduce the upfront costs oflocating businesses in the City. The City will periodically monitor local and regional trends to be able to adjust plans, policies, and programs. Consider the economic impact of all development regulations on the cost of housing. Maximize efficiency in the City's development review process and ensure that unnecessary time delays and expenses are eliminated. Continue to provide streamlined permitting processes for development that is consistent with the FWCP and FWCC (sic), and that has no adverse impacts. Encourage community input, where appropriate, into the development permit process by providing thorough and timely information to the public. Continue to assist developers with housing proposals at the earliest possible opportunity, including preapplication meetings to produce projects that can be reviewed quickly and maximize their ability to receive permits. 2. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to public health, safety, or welfare. The proposed FWRC text amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, or welfare because it responds to current national economic conditions that impact local land development and housing related industries by modifying development regulations to provide for flexibility during the development review process that is not provided in the current code; and clarifies and refines various related codes in order to increase the efficiency of the development review process. 3. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the residents of the City. Approval of the proposed code amendment would benefit the City as a whole as it provides for flexibility in development review timelines, which results in continued development within the City, thus aiding the local economy, and ensuring that housing costs remain realistic. VI. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW AND ACTION Pursuant to FWRC 19.80.050(b), the City Council may review City-initiated changes to the text of the zoning code frorn time to time at the Council's discretion_ The Planning Commission is being asked to review the proposed changes to the zoning code and forward a recommendation to the City CounciL FWRC Chapter 19_80, "Process VI Review," establishes a process and criteria for zoning code text amendments. Consistent with Process VI review, the role of the Planning Commission is to review and evaluate the zoning code text regarding any proposed amendments; to determine whether .- StatfReport to the Planning Connnission Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Page 6 09-10 1 0 17/Doc. !D. 50754 the proposed zoning code text amendment meets the criteria provided by FWRC 19.80.130; and to forward a recommendation to City Council regarding adoption of the proposed zoning code text amendment. Consistent with the provisions of FWRC 19.80.240, the Planning Commission may take the following actions regarding the proposed zoning code text amendments: 1. Recommend to City Council adoption of the FWRC text amendments as proposed; 2. Modity the proposed FWRC text amendments and recommend to City Council adoption of the FWRC text amendments as modified; 3. Recommend to City Council that the proposed fWRC text amendments not be adopted; or 4. Forward the proposed FWRC text amendments to City Council without a recommendatioIL VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the above staff analysis and decis ional criteria, staff recommends that the following amendment to FWRC Title 18 Subdivisions and FWRC Chapter 19.15 Permits and Review Processes as outlined in Section II above be recommended for approval to the City Council. 1. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit A, to FWRC 18.05.080, Application Cancelation 2. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit B, to FWRC 18.30.260, Short Plat Duration Approval 3. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit C, to FWRC 18.05.090, Lapse of Approval- Time Extension 4. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit D, to FWRC 18.30.270, Effect - Time Extension 5. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit E, to FWRC 18.35.220, Duration of Approval 6. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit F, to FWRC 19.15.045, Completeness of App lications 7. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit G, to FWRC 19.15.050, Application Cancelation 8. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit H, to FWRC 19.15.075, Final Decisions and Effect of the Decision 9. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit [, to FWRC 19.15.100, Lapse of Approval- Generally 10. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit 1, to FWRC 19.15.110, Lapse of Approval- Tirne Extension 11. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit K, to FWRC L9.65.110, Effect of the Decision 12. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit L, to FWRC 19.70. L60, Final Decisions and Effect of the Decision EXHIBITS Exhibit A, to FWRC L8.05.080, Application Cancelation Exhibit B, to FWRC 18_30_260, Short Plat Duration of Approval Exhibit C, to FWRC 18.05.090, Lapse of Approval- Time Extension Exhibit D, to FWRC 18.30.270, Effect - Time Extension Exhibit E, to FWRC L8.35.220, Duration of Approval Exhibit F, to FWRC 19.15.045, Completeness of Applications Exhibit G, to FWRC 19. L5.050, Application Cancelation Exhibit H, to FWRC 19. L5.075, Final Decisions and Effect of the Decision Exhibit [, to FWRC 19_ L 5_100, Lapse of Approval - Generally Exhibit J, to FWRC 19.15. L 10, Lapse of Approval- Time Extension Exhibit K, to FWRC 19.65.110, Effect of the Decision Exhibit L, to FWRC 19_70.160, Final Decisions and Effect of the Decision .;..'t Staff Report to the Planning Conunission Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Page 7 09-101017IDodD.50154 Proposed Text Amendments In Relevant Part Submitted to Planning Commission July 22, 2009 EXHIBIT A PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18~ "Subdivisions'~ 18.05.080 "Application Cancelation~' (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ~ Exhibit A (Provides extension to the 180-4ay timeline) 18.05.080 Application cancellation. (!}If an applicant for a boundary line adjustment, lot line elimination, binding site plan, short subdivision plat, preliminary plat, final plat, alteration of plat, or vacation of subdivision fails to provide additional information to the city within 180 days of being notified by mail that such information is requested, the application shall be deemed null and void and the city shall have no duty to process, review, or issue any decision with respect to such an application. (2) Extension request No less than 30 days prior to the lapse of the 180-dav notification bv the city under FWRC 18.05.080(1), the applicant for a short pla~ bindin2 site plan, or preliminary plat application(s) mav submit a written request in the form of a letter with supportin2 evidence to the department requestin2 an extension of the 180-dav time limits and documentin2 the followin2: (a) That circumstances bevond the applicant's control prevent compliance with the time limits of FWRC 18.05.080(1); (b) That the applicant is makin2 substantial pr02ress in respondin2 to the request for information so that review of the application can be furthered when that information is submitted; and (c) The number of additional calendar davs necessary to provide the requested information. (3) Review process. A request for an extension to the 180-dav time limit will be reviewed and decided upon bv the director based on responses to criteria in FWRC 18.05.080(2). (4) Retroactive applicabilitv. Administrative extension to the 180-dav time limit shall be retroactive to those valid bindin2 site plan, short subdivision., and preliminary plat applications currentlv under review. (Ord. No. 07-554, ~ 5(Exh. A(2)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 00-375, ~ 5. 10-3-00. Code 2001 ~ 20-22.) ...... 09-IOW17 Doc. 1.0. 50755 EXHIBIT B PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18, "Subdivisions" 18.30.260 "Effect - Short plat duration approvar' (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ,0 09-101011 Doc.1.0 50155 Exhibit B (Short plat approval would be valid for 5 years) 18.30.260 Effect - Short plat dDuration approval. (I) Short plat approval shall expire ene five year~ from the date of the director of community development services approvaL Said approval shall constitute acceptance of short subdivision layout and design and shall include all conditions, restrictions, and other requirements required by the director of community development services as part of short subdivision approvaL City approval of a short subdivision shall not constitute approval for land clearing or grading, vegetation removal, or any other activities which otherwise require permits from the city. (2) Prior to construction of improvements pursuant to short plat approval, engineering drawings for public improvements shall be submitted for review and approval to the department of public works, Lakehaven utility district, and city of Tacoma public utilities department. No permits to begin construction or site work shall be granted until final approval of all utility plans, including storm drainage; the payment of all pertinent fees; and the submittal of performance securities as may be required.. (Ord No_ 07-554, ~ 5(ExlL A(2)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 97-291, ~ 3,4-1-97. Code 2001 ~ 20-106.) .;..-" 09-101011 Doc. 1.0. )075S EXHIBIT C PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18, "Subdivisions" 18.05.090 "Lapse of Approval - Time extension" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) s 09-101011 Doc. to. 5On5 Exhibit C (NEW section for time extension for short plat, 8SP, and preliminary plat applications) 18.05.090 Lapse of approval- Time extension (l) Application. No less than 60 days prior to lapse of approval under FWRC 18.30.260 and FWRC 18.35.220, or prior to lapse of approval of any precedin2 time extension 2ranted under this section., the applicant may submit a written request in the form of a letter with supportin2 documentation to the department of community development services requestin2 extension of those time limits of UP to two years. (2) Criteria. An extension request shall satisfy the followin2 criteria to be approved: (a) Except for the first request for time extension, the applicant has made substantial pr02ress to complete the plat; (b) There are circumstances beyond the applicant's control which prevent compliance with the time limits of FWRC 18.30.260, 18.35.220, or any previously 2ranted extension; (c) The extension will not create or continue conditions that constitute a code violation or an attractive nuisance, contribute to erosion and sedimentation problems; or impact the public health, safety, and welfare; and (d) Whether either phvsical conditions in the vicinity of the plat or codes and requirements of the city, applicable a2encies, and utility providers have chan2:ed to such a de2ree since initial approval that it would be contrary to the public interest to extend the life of the plat, includin2: but not limited to such factors as: i. Whether the adoption of new codes and/or standards would substantiallv affect project layout and storm draina2e desi2n; ii. The adeQuacv of miti2ation and/or impact fees to address the cost of miti2ation at the end of the expiration period; iii. Whether the delaved project is an impediment to other development projects in the vicinity as a result of traffic concurrency reserved capacity. The director may condition the extension request to satisfy criteria (c) and (d) as appropriate. In order to demonstrate compliance with the criteria of FWRC 18.05.090(2), the applicant may also provide pertinent documentation of financial backin2, lease acceptance, or other such commitments secured by the developer and/or a2ent as well as applicable project timelines with milestones and dates of anticipated completion. (3) Fee. The applicant shall include with the letter of request the hourlv fee as established by the city. The request will not be accepted unless it is accompanied bv the required hourlv fee. (4) Review process. Each request for extension will be reviewed and decided upon bv the director of community development services who may l!rant UP to a two-year extension(s) of approval. (5) Appeals. Any person a!!!!rieved by the !!rantin2: or denyinl! of a request for a time extension under this section may appeal that decision. The appellant must file a letter of appeal indicatin!! how this decision affects the appellant's property and presentin2 any relevant material or information supportin2: the appellant's contention. The appeal will be heard and decided upon usin!! the appeal process described in FWRC 18.30.140 et seq. Anv short plat time limit, pursuant to Chapter 36.70B RCW, upon the city's processin2 and decision upon applications under this title may, except as otherwise specifically stated in this title, be modified by a written a!!reement between the applicant and the director of community development services. (6) Retroactive applicabilitv. The provisions of this section shall be retroactive to active and valid short plat, bindin2: site plan, and preliminary plat applications. .;.. 09-101017 Doc. l.D 50755 EXHIBIT D PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18, "Subdivisions" 18.30.270 "Effect - Time extension" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) -~ 09-101017 Doe. LD_ 50755 Exhibit D (Moved to 18.05.090) 18.30.270 Effect Time extension. (I) No less than 30 days prior to lapse of appro';al under f\VRC 18.30.260, the applicant may submit a written application in the form of a letter with supporting documentation to the department of community development services requesting a one time extension of those limi:ts of up to one year. (2) The applicant shall include, with the letter of request, the fee as established by the city and reasons for said. request. The application will not be accepted unless it is accompanied by the requrred fee. (3) The director of cOfffiIlunity development services may grant a one year extension of short subdill-ision appro'.'al v'nth an CKpiratiOB. date and no further opportunity for extension. (4) The request R1I:tSt demonstrate that the applieaflt is making substaRtial progress on the appro'lal and coooitioftS of approval, and that there are circumstances beyond the applicant's control ...vhich prC'I0flt compliaoce v.rith the time limits of FWRC 18.30.260. (5) Ally person aggrieved by the granting or deHYiag of a request for a time extension under this section. may appeal that decision.. The appellaHt R1I:tSt file a letter of appeal indicating no".' this decision. affects tOO appellant's property and presentiag any relevant material or information supporting the appellant's contention_ The appeal'NiH be heard and decided upon 1:I:Sin.g the appeal process dcscnbed in FWRC 18.30.l'IO ot seq. Any time limit, pursuant to Chapter 36.708 RCW, upoa the city's processing and decision upon applieations under this title may, except as otherwise specifIcally stated in this title, be modified by a written agreement between the applicant and the director of corrnnuuity development servIces. (Ora No. 07 551, ~ 5(Exh. ,\(2)), 5 1507; Ord. No. 97 291, ~ 3,1 1 97, Code 2001 ~ 20 107.) -" 09.1010\1 Doc.I.D 50755 EXHIBIT E PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18, "Subdivisions" 18.35.220 "Duration of approval" (City File No. 09-101 017-00-UP) .... 09-101011 Doc. lD. 50155 Exhibit E (from Preliminary plat; most moved to 18.05.090) 18.35.220 Duration of approval. Preliminary plat approval shall expire five years from the date of city council approval, unless the applicant requests an extension as provided in FWRC 18.05.090. from the hearing examiner. The request for extension must be submitted to the department of cOUHllooity development services at least 60 days prior to too expiration date of the preliminary plat. The department of CORHR1:illity development services shall schedule and advertise a public hearing in accordance .'lith fWRC UU5.100. In considering whether to grant the extension, the hearing examiner shall consider the follow.ng in the public hearing: (l) Whether substantial progress has been made toward completion of the entire plat, or the initial phase of the plat, if the preliminary approval included phasing. (2) Whether coaditions in the vicinity of the subdivision have changed to a sufficient degree since initial approval to warrant reconsideration of the preliminary plat. The hearing examiner may grant a one year ext-ension of preliminary plat approval or may allo'N division of the plat into separate phases, each with an expiration date and no further opportunity for extension. (Ord No_ 07-554, ~ 5(Exh.. A(2)), 5-15-O7~ Ord_ No_ 97-291, ~ 3, 4-1-97~ Ord No_ 9041, ~ 1(16_120.10 - 16_120.50),2-27-90. Code 200 1 ~ 20-131.) " 09-101017 Doc. !.D. 50755 Exhibit F (Defines use process ~'esting) 19.15.045 Completeness of applications. (1) Within 28 calendar days of receiving an application, the city shall determine whether the application is complete, with reference to FWRC 19.15.040. Prior to the 28-day deadline, a letter of completeness shall be issued indicatini! the date the application is deemed complete. if the city deeII15 the application t-o be complete, or, if the city determines the application to be incomplete, the city shall notify the applicant of what needs to be submitted for a complete application. In this written determination, the city shall also identify, to the extent known to the city, the other agencies of local, state, or federal government that may have jurisdiction over some aspect of the proposed development activity. f\n application may be deemed complete under this section even if the city does not provide a written determination to the applicant as required. (2) If an application was found incomplete and an applicant submits additional information, the city shall notify the applicant in writini! within 14 days the date whether the application is deemed complete or whether further additional information is necessary. (3) Additional information. A determination of completeness shall not preclude the city from requesting additional information or studies, either at the time of the letter of completeness or subsequently, if new information is required or if there are substantial changes in the proposed action. (4) Vestinf!. A proposed Use Process I, II. III. or IV application shall vest to and be considered under the zonini! code and other land use control ordinances. in effect on the land at the time a fully completed application for Use Process I, II, III. or IV has been submitted to the city. In the event that the city requests supplemental or specific information to find an application complete, the Use Process I. II, HI. or IV application shall vest to those codes in effect on the date that all requested supplemental or specific information is submitted. A complete application shall be defined as set forth in FWRC 19.15.040 and based on reQuirements in related handouts. Vested ri1!:hts shall not be waivable pursuant to the Vested Rii!hts Doctrine. (Oed. No. 09-594, ~ 19, 1-6-09. Code 2001 ~ 22-33.5.) ...1: 09.101011 Doc. LD. 50756 EXHIBIT F PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processes" 19.15.045 "Completeness of applications" (City File No. 09-101017-00-0P) ..~ EXHIBIT G PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processes" 19.15.050 "Application cancellation" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ';':-i 09-101017 Doc. 1.0. 50756 Exhibit G (Provides extension to the ISO-day timeline) 19.15.050 Application cancellation. ill If an applicant fails to provide additional information to the city within 180 days of being notified by mail that such information is requested, the application shaH be deemed null and void and the city shall have no duty to process, review, or issue any decisions with respect to such an applicatioIL (2) Extension request No less than 30 days prior to the lapse of the ISO-dav notification bv the city under FWRC 19.15.050(1), the applicant may submit a written request in the form of a letter with supportinl! evidence to the department reQuestinl! an extension of the time limits and documents the followinl!: (a) That circumstances bevond the applicant's control prevent compliance with the time limits of FWRC 19.15.050(1); (b) That the applicant is makinl! substantial prOl!ress in respondinl! to the request for information so that review of the application can be furthered when that information is submitted; and (c) The number of additional calendar days necessary to provide the requested information. (3) Review process. A request for an extension to the ISO-dav time limit will be reviewed and decided upon bv the director based on responses to criteria in FWRC 19.15.050(2). (4) Retroactive applicabilitv. Administrative extension to the I80-dav time limit shall be retroactive to those valid Process I, II. III, or IV applications currently under review. (Ord No. 97-291, ~ 3, 4-1-97. Code 2001 ~ 22-34.) ,"l" 09-101017 Doc. l.D. 50756 EXHIBIT H PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processes " 19.15.075 "Final decisions and effect of the decision" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ,0 09-101011 Doc. 1.0. 50756 Exhibit H (NEWSECTION combining "Final decisions and effect of the decision" and moving it from Process ill and N sections to section 19. 15 - Use process overview) 19.15.075 Final decisions and effect of the decision Upon a decision becomin2 final. the applicant may enl!a2e in activity based on the decision. provided applicable permits have been approved. (a) Director. Decisions of the Director of Community Development Services become final subiect to the followin2: (l) If a written notice of appeal is received within the appeal period. the decision shall not become final until the appeal process is complete and the city issues a final decision. (2) If no appeal is submitted within the 14-calendar-dav appeal period. the decision shall become final on the first calendar day followin2 the expiration of the appeal period. (b) Hearinf! Examiner. If a decision of the hearin2 examiner is the final decision of the city. it may be reviewed under FWRC 19.70.260. Where the hearin2 examiner's decision is not the final decision of the city. the decision may be appealed under FWRC 19.70.170 and is subject to subsection (2) of this section. (l) Af!encv decision (lfJoeals. The decision bv the hearin2 examiner on an a2encv decision appeal is the final decision of the city. except where the proposed proiect involves: i. An approval. other than a site plan approval. involvin2 a school (FWRC 19.195.100). a community recreation area (FWRC 19.195.120). a 20vernment facility (FWRC 19.195.150), a public utility (FWRC 19.195.140). or a public park (FWRC 19.195.160) located in an SE (suburban estates). RS (sin21e-familv residential). or RM (multifamilv) zone~ or ii. A site plan approval for a public utility located in a BN (nei2hborhood business). Be (community business), or or (office park) zone. iii. SEPA appeals under FWRC Titles 14 and 15. (2) Other cases. In cases not subiect to subsection (1) ofthis section. decisions of the hearin2 examiner become final: i. If no appeal of the hearin2 examiner's decision is submitted within the appeal period. on the first calendar day followin2 the expiration of the 14-calendar-dav appeal period~ ii. If a written notice of appeal of the hearin2 examiner's decision is received within the appeal period. when the city issues a final decision after the appeal process is complet~ ..."4 09-101017 Doc. 1.0. 50756 EXHIBIT I PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (PWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processes" 19.15.100 "Lapse of approval - Generally" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ... 00-101011 Doc. to. 50156 Exhibit I (Establishes the titre that Use Process I, II, III, and lV applications are valid) 19.15.100 Lapse of approval- Generally. (1) Use Process L The applicant must substantially complete construction for the development activity. use of land. or other actions approved and complete the applicable conditions listed in the Process I decision within one year after the final decision of the city on the matter. or the decision becomes void. Ira land use petition is filed under Chapter 36.70C RCW in Kin1! County superior court, the time limits of this section are automaticallv extended by the len1!th of time between the commencement and final termination of that liti1!ation. (2) Use Process II, III, and IV. l\n applicaRt IllHSt begin construction or submit to the city a complete building permit applieatioB for the development activity, use of land or other actioflS '.vithin Ofle year after the final decision appfO".iBg the matter, or the decision becomes 'loid. The applicant must substantially complete construction fOf the development activity, use of land, or other actions approved and complete the applicable conditions listed in the Use Process II. III. and IV decision within five years after the final decision of the city on the matter, or the decision becomes void. If a land use petition is filed under Chapter 36.7OC RCW in King County superior court, the time limits of this section are automatically extended by the length of time between the commencement and final termination of that litigation. If the development activity, use of land, or other action approved under this chapter includes phased construction, the time limits of this section may be extended in the decision on the application, to allow for completion of subsequent phases. (Ord No. 09-594, ~ 23,1-6-09. Code 2001 ~ 22-39.) .;.:'i" 09-101017 Doc. LD. 50756 EXHIBIT J PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processes " 19.15.110 "Lapse of approval- Time extension" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ..~ 09-101017 Doc. W. 50756 Exhibit J (Time extension for Use Process applications) 19.15.110 Lapse of approval- Time extension. (1) Application_ No less than 30 days IlPrior to the lapse of approval under FWRC 19.15. I 00 for substantiallv completine construction or prior to lapse of approval for any proceedine time extension eranted under this section. th~ applicant may submit a written applicatioo request in the form of a letter with supporting documentation to the department requesting a one time extension of those time limits of up to two years. one year. (2) Criteria. The request IIRlSt demonstrate that the applicant is making substantial progress on the developtneRt acti~Iitj., use of land. or other actioftS approved under this chapter and that circWllStances beyond the applicant's control prevent eOHlflliance ....tith the time liHlits of FWRC 19.15.100; An extension request shall satisfy the followine criteria to be approved: (a) Except for the first request for time extension. the applicant has made substantial prOl!ress to complete the proiect; (b) There are circumstances beyond the applicant's control which prevent compliance with the time limits of FWRC 19.15.100, or any previouslv eranted extension; (c) The extension will not create or continue conditions that constitute a code violation or an attractive nuisance, contribute to erosion and sedimentation problems, or impact the public health, safety and welfare; and (d) Whether either physical conditions in the vicinity of the plat or codes and requirements of the city, applicable aeencies, and utility providers have chaneed to such a deeree since initial approval that it would be contrary to the public interest to extend the life of the plat, includine but not limited to such factors as: i. Whether the adoption of new codes/standards would substantiallv affect proiect layout and storm drainal!e desien; ii. The adequacy of mitieation and/or impact fees to address the cost of mitieation at the end of the expiration period; iii. Whether the delayed project is an impediment to other development proiects in the vicinity as a result of traffic concurrency reserved capacity. The director may condition the extension request tosatisfv criteria (c) and (d) as appropriate. [n order to demonstrate compliance with the criteria of FWRC 19.15.110(2), the applicant may also provide pertinent documentation of financial backine, lease acceptance, or other such commitments secured bv the developer and/or aeent as well as applicable proiect timelines with milestones and dates of anticipated completion. (3) Fee. The applicant shall include, with the letter of request, the hourlv fee as established by the city. The application request will not be accepted tmless it is accompanied by the required hourly fee. (4) Review process and timeline. An Each req uest application for a time extension will be administratively reviewed and decided upon by the director who may l!rant up to a one-year extension of time to substantially complete construction and complete applicable conditions of approval for approved Use Process I application(s) after final decision and may l!rant up to a two-year extension of time to substantially complete construction and complete applicable conditions of approval for approved Use Process II, III, or [V application(s). (5) Appeals. Any person who is aggrieved by the granting or denying of a request for a time extension tmder this section may appeal that decision as provided in FWRC 19.65.120. The appellant must file a Letter of appeal indicating how the decision on the time extension affects the appellant's property and presenting any relevant material or information supporting the appellant's contention. The appeal will be heard and decided upon using process IV. Ptrrsuant to Chapter 36.70B RCW, any time limit upon the city's processing and decision upon applications under this title may, except as otherwise specifically stated in this title, be modified by a written agreement between the applicant and the director. (6) Retroactive avp/icabilitv. Extensions approved under this section shall be retroactive only for those active and valid Use Process I, II, III, or IV applications. (om. No. 09-594, ~ 24,1-6-09. Code 2001 ~ 22-40.) -~ 09-101017 Doc. LD 50756 EXHIBIT K PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processes" 19.65.110 ~~Effect of the decision" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ~ 09-101017 Doc. I.D_ j(J756 Exhibit K (Move this section to 19.15 and combine with Process [V language) 19.65.110 Effect of the decision. Upon a decision becoming final, the applicant may engage in activity based on the decision, pro'/ided applicable permits have been approT.'ed. Decisions become final subject to the folk>v.ring: (1) (f a "NITtlen notice of appeal is recei"ted within the appeal period, the decision shall not become final until the appeal process is complete and the city issues a final decision. (2) If 00 appeal is submitted within the l4 calendar day appeal period, the decision shall become final on the first calendar day following the expirati{)R of the appeal period.. '-~ 09-101017 Doc. 1.0. 50156 EXHIBIT L PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Permits and Review Processes " 19.70.165 "Final decisions and effect of the decision" (City File No. 09-101017-00-UP) ~ 09-101017 Doc. to. j()156 Exhibit L (l\'tove this section to 19.15 and combine with UP language) 19.70.160 Final decisions and effect of the decision. Upon a decision becoming final, the applicant may engage in activity based on the decision, provided applicable pennits have been approved. If a decision of the hear.ng examiner is the final decision of the city, it may be re'tie'Ned under fWRC 19.70.260. \\fhere the hearing examiner's decision is not the final decision of the city, the decision may be appealed under PJlRC 19.70.170 and is subject to subsection (2) of this section. (I) Agency dccisiBn appcals. The decision by the hearing examiner on an agency decision appeal is the final decision of the city, except where the proposed project invol';es: (a) An approval, other than a site plan appro','al, invol'ling a school (fWRC 19_ 195. 100), a community recreation area (FWRC 19.195.120), a government facility (fWRC L 9 _195 .150), a public utility (F'}lRC 19.195.110), or a public park (fWRC 19.195.160) located in a SE (suburban estates), RS (single family residential), or RM: (multifamily) zone; or (b) 1\ site pla:a approval for a public utility located in a B1'1 (neighborhood business), BC (community ettSiness), or or (office park) zone. (c) SEPA appeals under FWRC Titles 11 and L5. (2) Other cases. In cases not subject to subsection (L) of this section, decisions of the hearing examiner become final: (a) If no appeal of the hearing examiner's d;)cision is submitted 'llithin the appeal period, on the fIrst calendar day follo-:/ing the expiration of the III calendar day appeal period; (b) If a written notice of appeal of the hearing JKamiacr's decision is recei v'Cd '",-ithin the appeal period, when the city issues a flnal decision after the appeal process is complete. (Ord. No. 09-594, ~ 92,1-6-09; Ord. No. 07-573, ~ 26,12-4-07; Ord. No. 00-375, ~ 15,10-3-00; Ord. No. 97.291, ~ 3,4-1-97; Ord. No. 92-133, 93(150.70),4-21-92; Ord. No. 90-43, ~ 2(150.70),2-27-90. Code 2001 922-446.) .;..6 09-101011 Doc. ID 50756 Attachment 3 - Draft Minutes of the July 22, 2009 Planning Commission Public Hearing CITY OF FEDERAL WAY PLANNING COMMISSION July 22, 2009 7:00 p.m. City Hall Council Chambers MEETING MINUTES Commissioners present: Merle Pfeifer, Hope Elder, Lawson Bronson, Wayne Carlson, Tom Medhurst, and Tim 0 'Neil. Commissioners absent: Sarady Long (excused). Staff present: Senior Planner Margaret Clark, Senior Planner Deb Barker, Planning Manager Isaac Conlen, Public Works Deputy Director Ken Miller, Assistant City Attorney Amy 10 Pearsall, and Administrative Assistant Tina Piety. Chair Pfeifer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of July I, 2009, were approved as written. AUDIENCE COMMENT None ADMlNISTRATNE REpORT Ms. Piety announced that the next Planning Commission meeting will be September 16, 2009 . We will have public hearings on two proposed code amendments. COMMISSION BUSINESS PuBLIC HEARING - Plat & Land Use Application Time Limit Extensions and Vesting Clarification Ms. Barker delivered the staff presentation. The intent of the proposed code amendments is to provide flexibility in city review processes and timelines. The proposed amendments will allow more time to submit information before an application is canceled; will allow more time to complete an approved application as long as the applicant meets the criteria; and will give a consistent and early vesting time for applications. A draft of the proposed amendments was given to the stakeholders group and three responses were received. Lakehaven Utility District and ESM stated they approved of the proposed amendments. Sam Pace of the Seattle King County Realtors sent a letter (attached) that was forwarded to the Commissioners. His main concern was with the short plat timeline (he recommended seven years). Ms. Baker spoke to him about this issue and he stated he did not have an opportunity to read the staff report before preparing his letter. She explained to him that the proposed amendments increased the construction period to five years and allows for two year extensions. Ms. Barker believes the proposed amendments address his concern about the timing of projects. The proposed amendments will increase the time limit to five years and will allow two year extensions as long as the criteria are met. Public Comment Wayne Snoey, Covington resident, Federal Way landowner, member Covington City Counci/- He supports the spirit of the proposed amendments. He stated that the residential and commercial real estate industries are in terrible shape. It is very difficult for developers to obtain funding, so K:\Planning Commission\2OO91Meeting Summary 01-22-09.doc Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 July 22, 2009 extending the time limits will help by giving them more time to obtain funding. The real economic stimulus will happen at the local level, as with the proposed amendments. Garrett Huffman, Master Builders Association (MEA) - He stated this is excellent work. He passed out three handouts. The first is a table showing what other jurisdictions are doing and/or proposing for time extensions. He stated he has meet with staff on this issue. He commented that we may lose half the builders in this region because they are unable to obtain funding due to the economy. Extensions will be a great help. The other two handouts deal with the law. On page 8 of the 10 page handout, he has bolded some information regarding vesting. It states in part that a local government, "... may not cause vesting of application to be contingent on future events or decisions. .. ." He feels the proposed vesting amendment (city staff report Exhibit F) allows for this and therefore is illegal and should be deleted. The third handout has case law on the vesting issue. Other than the vesting issue, the MBA supports the proposed amendments. Commissioner Elder asked for the city's legal opinion on the vesting issue. Ms. Pearsall replied that the legal department reviewed the staff s proposal and feel it is legal. The language clarifies that vesting will occur when the application is complete and is not contingent on future events or decisions. The language says that if information is missing and thereby the application is incomplete, the city will request that information and will wait until the missing information is submitted before declaring the application complete. Once the decision is made that the application is complete, then it is vested. Commissioner O'Neal asked Mr. Huffman what he feels is onerous about the proposed vesting. Mr. Huffman replied he is concerned that the city could request additional information or studies that are not on the list of what must be submitted with the application and the city would say the project is not vested until it is all approved. The application should be vested when it is submitted and the city cannot legally require additional studies before vesting the project. Ms. Pearsall commented that the proposed language states that vesting will occur with submission of a complete application, and the code lists what constitutes a complete application. Mr. Huffman responded that just because it is in the code does not necessarily mean it is legal. Commissioner O'Neal asked if a limit is proposed for how many extensions an applicant may request. Ms. Barker replied there is no limit to the number of extensions an applicant may request as long as they meet the criteria. Commissioner Medhurst commented that the proposed amendment make common sense. He asked staff whether there was anything in the proposed amendments they may want to change once the economy improves. Ms. Baker replied that staff considered a sunset clause, but they agree the proposed amendments make common sense and decided not to place a sunset clause. Mr. Miller commented that short plats tend to be infill and the city has received complaints from neighbors about properties where work has been started, but nothing has been done for years. It is for this reason staff that included the criteria that substantial progress be shown if an applicant is seeking a second extension. Commissioner Carlson commented that staff has done a good job with these proposed amendments. He does have a concern. A project is not vested until the application is deemed complete, which could include a number of reports. He understands that city staff will need to review the reports to insure they contain the appropriate information, but he is concerned that staff could hold up the process because of a disagreement with the preparer of a report over a specific piece of information within a report. He requested that staff add language along the lines of stating that reports need only to meet the professional "standard of care." Commissioner Bronson agreed. Commissioner Bronson asked why Use Process I is not included with the proposed amendments. Ms. Barker replied that given the types of projects that are assigned to a Use Process I, staff does not foresee any such K:1P1anning Commission\2OO9'1Meeting Swnmary 01.22-09.doc Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 July 22, 2009 project needing an extension. They are less complex, minor land use decisions and very few Use Process I projects need more than a few weeks to complete and many need only a few days. Commissioner Bronson asked ifthere is an appeal process if the requirements for a complete application appear onerous to the applicant. He is concerned that a technical argument between staff and an engineer could delay an application being deemed complete and thereby would delay vesting. Ms. Barker replied that she is not aware of an appeal process because there has not been an issued decision. At such times, a concerned applicant will speak with the department director. It is not a formal appeal with fees and paperwork, but that is an option for them to take their concerns higher. Mr. Bronson commented this is a concern for him because he is currently involved with a project with the federal government that is delayed because of a technical argument between two professionals. There needs to be some mechanism that can be used to move the process along. Commissioner O'Neil asked to clarify whether the discussion is about vesting. Commissioner Bronson replied he is talking about getting to the point of vesting. If a government professional and an outside professional are involved in an argument there is no way to go around that arbitrary behavior. Mr. Conlen commented that Deb is correct. Typically at the start of the process there is not a point for an appeal other than an informal discussion between the applicant and the planner's supervisor or department director. However, typically within 28 days of the application being submitted, the city is required to issue a decision as to whether or not the application is complete. The city will issue a letter and that is a decision that could be appealed. So there is a chance to appeal. Commissioner Carlson moved (and it was seconded) to recommend the City Council adopt the proposed amendments as presented by staff. The motion passed unanimously. The public hearing was closed. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS Mr. Conlen informed the Commission of the status of the Shoreline Master Program (SMP). Staff had been waiting for comments from the state Department of Ecology and has received them Staff is now editing the SMP in light of these comments and plan to bring it back to the Planning Commission in September or October. AUDIENCE COMMENT Wayne Snoey, Covington resident, Federal Way landowner, member Covington City Counci/- He thanked the Commission for their work on the proposed amendments. ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 8 :00 p.m. K:1P1anning Commission\2009\Meeting Summ;uy 07-22-09.doc . REALTOR@ SeattleKiug County REALTORS@ 12410 SE 32nd Street, Suite 100, Bellevue, W A 98005 (425) 974-1011 . TF: (800) 540-3277 . Fax: 425-974-1032 TO: City of Federal Way Planning Commission Chairman Merle Pfeifer & Commissioners Hope Elder (Vice Chair), Lawson Bronson, Wayne Carlson, Tom Medhurst, Sarady Long and Tim O'Neil, DELIVERY: c/o: Margaret Clark, Senior Planner, (253) 835-2646, mar2aret.clark(ii),citvoffederalwav.com Tina Piety, Administrative Assistant II, (253) 835-2601 tina.piety~cityoffederalwav.com Deb Barker, Senior Planner; and deb.barker~citvoffederalway.com FROM: Sam Pace, Housing Specialist, SeattleKing County REAL TORS@ DATE: July 20, 2009 RE: Plat and Land Use Application and Permit Time Limit Extensions Dear Chairman Pfeifer and Members ofthe Planning Commission: My name is Sam Pace. I'm a Housing Specialist with the Seattle-King County Association of REAL TORS@ and I'm writing to you on behalf of our 7,500+ members. I will be unable to attend the July 22nd Planning Commission meeting to testifY at the Commission's Public Hearing on Plat and Land Use Application and Permit Time Limit Extensions. I'm out-of-town on vacation with my family, but this issue of such importance I thought it necessary to provide you written comments on the subject. I request that these be made a part of the Public Hearing Record. I provided similar written comments to the City Council back in March 2009. Since that time, several other cities, as well as the King County Council, have already enacted extension ordinances. I want to share with you our Association's support for (and underscore the importance of) the City adopting a Local Economic Stimulus plan. One key piece of such a stimulus plan that we request the City adopt is Extending the life of plat and land use applications and permits (and eSfJeciallv "short plats") including those that were in the City's permitting pipeline on or after January 1,2008. We recommend extending the life of short plats to seven years, (or at least to five years plus annual one-year extensions after the fifth year, similar to the way the City currently treats subdivisions and building permits). Seven years, like the King County Council adopted (retroactive to 2004) is the preferred approach As you know, consistent with existing state law, the City allows 9-lot short plats, and deserves credit and recognition for doing so. In addition, the City allows permits for subdivisions and buildings to be valid for five years, plus annual renewals beyond the fifth year. The City's deserVes credit for this approach as well. It is appropriate for the City to provide time frames for the validity of short plats that are similar to those the City provides for subdivisions and building permits. We recommend seven years. TO: DELIVERY: FROM: DATE: RE: PAGE: Chairman Merle Pfeifer and 'Memben~fthe Federal Way Planning C~mrnissi~n c/o Margaret Clark, Tina Piety and Deb Barker Sam Pace, HousingSpecialis4 SeattleKing County REAL TORS@ July 20, 2009 Plat and Land Use Application and Permit Time Limit E"tensi~ns 2~r3 As you also know, the construction of homes and plats is stalled due to the national (and world) fmancial crisis that is dramatically constricting access to the capital needed to complete construction of plats and homes. That financial crisis is not the fault of local builders/property owners who fmd themselves in the position of unintended victims (like so many other small to medium-sized businesses in our local communities). It is important that the City extend the life of those plats (and especiallv "short plats") and permits, rather than allowing them to expire. Allowing them to expire, and requiring builders to re-do, re-submit, and re-pay for work that has already been done, and already submitted to the City: . Increases the Costs of Housing . Hurts Housing Affordability for working families . Places homebuilders (and the jobs they provide for local workers) in greater peril. Some observers of the industry indicate that perhaps as many as half the firms may not be able to survi ve the current financial crisis. . Allowing the permits/applications to expire also has the potential to divert City resources for review of other projects - such as construction the Council wants to see happen Downtown - to redo staff work on residential projects once the market begins to recover; and . All of that, in-turn, delays the City's receipt of sales tax on "sticks and bricks" used in construction of plats and homes, as well as REET revenues the City receives when the lots and homes sell. Additionally, viewing this situation from a "macro economics" perspective, I anticipate that when credit markets start to recover and builders once again have access to capital, we're going to see a continued constraint on housing supply (relative to the pent-up demand for homes) that will artificially increase housing prices above more normal market levels. While it may seem counter-intuitive given current inventory levels, this imbalance between supply and pent-up demand will be the result of the "lag time" between the remaining/surviving builders regaining access to credit for working capital, and the time it takes to complete construction of the plats and homes. lmp-ortantly, and unfortunately, there are likely to be far fewer builders available to meet that demand, resulting in l{)nger lag times and higher price mcreases. Depending up-on the number of construction ftrms that go under, I anticipate this will happen for a period of about 6 to 18 months while the construction industry once again begins building homes that, when fmlshed, will be sold to the families of local workers. It's important for the City to do its small part to help avoid unnecessarily exacerbating that imbalance between supply and pent-up demand when the market starts to recover. Extending the life of plats (and especial/v "short plats" which currently receive disparate treatment) is an imp-ortant contribution the City can make to help mitigate this problem. Making the extensions retroactive for projects that were in the City's pipeline on or after January 1,2008, (or even 2007, when many construction firms began to experience the lenders' constricting access to working capital) will help to mitigate the damage being done, and avoid future damage. TO: DELIVERY: FROM: DATE: RE: PAGE: Chairman Merle Pfeifer and . ~fembers of the Federal Way Planning Commission c/o Margaret Clark, Tina Piety and Deb Barker Sam Pace, Housing Specialist, SeattleKing County REAL TORS@ July 20, 2009 Plat and Land Use Application and Permit Time Limit Extensions 2of3 A very recent study by a number of noted economists and researchers in our state found that Housing (both directly and indirectly) accounts for approximately 20% of the State's GDP and 24% of the payroll in Washington State. Additionally, each l,OOO home sales result in 935 jobs, $37.5 million in wages and $l26 million in economic activity. It's an important economic driver for our economy. Thank you in advance for your consideration. Sincerely, SEA TILEKlNG COUNTY REAL TORS@ ~p~ Sam Pace, Housing Specialist cc: David Crowell SKCAR Governmental Affairs Committee