The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUTC PKT 11-01-2010� City of Federal 1Nay City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee November 1, 2010 City Hall 5:30 p.m. Council Chambers MEETING AGENDA (Electronic) 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC COMMENT (3 minutes) 3. COMMITTEE BUSINESS Topic Title/Description A. Approval of Minutes: October 18, 2010 B. Comprehensive Plan Update: PACC and Sports Facility Study Session C. School Impact Fees D. E. F. G. Proposed Amendments to BC Zone, Design Guidelines & Landscaping Department of Ecology — Freshwater Algae Control Program Grant S 320 St @ I-5 SB Off Ramp - 85% Design Status Report Silver Lake Elementary School Zone Flasher Grant Application Action Presenter Page orInfo LeMaster 2 Action Enge 4 Information Kraus/FWPS 8 Action Lee 78 Action Appleton 125 Action Roberts 127 Action Hannahs 130 Action Council Date Time N/A 5 min. N/A 20 min. Nov. 16, 2010 15 min. Consent Nov. 16, 2010 10 min. Ordinance Nov. 16, 2010 5 min. Consent Nov. 16, 2010 5 min. Consent Nov. 16, 2010 5 min. Consent 4. OTHER 5. FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDA ITEMS: The next LUTC meeting will be held Monday, November 15, 2010 at 5:30 PM in City Hall Council Chambers. 6. ADJOURN Committee Members City Staff Dini Duc%s, Chair Cary M. Roe, P.E., Di�ecto� of Parks, Pub/ic Works and Emergency Management Jim Ferrel% Member Dar/ene LeMaster, Administratrve Assistant II Jack Dovey, Membe� 253-835-2701 G.• ILUTC�LUTCAgendas and Summaries 2010111-01-10 LUTCAgenda.doc City of Federal Way City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee October 18, 2010 City Hall 5:30 PM City Council Chambers MEETING SUMMARY Committee Members in Attendance: Committee Chair Dini Duclos, Committee Member Jack Dovey and Committee Member Jim Ferrell. Council Members in Attendance: Mayor Linda Kochmar and Council Member Burbidge Staff Members in Attendance: Director of Parks, Public Works and Emergency Management Cary Roe, Deputy Public Works Directar Marwan Salloum, City Traffic Engineer Rick Perez, Senior Traffic Engineer Maryanne Zukowski, Assistant City Attorney Peter Beckwith, and Administrative Assistant II Darlene LeMaster. 1. CALL TO ORDER Committee Chair Duclos called the meeting to order at 530 PM. 2. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. 3. BUSINESS ITEMS Forward Topic Titte/DescripNon to Council A. Approval of the October 4, 2010, LUTC Minutes N/A B. Committee approved October 4, 2010, LUTC minutes as presented. Moved: Dovey Seconded: Ferrell Passed: Unanimously, 3-0 20` Way South Street Lighting Project —Final Acceptance 11/OS/2010 Consent Deputy Public Works Director Marwan Salloum presented information on this item. There was no public comment or discussion Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented. Moved: Ferreli Seconded: Dovey Passed: Unanimously, 3-0 C. 2010 Pedestrian Safety Projects — Bid Award 11/OS/2010 Consent Senior Traffic Engineer Maryanne Zukowski presented information on this item. There was no public comment. Committee Member povey asked for the source of the $110,000 transfer of funds and if transferred, would another go without. Deputy Director Salloum responded that the $110,000 requested transfer is coming from the annual Transportation System Safety Improvement Fund which is funded with 0.5 cents gas tax authorized by 2005 legislation and appropriated by Council for pedestrian safety improvements. The original funding for this project came from the BPA at SW 356"' St Pedestrian Signal Project, which is also a fuel talc fund. No other project will go without funding because of the transfer. Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented. Moved: Dovey Seconded: Ferrell Passed: Unanimously, 3-0 Land Use/Transportation Committee Page 2 October 18, 2010 4. OTHER None 5. FUTURE MEETING The next LUTC meeting will be held Monday, 11/1/10 at 5:30 PM in City Hall Council Chambers. 6. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 5:37 PM. COMMITTEE APPROVAL: Attest: Darlene LeMaster, Administrative Assistant II Dini Duclos, Chair Jim Fenell, Member Jack Dovey, Member 3 GU.UTC\LUTC Agrndas and Summaries 2010\IO-18-10 Minutes.doc COUNCIL MEETING DATE: N/A CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL ITEM #: SUBJECT: AMENDING SECTION 6.4 OF CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICY QUESTION N/A CoM1vuTTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee CATEGORY: ❑ Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution MEETING DATE: NOV. 1, 201 O ❑ Public Hearing � Other STAFF REPORT BY _Bryant Enge, Financial Services Administrator DEPT City Manager Attachments: Memorandum to Land Use and Transportation Committee dated November 1, 2010. Options Considered: N/A -Item is for information only. STAFF RECOMMENDATION N/A. CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: Council COMI�IITTEE RECONINIENDATION N/A DIRECTOR APPROVAL: council Dini Duclos, Chair Jim Ferrell, Member Jack Dovey, Member PROPOSED COUNCII, MOTION N/A — Item is for information only. (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL # ❑ DENIED 1 ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE # REVISED — 02/06/2006 RESOLUTION # 4 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: November 1, 2010 TO: Land Use and Transportation Committee VIA: Brian Wilson, City Manager/ Police Chief FROM: Bryant Enge, Financial Services Administratar SUBJECT: Amending Section 6.4 of City's Comprehensive Plan BACKGROUND: In response to the concerns about updating the Comprehensive Plan with respect to the PACC and Sports facilities, a study session will be convened at the LUTC October 18�' where information gathered about the PACC and Sport faciliry will be presented. The purpose of the study session is to continue dehberations concerning amending Chapter 6.0 of the City's Comprehensive Plan (the Plan), Capital Facilities. The focus of the discussion is on Section 6.4 of the Plan, Community Facilities, specifically a performing arts and conference center and a competitive sport facility. The following list is a schedule of several projected community facility needs in the current Plan: • Maintenance Facility: $ 1 million • Conference/Perfornung Arts Facility: $35 to $40 million • Indoor Competitive Sports Facility: $10 to $12 million • Public Parl�ng Faeilities: $ 5 to $10 million In the following, staff has swnmarized the history and background of these facilities in the context of the current Plan. Staff has provided a review concerning what has been done since the last time this infornlation was updated, go over the results of these efforts, and request the committee's guidance as to next steps. Maintenance Facility The current Plan includes a recommendation for a maintenance facility with 6,500 square feet of office space and 120,000 square foot storage yard. The City acquired a maintenance facility located at 31132 28 Avenue. The ma.intenance facility contains approximately 3,500 square feet of office space and 90,000 square foot fenced storage space with an additional 1.5 acres of land available for future expansions. Conference/Performing Arts Facility The current Plan includes a recommendation for a 50,000 square foot conference/performing arts center. In 1994, the City of Federal Way Arts Commission funded a feasibility study (aka AMS study) of a November 1, 2010 Land Use and Transportation Committee Amending Section 6.4 of City's Comprehensive Plan Page 2 facility to house a culri�ral and community events center and the desire to create an image and identity for the city as one which recognizes the value of arts and culture as an essential component of the conununiry. The AMS study recommended a performing arts center to seat 1,000 patrons and a visual art gallery. The estimated construction for the facility was $190 to $240 per square foot. The current Plan adjusted the per square foot cost to 2007 dollars, resulting in a per square foot cost of $400 to $500, or $25 to $30 million for construction. In addition, structured parking was added to the performing arts center facility, which was estimated at an additional $5 to $8 million. Based on these assumptions, the full development cost was expected to be $35 to $40 million. In 1999, the City's Lodging Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) commissioned a feasibility study for a range of public assembly development alternatives for Federal Way. This report (aka Hunter's Report) presented preliminary findings for various alternatives, including a Performing Arts Center and a Competitive Sparts Facility. A development concept considered by the Hunter's report was a performing arts center. The report assumed a 900 to 1,200 seat facility with a cost of $17 to $23.4 milIion. The report considered options to incorporate into a performing arts facility, including expansion of ineeting and exlu`bition space, which would increase the cost to $21.6 to $29.4 million. In 2008, the city engaged CH Johnson Consulting (aka Johnson report) for a feasi`bility study addressing the performing arts center. The study evolved into a proposal for mi7ced-used develapment. The report provided inforniation concerning a Federal Way performing arts center, along with a conference center, hotel, and structured parking development opportunities. Based on the consultant's analysis the development cost associated with a 700 seat theater was $40.7 million. In addition to a perforniance arts facility, the consultant indicated that a new conference center would have the ability to enrich the perfornung arts center identity and increase visitors through increased attendees. The findings concluded that a mid-size conference center would be an excellent complement to a performing arts facility. The conference center with a 12,000 square foot ballroom and 10,000 square feet in meeting rooms was estimated to cost $29.1 million. The consultant indicated that a combined performing arts center and conference center would e�.perience bene�ts in tern�s of shared operating costs, but would not see significant savings in initial construction first costs. In 2009, the city engaged Webb Management 5ervices (aka Webb report) in conjunction with LMN Architects to study the feasibiliry of an integrated perfornung arts and conference center facility. Based on the consultant's review, a 500 to 700 seat theater would support local arts organizations and operate as an additional large conference space for lectures and presentations. The report found that a conference center would include an 8,000 square foot lobby and conference center and 6,000 square feet of additional meeting space to be used as breakout rooms or for stand-alone events. The estirnated cost for an integrated facility was $30 to 40 million. Given current market conditions, the estimated cost for an integrated performing arts-conference facility would range from $20 to $30 million without siructured parking ($25 million to $35 xnillion with structured parking). Therefore, depending on timing, the cost of the project would range from $20 million to $40 million. Indoor Competitive Sports Facility In 1999, the Hunter Report presented preliminary findings for a Competirive Sports Facility. The consultant researched the feasibility of an indoor competirive sports facility that would increase visitor stays in local hotels and complement the existing amateur sports facility in the city. The findings from this study included the cost for this type of facility as $10 to $12 million. 0 November 1, 2010 Land Use and Transportation Committee Amending Section 6.4 of City's Comprehensive Plan Page 3 In 2002, the LTAC engaged Don Schumacher & Associates to perform a financial feasibility study of a multipurpose fieldhouse for indoor sports competitions and other events. Based on this research, the facility would be a 75,000 square foot building that would accommodate 4-6 basketball courts and 4 volleyball courts. This facility would require parking. The report estimated a cost of about $8.6 million (plus land) assuming inclusion of a health and fitness facility. The cost without the fitness facility would be $2 million less. Public Parking Facilities In 2002, staff researched the potential of City participation in a public parking structure. Major redevelopment of the City Center may likely yield a need for some amount of structured parking to accommodate public dema,nd for parking in associarion with such potential redevelopment. These facilities could be in part financed with LIFT funding. In addition, these facilities could be constructed in conjunction with various redevelapment schemes, which may or may not include a performing arts and conference center. Cost esrimates in the current Plan for a parking structure were stated as $12,000 to $15,000 per parking stall for a total of $5 to $10 million. Notwithstanding recent reductions in construction costs, structured parking costs (especially below-grade parking structures) have risen to approximately $20,000 per stall ($30,000+ for below-grade parking). Nevertheless, given that most of the funding source for public parking would come from LIFT financing, the total public investment would likely not range higher than the approximately $10 million currently indicated in the Plan. At these construction cost rates, $10 million could yield approximately 500 above-grade, structured parking stalls. Conclusion Since the Maintenance Facility Project is complete, an update to the Plan should include deleting the Maintenance Facility project from the list of projected community facility needs. While the estimated costs of the remaining facilities are still relevant based on the latest information and comparables, the Plan should be updated with the latest information from the aforementioned studies. As mentioned above, depending on the project timing the Perfornung Arts and Conference Facility could be constructed, at current construct cost rates, at a cost from $25 to $35 million, including above-grade, structured parking. Stand-alone public parking facilities, potentially constructed in tandem with major redevelapment projects, would likely cost more on a per stall basis, but the extent of City participation in such facilities would likely still be limited to the range of $10 million, based on expected, available LIFT financing. COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 16, 2010 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBJECT: FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council approve the Federal Way School District 2011 Capital Facilities Plan or re- adopt the 2010 Capital Facilities Plan? ITEM #: COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee CATEGORY: � Consent ❑ City Council Business � � Ordinance Resolution MEETING DATE: November 1, 2010 ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: Tho Kraus Finance Directol�.� DEPT Finance _..._._ ..................._...._..._...._.._...._........._..............................._........._..............._......._�_.._._..................................---._......_..._...._...-- -............_..._......._.._...._..._............_........_..._........_..._.._.........._.....__..__.......__.._.....__........_...._..----.._....._._..._....__._._._..._.._._.._._...__.._._..---- Background: The City has received the Federal Way School District's 2011 Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) with the proposed school impact fees for the City's annual review and adoption. The new fees under the 2011 CFP, if approved, will be effective January l, 2011, are $4,014 per single-family unit and $2,172 per multi-family dwelling unit. This is a$182 or 4.7% increase from the $3,832 single-family rate, and $58 or 2.7% increase from the $2,114 multi-family rate. A number of variables go into the school impact fee calculation. Among them are the District's facility needs, construction costs required for schools, and the student generating factor (average students per household in elementary, middle, and high schools respectively) in new single and multi-family developments. The calculated amounts are then reduced by any state matching funds and voter approved property taxes for construction. Finally, a 50% factor is applied to eliminate imperfections in the fee calculation model. Staff has been in contact with FWSD regarding the City's goal of no new or increase in taxes or fees during the 2011/12 Biennium. FWSD is on board with this and has suggested staff recommend re-adopting the 2010 Capital Facilities Plan in order to maintain the current 2010 school impact fees. Attachments: ■ Federal Way School District 2010 Capital Facilities Plan ■ Federal Way School District 2011 Capital Facilities Plan Options Considered: l. Re-adopt the Federal Way School District 2010 Capital Facilities Plan and the school impact fees of $3,832 for single family and $2,114 for multi-family units. 2. Approve the Federal Way School District 2011 Capital Facilities Plan and the school impact fees of $4,014 for single family and $2,172 for multi-family units. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Option 1. CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: _ I�/►� ��I ��D DIRECTOR APPROVAL: �_ Committee Council Committee Council COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: "I move to forward approval of re-adopting the Federal Way School District 2010 Capital Facilities Plan and school impact fees of $3,832 for single family and $2,114 for multi- family units to full Council for approval with implementation of the proposed fee effective January 1, 2011." Mike Park, Committee Chair Jeanne Burbidge, Committee Jack Dovey, Committee Member Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move approval of re-adopting the Federal Way School District 2010 Capital Facilities Plan and school impact fees to full Council for approval with implementation of the proposed fees effective January l, 2011." (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL # ❑ DENIED ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED — 08/12/2010 1 ST reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # 9 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN BOARD OF EDUCATION Suzanne Smith, President Tony Moore, Vice President Ed Barney, Directar Amye Bronson-Doherty, Director Angela Griffin, Director SUPERINTENDENT Thomas R. Murphy Prepared by: Sally D. McLean Tanya Nascimento 10 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 SECTION 2 SECTION 3 SECTION 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Introduction Inventory of Educational Facilities Inventory of Non-Instructional Facilities Needs Forecast - Existing Facilities Needs Forecast - New Facilities Six Year Finance Plan MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Introduction Map - Elementary Boundaries Map - Middle School Boundaries Map - High School Boundaries SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Introduction Building Capacities Portable Locations Student Forecast Capacity Summaries King County Impact Fee Calculations SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 2009 PLAN 1 2-3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16-17 18-19 20-22 23-27 28-30 31-33 1 11 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN INTRQDUCTION In response to the requirements of the State of Washington Growth Management Act (SHB)2929 (1990) and ESHB 1025 (1991)), and under the School Impact Fee Ordinances of King County Code 21A, City of Federal Way Ordinance No. 95-249 effective December 21, 1995 as amended, City of Kent Ordinance No3260 effective March 1996, and the City of Auburn Ordinance No. 5078 effective 1998, Federal Way Public Schools has updated its 2010 Capital Facilities Plan as of May 2009. This Plan is scheduled for adoption by King County, the City of Kent, City of Federal Way and the City of Auburn and is incorporated in the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction by reference. This plan is also included in the Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction. To date, the City of Des Moines has not adopted a school impact fee ardinance. The City of Des Moines collects school impact fees as part of the SEPA process. The Growth Management Act requires the County to designate Urban Growth areas within which urban growth can be encouraged. The Growth Management Planning Council adopted and recommended to the King County Council four Urban Growth Area Line Maps with designations for urban centers. A designation was made within the Federal Way planning area, which encompasses Federal Way Public Schools boundaries. King County will encourage and actively support the development of Urban Centers to meet the region's need for housing, jobs, services, culture, and recreation. This Plan's estimated population growth is prepared with this underlying assumption. This Capital Facilities Plan will be used as documentation for any jurisdiction, which requires its use to meet the needs of the Growth Management Act. This plan is not intended to be the sole planning tool for all of the District needs. The District may prepare interim plans consistent with Board policies or management need. The District has prepared a multi-phase plan for the renovation and construction of Federal Way Schools and support buildings. The Board authorized presenting the $149 million bond on May 15, 2007. The bond, passed at 63.93%, will replace four elementary schools, Lakeland, Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla and one middle school, Lakota. Plans to replace Federal Way High School and Decatur High School and to increase capacity by approximately 400 students at each school are planned in later phases. Federal Way High School was built in 1938. It has been added onto at least 10 times and currently has an almost maze-like layout. Based on an annual4% increase in construction cost, the estimated cost to rebuild Federal Way High School is $122 million. Estimated construction costs will be re-calculated prior to the next bond election. None of the cost to replace Federal Way or Decatur High School is included in the Impact Fee calculation in this Plan. 2 12 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN The non-instructional projects included in the plan will consolidate support services operations at a single location. The current Transportation and Maintenance facility cannot continue to meet the District needs in the future. Nutrition services and other administrative functions will also relocate to this centralized location. In September 2007 Woodmont Elementary School began a K-8 program by adding a 6�' grade and progressively adding a grade level each year. In March 2008, the Board approved a second K-8 program at Nautilus Elementary School. Nautilus began the 2008/09 school year with K-6 grade. As the program grows there will be more data available about the unique facility needs for this grade configuration. The District opened a new school in September 2008. The Technolo�y Access Foundation (TAF) Academy will provide a small school setting for 6 through 12�' grade students. This academy is funded through a unique public/private partnership between the Technology Access Foundation and Federal Way Public Schools. The focus of the school is Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM). The TAF Academy opened in September of 2008 with students in grades 6, 7 and 9. In the 2009/10 school year TAF Academy added 8�' and 10�' grade. Grades 11 and 12 will be added in successive years with a target population of about 350. The District continues to study school boundaries as new housing and fluctuating populations impact specific schools. Some shifts in boundaries may be required in the coming year. 3 13 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN SECTION 1- THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN The State Growth Management Act requires that several pieces of information be gathered to determine the facilities available and needed to meet the needs of a growing community. This section provides information about current facilities, existing facility needs, and expected future facility requirements for Federal Way Public Schools. A Financial Plan that shows expected funding for any new construction, portables and modernization listed follows this. 4 14 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Adelaide Brigadoon Camelot Enterprise Green Gables Lake Dolloff Lake Grove Lakeland Mark Twain Meredith Hill Mirror Lake Nautilus (K-8) Olympic View Panther Lake Rainier View Sherwood Forest Silver Lake Star Lake Sunnycrest Twin Lakes Valhalla Wildwood Woodmont (K-8) MIDDLE SCHOOLS Federal Way Public Academy (6-10) Illahee Kilo Lakota Sacajawea Saghalie Sequoyah Totem TAF Academy (6-12) HIGH SCHOOLS Decatur Federal Way Thomas Jefferson Todd Beamer Career Academy at Truman ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS Merit School 1635 SW 304th Street 3601 SW 336th Street 4041 S 298th Street 35101 Sth Avenue SW 32607 47th Avenue SW 4200 S 308th Street 303 SW 308th Street 35827 32 Avenue S 2450 S Star Lake Road 5830 S 300th Street 625 S 314"' Street 1000 S 289th Street 2626 SW 327th Street 34424 lst Avenue S 3015 S 368th Street 34600 12th Avenue SW 1310 SW 325th Place 4014 S 270th Street 24629 42° Avenue S 4400 SW 320th Street 27847 42" Avenue S 2405 S 300th Street 26454 16th Avenue S. 34620 9 Avenue S 36001 lst Avenue S 4400 S 308th Street 1415 SW 314th Street 1101 S Dash Point Road 33914 19th Avenue SW 3450 S 360` ST 26630 40�` Ave S 26630 40 Ave S 2800 SW 320th Street 30611 16th Avenue S 4248 S 288th Street 35999 16th Ave S 31455 28th Ave S 36001 ls Ave S 31455 28 Ave S Federal Way Federal Way Auburn Federal Way Federal Way Auburn Federal Way Auburn Federal Way Auburn Federal Way Federal Way Federal Way Federal Way Federal Way Federal Way Federal Way Kent Kent Federal Way Auburn Federal Way Des Moines Federal Way Federal Way Auburn Federal Way Federal Way Federal Way Auburn Kent Kent 98023 98023 98001 98023 98023 98001 98023 98001 98003 98001 98003 98003 98023 98003 98003 98023 98023 98032 98032 98023 98001 98003 98198 Internet Academy 98003 98003 98001 98023 98003 98023 98001 98032 98032 Federal Way 98023 Federal Way 98003 Auburn 98001 Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 5 15 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CURRENT INVENTORY NON-INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITIES Develoned Property Administrative Building MOT Site Central Kitchen Federal Way Memorial Field Leased Space Community Resource Center Available Office Space 31405 18th Avenue S 1066 S 320th Street 1344 S 308th Street 1300 S 308th Street 1813 S Commons 32020 l Ave S Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 Undeveloped Property Site # Location 75 SW 360th Street & 3rd Avenue SW — 9.2 Acres 65 S 351st Street & 52nd Avenue S— 8.8 Acres 60 E of lOth Avenue SW - SW 334th & SW 335�' Streets - 10.04 Acres 73 N of SW 320�' and east of 45�' PL SW — 23.45 Acres 71 S 344th Street & 46th Avenue S- 17.47 Acres 82 l Way S and S 342n St — Minimal acreage 96 S 308�` St and 14�' Ave S—.36 Acres 81 S 332" St and 9�' Ave S— 20 Acres Notes: Not all undeveloped properties are large enough to meet school construction requirements. Properties may be traded or sold depending on what locations are needed to house students in the District. 16 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN NEEDS FORECAST - EXISTING FACILITIES EXISTING FACILITY FUTURE NEEDS ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF FUNDS Purchase and Relocate Interim Capacity Anticipated source of funds is Portables Im act Fees. Elementary Schools: Replace Existing Buildings Voter approved bonds. Lakeland, Panther Lake, Increase capacity at Lakeland, Sunnycrest and Valhalla Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla by a total of 200 seats Lakota Middle School Re lace Existin Buildin Voter a roved bonds Federal Way High School Replace Existing Building, Future bond authorization Increase Ca aci Decatur High School Replace Existing Building, Future bond authorization. Increase Ca aci The District is also planning the replacement of some non-instructional facilities. The District has purchased 20 acres (Site #81) for construction of consolidated facilities for support services functions. Transportation, Nutrition Services, Maintenance and other non-instructional functions will be housed at this centralized location. As part of the multi-phase plan, the District intends to increase capacity for high school students with expansion at the Decatur High School site. Increased capacity at Federal Way High and at Decatur High in later phases supplant the need for construction of a fifth comprehensive high school. 7 17 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN NEEDS FORECAST - ADDITIONAL FACILITIES NEW FACILITY LOCATION ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF FUNDS No current plans for additional facilities. 18 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Six Year Finance Plan r � Secured Funding Projected Revenue Actual and Planned Expenditures available for use by the District for system improvements. This is yeaz eud baluice on 12/31/08. Sources Im act Fees 1) $69,875 Land Sale Funds 2) $143,642 Bond Funds 3) $81,545,134 State Match (4) ($4,598,259 TOTAL $77,160,392 Sources State Match (5 $20,000,000 Bond or Le Funds 6) $67,000,000 Land Fund Sales (7) $10,000,000 Im act Fees 8) $1,800,000 TOTAL 598,800,000 Total Secured Funding and Projected Revenue 5175,960,392 2. These fixnds come from various sales of land and are set aside for estimated expendihues. This is year end balance on 12/31/O8. 3. This is the 12/31/08 balance of bond funds. This figure includes interest eamings. 4. In anticipation of State Match Funds fur Valhalla, Panther Lake, Lakeland, and Sunncrest Eleinertaries and Lakota Middle School, work on speciSc building up�rades is occurring. This is a yeaz end balance on 12/31/08. 5. This is anticipated State Metch for projects attached to future bond issues. This is based on July 1, 2006 State Match indices. State Match funds are bein}; used For lugh prim�iry repairs, upgrades and system improvements ro e�cisting buildings. These improvements include HVAC, and other sVuctural improvements aze uot related to capacity increase. 6. These aze anticipated bond funds. Voters have approved a bond for $149m, $45m of this bond is for non school consWction. As of 12/31/08, $82m has been sold. 7. Projected sale of smplus properties. S. These are projected fees based upon la�own residential developments in the Dis�ict over the next six yeazs. 'll�is fibnve assumes $25,000 per month for [he nex[ six years. This Sgure has been adjusted to reflec[ the cuirent econonry. 9. "Ihese fees represent Ihe cost of purchasing aod installing new portables. The portable expendihue in fiature yeazs may replace ewsting portables that are not fimctional. These nwy not increase capacity and are not included in the capacity summary. NOTES: ' 1. These fees are currendy bein6 held in a King Counry, City of Federal Way and City of Kent i�npac[ fee account, and will be FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN SECTION 2- MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Federal Way Public Schools has twenty-one elementary schools (grades K-5), two schools with a K-8 grade configuration, seven middle school schools (grades 6-8}, four high schools (grades 9-12) and three small secondary schools. The Federal Way Public Academy serves students in grades 6-10. The TAF Academy serves students in grades 6- 12 who reside in the Totem Middle School service area. The Career Academy at Truman High School serves students in grades 9-12. The Internet Academy serves grades K-12. The following maps show the service area boundaries for each school, by school type. (Career Academy at Truman High School, Merit School, Internet Academy and Federal Way Public Academy serve students from throughout the District). The identified boundaries are reviewed annually. Any change in grade configuration or adoption of programs that affect school populations may necessitate a change in school service areas. The Growth Management Act requires that a jurisdiction evaluate if the public facility infrastructure is in place to handle new housing developments. In the case of most public facilities, new development has its major impact on the facilities immediately adjacent to that development. School District are different. If the District does not have permanent facilities available, interim measures must be taken until new facilities can be built or until boundaries can be adjusted to match the population changes to the surrounding facilities. Adjusting boundaries requires careful consideration by the District and is not taken lightly. It is recognized that there is a potential impact on students who are required to change schools. Boundary adjustments impact the whole district, not just one school. It is important to realize that a single housing development does not require the construction of a complete school facility. School districts are required to project growth throughout the district and build or adjust boundaries based on growth throughout the district, not just around a single development. 11 21 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL BOUNDARIES ❑ Elementary Schools � Middle Schools 1 Adelaide 36 Federal Way Public Academy 2 Brigadoon 30Illahee 3 Camelot 31 Kilo 4 Enterprise 32 Lakota 5 Green Gables 33 Sacajawea �',� � . � ' � � �W E . ; � 6 Lake Dolloff 34 Saghalie �.. �: � g�' �. '� � 7 Lake Grove 37 Sequoyah � w � �� "}� � �� '� � � ° � � } �` Y . 3 � t + 8 Lakeland 35 Totem �-; �--- �=�-� > ; '�`' { � � ~ Z-- k - �+- � -� , ( � ' � (Y �,,, 9 Mark Twain �, ��-�� .�- �� k s= � , ; . � �� , 10 Meredith Hill � High Schools -� � � � � � � . � , � � �� _ _� 11 Mirror Lake 40 Decatur �� W �.� ` � # � � � » �� , ;� �� r�i 12 Nautilus 41 Federal Way �� ;�- ,r � ; -� � '; - � ; 13 Olympic View 421 Thomas Jefferson =f �'-�- � ��- c =. ��"" 14 Panther Lake 45 Todd Beamer , � �,_ � _--� � ," .:� , ` ��. , �� : � � � , �� .� • • 49 Career Academy at ;� � � � � i�� 15 Ramier View � ; � � £ � F , Truman ..;.; '-- - � ` � �� ___ =�--.� 16 Sherwood Forest `� -� - �° �" ' ' ° = �'• � ' 4 .' � ...... 17 Silver Lake 0 Administrative ' ` � � � � �, , .. � � . C �' .._........... h - �.....,. 18 Star Lake Building ,M � � � �`�--�--�--; ` � 19 Sunnycrest a � ' ��' � � Undeveloped Property � °� � � � � ' ' 20 Twin Lakes � �° � � ? �� _� 21 Valhalla =� ��` �' � � �`� � � �-` �� ___� £ � !'-' ' � A ` � z F (' 22 Wildwood � ; � �� , -, � � ` 23 Woodmont �.,. ; ;�.� �.__� - , �,, : : � :: � } ,___,�� r � "`,`��T'`�°�`; . � . �=C�� .� � _ _ �� : �� / �_ � FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN MIDDLE SCHOOL BOUNDARIES ❑ Elementary Schools 1 Adelaide 2 Brigadoon 3 Camelot 4 Enterprise 5 Green Gables 6 Lake Dolloff 7 Lake Grove 8 Lakeland 9 Mark Twain 10 Meredith Hill 11 Mirror Lake 12 Nautilus 13 Olympic View 14 Panther Lake 15 Rainier View 16 Sherwood Forest 17 Silver Lake 18 Star Lake 19 Sunnycrest 20 Twin Lakes 21 Valhalla 22 Wildwood 23 Woodmont "'' Middle Schools �� 36 Federal Way Public Academy 30 Illahee 31 Kilo 32 Lakota 33 Sacajawea 34 Saghalie 37 Sequoyah � �3 35 Totem 4�� '��-�; High Schools 40 Decatur 41 Federal Way 421 Thomas Jefferson 45 Todd Beamer 49 Career Academy at Truman 0 Administrative Building MOT Site ��• Undeveloped Property �� . 2 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN ❑ Elementary Schools 1 Adelaide 2 Brigadoon 3 Camelot 4 Enterprise 5 Green Gables 6 Lake Dolloff 7 Lake Grove 8 Lakeland 9 Mark Twain 10 Meredith Hill 11 Mirror Lake 12 Nautilus 13 Olympic View 14 Panther Lake 15 Rainier View 16 Sherwood Forest 17 Silver Lake 18 Star Lake 19 Sunnycrest 20 Twin Lakes 21 Valhalla 22 Wildwood 23 Woodmont HIGH SCHOOL BOUNDARIES 0 Middle Schools 36 Federal Way Public Academy 30 Illahee 31 Kilo 32 Lakota 33 Sacajawea 34 Saghalie _. 37 Sequoyah 35 Totem High Schools 40 Decatur 41 Federal Way 421 Thomas Jefferson 45 Todd Beamer 49 Career Academy at Truman 0 Administrative Building MOT Site � Undeveloped Property FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN SECTION 3 - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Building Capacities - The Education Program Portable Locations Student Forecast — 2010 through 2016 Capacity Summaries King County Impact Fees - Single and Multi-Family Units 15 25 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Building Capacities This Capital Facilities Plan establishes the District's "standard of service" in order to ascertain the District's current and future capacity. The Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, but these guidelines do not take into consideration the education program needs. In general, the District's current target class size provides that the average class size for a standard classroom for grades K through 2 should be 20 students. In grades 3-5 the target is 25 students. For grades 6 to 12 the target class size is 26 students. Classrooms for students with Individualized Education Program (Special Education) needs are calculated at 12 seats per classroom. Using the OSPI square footage calculation as a base line, the District has calculated a program capacity for all schools. A recent Study & Survey was the basis for changes to the OSPI building report. The following list clarifies the adjustments to the OSPI calculation. Music Rooms: Each elementary school requires a standard classroom for music instruction. All Day Kindergarten: Every elementary school operates at least one all day Kindergarten program. These all day Kindergarten program require additional capacity because the standard classroom is available for one all day session rather than two half day sessions. The District will operate 52 sections of all day Kindergarten in 2009/10 Special Education Resource Rooms: Each elementary and middle school requires the use of a standard classroom(s) for special education students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities English as a Second Language Programs: Each elementary, middle school and high school requires the use of a standard classroom for students learning English as a second language. Middle School Computer Labs: Each middle school has computer labs. High School Career Development and Learning Center (Resource) Room: Each high school provides special education resource room and career development classrooms for students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities. 16 26 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITIES *Middle School Avera e 754 762 Elementa Avera e 373 *Hi h School Avera e 1 299 1 389 Notes: * Federal Way Public Academy and Career Academy at Truman High School are non-boundary schools. These schools are not used in the calculated averages. ** Technology Access Foundation Academy is housed entirely in portables on the Totem Middle School site. 17 27 MIDDLE SCHOOL BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITY ELEMENTARY BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITY HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITY FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Portable Locations The Washington State Constitution requires the State to provide each student a basic education. It is not an efficient use of District resources to build a school with a capacity for 500 students due to lack of space for 25 students when enrollment fluctuates throughout the year and from year to year. Portables are used as temporary facilities or interim measures to house students when increasing population impacts a school attendance area. Portables may also be required to house students when new or changing programs require additional capacity. They also provide temporary housing for students until permanent facilities can be financed and constructed. When permanent facilities become available, the portable(s) is either used for other purposes such as storage or child care programs, or moved to another school for an interim classroom. Some portables may not be fit to move due to age or physical condition. In these cases, the District may choose to buy new portables and surplus these unfit portables. It is the practice and philosophy of Federal Way Public Schools that portables are not acceptable as permanent facilities. The following page provides a list of the location of the portable facilities, used for temporary educational facilities by Federal Way Public Schools. 18 28 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PORTABLE LOCATIONS PORTABLESLOCATED AT HIGH SCHOOLS NON INSTRUC710f7AL RVSfRUC7IONAL ecatur 9 ederal Way 2 homas Jefferson 10 odd Beamer 8 AF Academv 8 AL � 37 PORTABLESLOCATED AT SUPPORT FACILITIES MOT i TDC 5 TOTAL 6 HEAD START PORTABLES AT DISTRICT SITES Sherwood Forest 1 Total 1 19 29 PORTABLES LOCATED AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS PORTABLESLOCATED AT MIDDLE SCHOOLS FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Student Forecast Student enrollment projections are a basic component of budget development. Enrollment projections influence many ofthe financial estimates that go into budget preparation. The majority of staffing requirements are derived directly from the forecasted number of students. Allocations for instructional supplies and materials are also made on the basis of projected enrollment. Other expenditures and certain revenue projections are directly related to enrollment projections. Enrollment projections are completed annually in the Business Services Department. Projections must be detailed at various levels, district total, school-building totals, grade level and program level to include vocational and special education students. The basis of projections has been cohort survival analysis. Cohort survival is the analysis of a group that has a common statistical value (grade level) as it progresses through time. In a stable population the cohort would be 1.00 for all grades. This analysis uses historical information to develop averages and project the averages forward. This method does not trace individual students; it is concerned with aggregate numbers in each grade level. The district has used this method with varying years of history and weighted factors to study several projections. Because transfers in and out of the school system are common, student migration is factored into the analysis as it increases or decreases survival rates. Entry grades (kindergarten) are a unique problem in cohort analysis. The district collects information on birth rates within the district's census tracts, and treats these statistics as a cohort for kindergarten enrollment in the appropriate years. The Federal Way School District is using various statistical methods for projecting student enrollments. The resultant forecasted enrollments are evaluated below. The first method is a statistical cohort analysis that produces ten distinct forecasts. These are forecast of enrollment for one year. The projections vary depending on the number of years of historical information and how they are weighted. A second method is a projection using an enrollment projection soflware package that allows the user to project independently at school or grade level and to aggregate these projections for the district level. The Enrollment Master soflware provides statistical methods including trend line, standard grade progression (cohort) and combinations of these methods. This software produces a five-year projection of school enrollment. In December 2006, the District contracted a demographer to develop projections for the Federal Way School District. The report was complete in January 2007. The model used to forecast next year's enrollment uses cohort survival rates to measure grade to grade growth, assumes market share losses to private schools (consistent with county-wide average), assumes growth from new housing or losses due to net losses from migration. This forecast was provided as a range of three projections. The long-range forecast provided with this report used a model with cohort survival rates and growth rates based on projected changes in the 5-19 age group for King County. Most of the methods used for long range enrollment reporting assume that enrollrnent is a constant percent of 20 30 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN something else (e.g. population) or that enrollment will mirror some projected trend for the school-age population over time. The report included 5 different calculations to provide a range of possible projections for the District to the year 2015. This model produces a projection that is between 23,000 and 24,000 when applied to the low, medium and high range modes. This provides a reasonable range for long-range planning and is consistent with estimates from various models. Long-range projections that establish the need for facilities are a modification of the cohort survival method. The cohort method of analysis becomes less reliable the farther out the projections are made. The Federal Way School District long-range projections are studied annually. The study includes information from the jurisdictional demographers as they project future housing and population in the region. The long-range projections used by Federal Way Public Schools reflect a similar age trend in student populations as the projections published by the Office of Financial Management for the State of Washington. Near term projections assume some growth from new housing, which is offset by current local economic conditions. Current economic conditions do appear to be affecting enrollment. This is reflected in the District's projections. The District tracks new development from five permitting jurisdictions. Long range planning assumes a student yield from proposed new housing consistent with historical growth patterns. Growth Management requires jurisdictions to plan for a minimum of twenty years. The Federal Way School District is a partner in this planning with the various jurisdictions comprising the school district geography. These projections create a vision of the school district community in the future. 21 31 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Full Time Equivalent Enrollment History and Projections Simplified FTE (K Headcount =.5 FTE; Middle School FTE=.99 Headcount; High School FTE _.935Headcount) Total K -12 Per Calendar Yr School Year � Elementary Middle School Senior High FTE Chi 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2003-04 2004-OS 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 B2009-10 P20I0-11 P2011-12 P2012-13 P2013-14 P2014-IS P2015-16 * New Conr�uratio s 9,127 5,524 6,408 9,164 5,473 6,515 9,105 5,309 6,770 9,022 5,261 6,754 8,912 5,167 6,637 8,865 5,155 6,456 8,793 5,076 6,325 8,838 5,077 6,167 8,894 5,042 6,129 8,988 4,995 6,109 9,091 4,969 6,111 9,175 5,012 6,066 9,253 5,086 6,022 Elementary K-5 Middle School 6-8 High Schoo[ 9-12 21,059 21,152 0.4% 21,184 0.2% 21,037 -0.7% 20,716 -1.5% 20,476 -1.2% 20,194 -1.4 % 20,082 -0.6% 20,065 -0.1 % 20,092 0.1 % 20,171 0.4% 20,253 0.4% 20,361 0.5% Enroliment History and Six Year Forecast zz,000 21,000 20,000 « c � 0 a 19,000 m m x a 18,000 0 « u O 17,000 16,000 15,000 � aO D � � p ��f �6 �� O FTE c,O �� c' �� ,�� a �� a �� c9 � � C� V� D lf O � O � �0 � l �t� Y �tS �� School Year 22 32 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Capacitv Summaries All Grades, Elementary, Middle School, and High Schools The Capacity Summaries combine Building Capacity information and the Student Forecast information. The result demonstrates the requirements for new or remodeled facilities and why there is a need for the District to use temporary facilities or interim measures. The information is organized in spreadsheet format, with a page summarizing the entire District, and then evaluating capacity vs. number of students at elementary, middle school, and high school levels individually. The notes at the bottom of each spreadsheet provide information about what facilities are in place each year. 23 33 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CAPACITY SUMMARY - ALL GRADES Budget - - Projected - - Calendar Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 CAPACITY School Year 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015l16 BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOLJNT CAPACITY 19,493 19,493 19,493 19,593 19,593 19,593 19,593 FT'� GA�ACI�'Y..-" . Add or subtract changes to capacity Increase Capacity, Lakeland, Panther Lake Sunnycrest and Valhalla Adiusted Prosram Headcount Canaciri 100 ' 100 ' 19, 5 93 19, 493 19, 5 9 3 19, 5 93 19, 5 93 19 1 ENROLLMENT SURPLUS OR RELOCATABLE CAPACITY Current Portable Capacity Deduct Portable Capacity Add New Portable Capacity 2,700 2,700 2,700 2,700 2,700 2,700 2,700 �� 125 24 34 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CAPAC[TY BUILDING PROGRaM HEAD COtJN"C CAP�C[ FTE CAPACITY L [ncrease Capacity Lakeland and Sunnycrest Adjusted Program I Ad�usted Progra�n FTE Canac CAP�C[TY SUMMARY - ELE1�tENTARY SCHOOLS Budget - - Projected - - Calendar Yeaz 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 School Year 2009/10 20i0/lt 2011/i2 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 8,�7i 8,�71 8,�71 8,671 8,671 8,671 8,67i 8,57i 8,57 t' 8 8',671 ' 8,67 i', 8,fi7 i! 8;67 t ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment 2. Internet Academy {A,�f' Basic FT'E Enrotlment without Internet Academy SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PRQGRAM CAPACITY RELOCATABLE CAPAC[TY" 3. Cunent Portabie Capacity 8,� 71 8,� 71 8,671 8,671 8,67I 8,67 l 8,671 8,57I 8,57} 8 8;671 $,671 8,67I 8,671 8,793 8,838 8,894 8,988 9,091 9,175 9,253 (36) (36) (36) (36) (36) (36) (36) 8,757 8.8f12 R RS>R A 4S� o ncc n,�n : �,;..: 1,07� 1,075 1,075 1,075 1,075 1,075 1,075 ., -- ----....,.., �...k,�...��y, t,D75 1 l 1,Q75 1,�375 ,1;4'f5 ; I,ff75 SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRANI AIYD RELOCATABLE CAPACI'FY 889 &44 888' 794 591 607 ' S29 ' IVOTES: L Increase Capacity at Lakeland, Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhal(a 2. tnternet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. 3. Re(ocatable Capacin- is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available_ This is a calcu(ated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used wi(I be based on actual student population needs. The District may begin to pul( portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables will determine feasibility for continued instructional use. 25 35 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CAPACITY SUMMARY - MIDDLE SCHOOLS liuQgei - - rru�cc�cu - - Calendar Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 CAPACIT'1' School Year 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012l13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/lf BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOiTNT CAPACITY 5,489 5,489 5,489 5,489 5,489 5,489 5,489 Add or subtract changes in capacity ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment l. Internet Academy (AE SiJRPLUS OR RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 2. Cunent Portable Capacity Add/Subtract portable capacity Add new portable capacity Sequoyah Subtract nortable capacity from Totem SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE 5,489 5,489 5,489 5,489 5,076 � 5,077 � 5,042 � 4 825 725 725 ,' 25 (1251 ` 5,489 5,489 5,489 5,544., . 5,544 5,54�F"�; 4,969 5,012 5,086 725 725 725 725 NOTES: 1. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. 2. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables will determine feasibility for continued instructional use. 26 36 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CAPACITY SUMMARY - HIGH SCHOOLS CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOUNT CAPACITY Calendar Yeaz 2010 School Year 2009/11 Add or subtract changes in capacity Headcount ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment 1. Internet Academy (AA RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 2. Current Portable Capacity Add/Subtract portable capacity Add nortable caoacitv at TAF A SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE - - Projected - - 2011 2012 2013 2014 �10/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/1� 5,433 5,433 5,433 5,433 5,433 5,433 5,433 5,433 6,325 � 6,167 � 6,129 � 6,109 � 6,Ill 800 900 900 900 901 100 ; : 2015 2016 )14/IS 2015/l 5,433 5,433 5,433 6,066 6,022 (205) (205) 900 900 NOTES: 1. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. 2. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables will determine feasibility for continued instructional use. 3. Capacity for unhoused students will be accommodated with traveling teachers and no planning time in some classrooms. Puget Sound Early College will house approximately 60 of the unhoused students. 27 37 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Kin County the Citv of Federal Way and the Citv of Kent Impact Fee Calculations Single and Multi-Family Residences Each jurisdiction that imposes school impact fees requires that developers pay these fees to help cover a share of the impact of new housing developments on school facilities. To determine an equitable fee throughout unincorporated King County, a formula was established. This formula can be found in King County Code 21A and was substantially adopted by the City of Federal Way and Kent. The formula requires the District to establish a"Student Generation Factor" which estimates how many students will be added to a school district by each new single or multi-family unit and to gather some standard construction costs, which are unique to that district. - STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR ANALYSIS Federal Way Public Schools student generation factor was determined separately for single-family units and multi-family units. The factors used in the 2010 Capital Facilities Plan were derived using actual generation factors from single-family units that were constructed in the last five (5) years. - IMPACT FEE CALCULATION Following the calculations for the student generation factor is a copy of the Impact Fee Calculation for single family and multi-family units based on King County Code 21A and the Growth Management Act. ➢ Temporary Facility Cost is the average cost of a portable purchased within the last 12 months. Plan Year 2010 Plan Year 2009 Single Family Units $3,832 Multi-Family Units $2,114 $4, 017 $ 1,733 28 38 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN STUDENT GENERATION NEW CONSTRUCTION IN PRIOR 5 YEARS Single Family Student Generation Number of Number of Number of Number of Number of Elementary Middle School High School Total Single Family Multi-Family Elementary Middle School High School Student Student Student Student DEVELOPMENT Dwellin s Dwellings Students Students Students Factor Factor Factor Factor (09 Lakota Crest 41 0 3 7 2 0.0732 0.1707 0.0488 0.2927 (09) Tuscan 1S 0 9 2 1 0.5000 0.1111 0.0556 0.6667 (08) Northlake Rid e IV 90 0 30 9 15 0.3333 0.1000 0.1667 0.6000 (08) Collin tree Park 42 0 19 5 2 0.4524 0.1190 0.0476 0.6190 (07) Colella Estates 81 0 31 13 22 0.3827 0.1605 0.2716 0.8148 (07) Woodbrook 169 0 36 25 39 0.2130 0.1479 0.2308 0.5917 (06) Devonshire 29 0 15 6 17 0.5172 0.2069 0.5862 1.3103 (06 Orchid Lane 50 0 25 11 13 0.5000 0.2200 0.2600 0.9800 (05) Danville Station SO 0 36 18 22 0.4500 0.2250 0.2750 0.9500 (05) Northiake Ridge 1, II AND III 241 0 75 43 54 0.3112 0.1784 0.2241 0.7137 Total 841 0 279 139 187 Student Generation* 0.3317 " 0.1653 0.2224 " 0.7194 w �o * Student Generation rate is based on totals. 29 Multi-Family Student Generation FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN IMPACT FEE School Site Acquisition Cost: Facility Elementary Middle School High School School Construction Cost: % Perm Fac./ Total S Ft Elementary 95.6� ..,. _ _........, _......... �... _.... _....... _. Middle School _._...._........_�_..�._.._._..._.... High School Temporary Facility Cost: % Temp Fac Total S Ft Elementary ........___..._._ ............._.._.._.. Middle School 4.3 ......__.__............_ ............... High School State Matching Credit Calculation: Area Cost Allowance/S Ft Elementary $168.79 _.._..........---.___....__..�..._._.._._. Middle School $168.79 ......._.....,.__.............._..._.._.._, High School $168.79 Tax Payment Credit Calculation Average Assessed Value (March 2009) Capital Bond Interest Rate (March 2009) Net Present Value of Average Dwelling Years Amortized Property Tax Levy Rate Present Value of Revenue Stream Cost / Acre Facility Cost Facility Cost $193,E Sq. Ft. Student Facility Facility �apacity 200 Facility Size 25 State Match 61.09% Student Student Factor Factor SFR MFR 0.3317 0.1520 0.1653 0.0520 0.2224 0.0590 TOTAL Student Student Factor Factor SFR MFR 03317 0.1520 _...�_......._ ...............,.. .....,,....�_.._.._...........__.._. 0.1653 0.0520 _......___.......__. ............ .____..__�.�.a..___.._._�_ 0.2224 0.0590 TOTAL Student Student Factor Factor SFR MFR 0.3317 0.1520 ..._ ..............__._.,_. .._.�__...._�......_...�_.___- 0.1653 0.0520 ......._....,....,__..,_._.. ..,..�__....._._....._._._ 0.2224 0.0590 TOTAL Student Student Factor Factor SFR MFR 03317 0.1520 _.._._..........�.._....._._. .__._.__..._..._.._...._....._ _._........ �., .__.._..�._�_,...0 :0520 0.2224 0.0590 Total Single Family Multi-Family Residences Residences Mitigation Fee Summary Site Acquisition Cost $ - $ - Permanent Facility Cost $ 14,431 $ 6,613 Temporary Facility Cost $ 56 $ 18 State Match Credit $ (3,078) $ (1,411) Tax Payment Credit $ (3,745) $ (992) Sub-Total $ 7,664 $ 4,228 50%Local Share $ 3,832 $ 2,114 Im act Fee $ 3,832 $ 2,114 30 40 Cost/ SFR $0 $0 $0 $0 Cost/ MFR $0 $0 $0 CosU Cost1 SFR MFR $14,431 $6,613 $0 $0 $0 $0 $14,431 $6,613 Cost/ Cosd SFR MFR $56 $18 $56 $18 Cosb Cost/ SFR MFR $3,078 $1,411 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,078 $1,411 SFR MFR FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN SECTION 4 SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 2009 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN The 2010 Capital Facilities Plan is an updated document, based on the 2009 Capital Facilities Plan. The changes between the 2009 Plan and the 2010 Plan are listed below. SECTION I- THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN SIX-YEAR FINANCE PLAN The Six Year Finance Plan has been rolled forward to reflect 2010/2016 SECTION III - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION CAPACITY Elementary capacity includes space for All Day Kindergarten programs at every elementary school. Changes to the Building Program Capacities calculation are found on page 17. PORTABLES The list of portables reflects the movement of portables between facilities or new portables purchased. Portable Locations can be found on page 19. STUDENT FORECAST The Student Forecast now covers 2010 through 2016 Enrollment history and projections are found on page 22. CAPACITY SUMMARY The changes in the Capacity Summary are a reflection of the changes in the capacities and student forecast. New schools and increased capacity at current buildings are shown as increases to capacity. Capacity Summaries are found on pages 24-27. IMPACT FEE CALCULATION - HING COUNTY CODE 21A The Impact Fee Calculations have changed due to changes in several factors. The adjustment made in the Impact Fee Calculation, causing a change in the Impact Fee between the 2009 Capital Facilities Plan and the 2014 Capital Facilities Plan can be found on page 32 and 33. 31 41 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES FROM 2009 TO 2010 STUDENT GENERATION FACTORS Student Generation factors are based on rates for new developments constructed over a period of not more than five years prior to the date of the fee calculation. The changes in student Generation factors between the 2009 Capital Facilities Plan and the 2010 Capital Facilities Plan are due to developments that were deleted or added based upon the age of the developments and the year placed in the survey. The Student Generation worksheet is found on page 29. SCHOOL CONSTR UCTION COSTS The anticipated cost for replacing Lakeland, Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla is $70, 000, 000. The replacement will add 50 new seats to the school capacity at each building. The total capacity at these four elementary schools is currently 1 SOS. Adding 200 additional seats will increase the capacity by 13%. Total Cost .13 X �70,000,000 = $9,100,000 The District will use the above formula created as a base from the 2008 Capital Facilities Plan for the 2010 Capital Facilities Plan. The capacity of the four elementary schools may vary from year to year as programs are added or changed and construction cost may increase over time. For instance, for each new all day Kindergarten program, the building capacity will effectively be reduced by 20 headcount and the Board authorized an increase in construction cost of $lm for Valhalla. These changes would increase the construction cost. The District is using the base formula established in the 2008 plan in the Impact Fee calculation. 32 42 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES FROM 2009 TO 2010 IMPACT FEE Item From/To Comment Percent of Permanent Facilities 96.81% to 95.62% Percent Temporary Facilities 3.19% to 4.38% Average Cost of Portable $168,307 to $193,607 Classroom Area Cost Allowance $168.79 to $168.79 State Match Average Assessed Value Capital Bond Interest Rate Property Tax Levy Rate 61.84% to 61.09% SFR — $297,242 to $326,409 MFR — $68,998 to $86,497 5.11% to 4.96% $1.49 to $1.48 Single Family Student Yield Elementary Middle School High School Multi-Family Student Yield Elementary Middle School High School 3285 to .3317 .1631 to .1653 .2446 to .2224 .1222 to .1520 .4621 to .0520 .0942 to .0590 Report #3 OSPI Updated portable inventory Updated average of portables purchased and placed in 2009 No change from the prior year. Change effective July 2008 Per Puget Sound Educational Service District (ESD 121) Market Rate King County Treasury Division Updated Housing Inventory Updated Housing Inventory 33 43 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN BOARD OF EDUCATION Tony Moore, President Angela Griffin, Vice President Ed Barney, Director Amye Bronson-Doherty, Director Suzanne Smith, Director SUPERINTENDENT Thomas R. Murphy Prepared by: Sally D. McLean Tanya Nascimento 44 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1 SECTION 2 SECTION 3 SECTION 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Introduction Inventory of Educational Facilities Inventory of Non-Instructional Facilities Needs Forecast - Existing Facilities Needs Forecast - New Facilities Six Year Finance Plan MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Introduction Map - Elementary Boundaries Map - Middle School Boundaries Map - High School Boundaries SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Introduction Building Capacities Portable Locations Student Forecast Capacity Summaries King County Impact Fee Calculations SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 2010 PLAN 1 2-3 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16-17 18-19 20-22 23-27 28-30 31-33 1 45 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN INTRODUCTION In response to the requirements of the State of Washington Growth Management Act (SHB)2929 (1990) and ESHB 1025 (1991)), and under the School Impact Fee Ordinances of King County Code 21A, City of Federal Way Ordinance No. 95-249 effective December 21, 1995 as amended, City of Kent Ordinance No3260 effective March 1996, and the City of Auburn Ordinance No. 5078 effective 1998, Federal Way Public Schools has updated its 2011 Capital Facilities Plan as of May 2010. This Plan is scheduled for adoption by King County, the City of Kent, City of Federal Way and the City of Auburn and is incorporated in the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction by reference. This plan is also included in the Facilities Plan element of the Comprehensive Plans of each jurisdiction. To date, the City of Des Moines has not adopted a school impact fee ordinance. The City of Des Moines collects school impact fees as part of the SEPA process. The Growth Management Act requires the County to designate Urban Growth areas within which urban growth can be encouraged. The Growth Management Planning Council adopted and recommended to the King County Council four Urban Growth Area Line Maps with designations for urban centers. A designation was made within the Federal Way planning area, which encompasses Federal Way Public Schools boundaries. King County will encourage and actively support the development of Urban Centers to meet the region's need for housing, jobs, services, culture, and recreation. This Plan's estimated population growth is prepared with this underlying assumption. This Capital Facilities Plan will be used as documentation for any jurisdiction, which requires its use to meet the needs of the Growth Management Act. This plan is not intended to be the sole planning tool for all of the District needs. The District may prepare interim plans consistent with Board policies or management need. The District has prepared a multi-phase plan for the renovation and construction of Federal Way Schools and support buildings. The Board authorized presenting the $149 million bond on May 15, 2007. The bond, passed at 63.93%, will replace four elementary schools, Lakeland, Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla and one middle school, Lakota. Plans to replace Federal Way High School and Decatur High School and to increase capacity by approximately 400 students at each school are planned in later phases. Federal Way High School was built in 1938. It has been added onto at least 10 times and currently has an almost maze-like layout. Based on an annual 4% increase in construction cost, the estimated cost to rebuild Federal Way High School is $122 million. Estimated construction costs will be re-calculated prior to the next bond election. None of the cost to replace Federal Way or Decatur High School is included in the Impact Fee calculation in this Plan. The non-instructional projects included in the plan will consolidate support services operations at a single location. The current Transportation and Maintenance facility cannot continue to meet the District needs in the future. Nutrition services and other administrative functions will also relocate to this centraIized location. 2 46 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Construction of Panther Lake & Valhalla has been completed and students began the 2009-IO school year in the new buildings. Lakota Middle School will be completed this summer and students will begin the upcoming school year in the new school. The District will be awarding bids for Sunnycrest & Lakeland in May & June and construction for both sites will begin this summer. During the construction of Sunnycrest, students will be served at an off-site location. In Fa112010, the District will offer the Middle Years IB program at Totem & Kilo. 'The Middle Years IB programs will require students to take a foreign language in addition to the core subjects currently offered at the middle schools. In Fa112011, the district will implement a dual-language program at Sunnycrest. The dual-language program will offer opportunities for students to engage in bilingual learning. The program will begin with a K-1 program adding a new grade level each year. Each grade level will require three classrooms. The District continues to monitor factors that may have an impact on enrollment and capacity at our schools. One such factor is HB 2261, which will phase in full-day kindergarten for all students. The District will follow this bill as it progresses and assess the possible facility impact this bill may create. Another factor would be the inclusion of a Program of Early Learning for at risk children within the overall Program of Basic Education. According to the projections provided by the Puget Sound Educational Service District, Federal Way was projected to have 1,219 children eligible for Head Start, Early Head Start and ECEAP in 2009. Funded capacity for these programs is only 321 leaving 898 children unserved. If a bill including Early Learning as a part of the Program of Basic Education were to pass, there would be a significant impact to the capacity of our schools. We will also continue to study school boundaries as new housing and fluctuating populations impact specific schools. Some shifts in boundaries may be required in the coming years. 3 47 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN SECTION 1- THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN The State Growth Management Act requires that several pieces of information be gathered to determine the facilities available and needed to meet the needs of a growing community. This section provides information about current facilities, existing facility needs, and expected future facility requirements for Federal Way Public Schools. A Financial Plan that shows expected funding for any new construction, portables and modernization listed follows this. 4 48 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 201 I CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN INVENTORY OF EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Adelaide Brigadoon Camelot Enterprise Green Gables Lake Dolloff Lake Grove Lakeland Mark Twain Meredith Hill Mirror Lake Nautilus (K-8} Olympic View Panther Lake Rainier View Sherwood Forest Silver La1ce Star Lake Sunnycrest* Twin Lakes Valhalla Wildwood Woodmont (K-8) MIDDLE SCHOOLS Federal Way Public Academy (6-10) Illahee Kilo Lakota Sacajawea Saghalie Sequoyah Totem TAF Academy (6-12) HIGH SCHOOLS Decatur 1635 SW 304` St 3601 SW 336` St 4041 S 298�' St 35101 5` Ave SW 32607 47`� Ave SW 4200 S 308�' St 303 SW 308�` St �5827 �2 nd AVe S 2450 S Star Lake Rd 5830 S 300�` St 625 S 314 St 1000 S 289�' St 2626 SW 327` St 34424 1 S ` Ave S 3015 S 368�' St 34600 12"' Ave SW 1310 SW 325�` Pl 4014 S 270�` St 24629 42" Ave S 4400 SW 320` St 27847 42" Ave S 2405 S 300�` St 26454 16�' Ave S 34620 9 Ave S 36001 1 Ave S 4400 S 308�` St 1415 S W 314"` St 1101 S Dash Point Rd 33914 19`�' Ave SW 3450 S 360�` ST 26630 40�' Ave S 26630 40"' Ave S Federal W ay Federal Way Auburn Federal Way Federal Way Auburn Federal Way Auburn Federal Way Auburn Federal Way Federal Way Federal Way Federal Way Federal Way Federal Way Federal Way Kent Kent Federal Way Auburn Federal Way Des Moines Federal Way Federal Way Auburn Federal Way Federal Way Federal Way Auburn Kent Kent 98023 98023 98001 98023 98023 98001 98023 98001 98003 98001 98003 98003 98023 98003 98003 98023 98023 98032 98032 98023 98001 98003 98198 98003 98003 98001 98023 98003 98023 98001 98032 98032 2800 SW 320` St Federal Way Federal Way 30611 16` Ave S Federal Way Thomas Jefferson 4248 S 288`� St Auburn Todd Beamer 35999 16 Ave S Federal Way Career Academy at Truman 31455 28�` Ave S Federal Way ALTERNATIVE SCHOOLS Merit School 36001 1 S Ave S Federal Way Internet Academy 31455 28 Ave S Federal Way Employment Transition Program 33250 21 Ave SW Federal Way *During the construction of the new school, Sunnycrest will be relocated to 440 S 186'" St, Burien 98148 98023 98003 98001 98003 98003 98003 98003 98023 5 49 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 201 I CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CURRENT INVENTORY NON-INSTRUCTIONAL FACILITIES Developed Property Administrative Building MOT Site Central Kitchen Federal Way Memorial Field Northwest Center Leased Space 31405 18 Ave S 1066 S 320�' St 1344 S 308�' St 1300 S 308 St 33330 8�' Ave S 1813 S Commons 32020 l Ave S Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 Federal Way 98003 Community Resource Center Student Support Annex Notes: In July 2011, the Administrative Building, Community Resource Center, and Student Support Annex will be relocated to the Northwest Center. The leases for the Community Resource Center and the Student Support Annex will end in August 2011. In 2010, construction will begin on Site 81. The MOT Site & Central Kitchen will be relocated to this site when construction is complete. The Administration Building and MOT Site have been surplussed and will be marketed for sale. Undeveloped Propertv Site # Location 75 SW 360th Street & 3rd Avenue SW — 9.2 Acres 65 S 351st Street & 52nd Avenue S— 8.8 Acres 60 E of lOth Avenue SW - SW 334th & SW 335 Streets - 10.04 Acres 73 N of SW 320�' and east of 45�' PL SW — 23.45 Acres 71 S 344th Street & 46th Avenue S- 17.47 Acres g2 l Way S and S 342 St — Minimal acreage 96 S 308�' St and 14�' Ave S—.36 Acres 81 S 332" St and 9�' Ave S— 20 Acres Notes: Not all undeveloped properties are large enough to meet school construction requirements. Properties may be traded or sold depending on what locations are needed to house students in the District. 6 50 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN NEEDS FORECAST - EXISTING FACILITIES EXISTING FACILITY FUTURE NEEDS ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF FUNDS Purchase and Relocate Interim Capacity Anticipated source of funds is Portables Im act Fees. Elementary Schools: Replace Existing Buildings Voter approved bonds. Lakeland, Panther Lake, Increase capacity at Lakeland, Sunnycrest and Valhalla Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla b a total of 200 seats Lakota Middle School Re lace Existin Buildin Voter a roved bonds Federal Way High School Replace Existing Building, Future bond authorization Increase Ca aci Decatur High School Replace Existing Building, Future bond authorization. Increase Ca aci The District is also planning the replacement of some non-instructional facilities. The District has purchased 20 acres (Site #81) for construction of consolidated facilities for support services functions. Transportation, Nutrition Services, Maintenance and other non-instructional functions will be housed at this centralized location. As part of the multi-phase plan, the District intends to increase capacity for high school students with expansion at the Decatur High School site. Increased capacity at Federal Way High and at Decatur High in later phases supplant the need for construction of a fifth comprehensive high school. 7 51 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN NEEDS FQRECAST - ADDITIONAL FACILITIES NEW FACILITY LOCATION ANTICIPATED SOURCE OF FUNDS No current plans for additional facilities. 52 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Six Xear Finance Plan Cn w Secured Funding Projected Revenue Actual and Planned Expenditures available for use by the Distric[ for system improvements. This is yeaz end balance on 12/31/09. Sources Im actFees 1) $223,916 Land Sale Funds (2) $1,498,977 Bond Funds 3 $42,102,751 State Match (4) ($910,840) TOTAL $42,914,804 5ources State Match (5) $20,000,000 Bond or Lev Funds (6) $22,000,000 Land Fund Sales 7) $10,000,000 Im act Fees (8) $1,800,000 TOTAL $53,800,000 otal Secured Funding and Projected Revenue $96,714,804 2. These funds come from various sales of land and aze set aside for estimated expenditures. This is year end balance on 12/31/09. 3. This is the 12/31/09 balance of bond funds. This figure includes interest eamings. 4. In anticipation of State Match Funds fur V alhalla, Panther Lake, Lakeland, and Sunncrest Elementaries and Lakota Middle School, work on specific building upgrades is occurring. This is the balance on 12/31/09. 5. This is anticipated State Match for projec[s attached to future bond issues. This is based on July 1, 2006 State Ma[ch indices. S[ate Ma[ch funds are being used for high priority repairs, upgrades and system improvements to existing bui(dings. These improvements include HVAC, and other structural improvemen[s are not related to capacity increase. 6. These aze anticipated bond funds. Voters have approved a bond for $149m, $45m of this bond is for non school conswction. As of 12/31/09, $127m has been sold. 7. Projected sale of surplus properties. These funds will be used to retire debt incurred for the acquisition of a replacement Educational Support Center. 8. These are projected fees based upon known residential developments in the District over the next six years. This tigure assumes $25,000 per month for the next six years. This figure has been adjusted to reflect the current economy. 9. T6ese fees represent the cost of purchasing and installing new portables. The portable expenditure in future yeazs may replace existing portables that are not functional. These may not increase capacity and aze not included in the capacity smiuna�y. NU'1'N:J: • 1. These fees aze aurently tieing held in a King County, Ciry of Federal Way and City of Kent impact fee account, and will be FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN SECTION 2- MAPS OF DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Federal Way Public Schools has twenty-one elementary schools (grades K-5), two schools with a K-8 grade configuration, seven middle school schools (grades 6-8), four high schools (grades 9-12) and three small secondary schools. The Federal Way Public Academy serves students in grades 6-10. The TAF Academy serves students in grades 6- 12 who reside in the Totem Middle School service area. The Career Academy at Truman High School serves students in grades 9-12. The Internet Academy serves grades K-12. The following maps show the service area boundaries for each school, by school type. (Career Academy at Truman High School, Merit School, Internet Academy and Federal Way Public Academy serve students from throughout the District). The identified boundaries are reviewed annually. Any change in grade configuration or adoption of programs that affect school populations may necessitate a change in school service areas. The Growth Management Act requires that a jurisdiction evaluate if the public facility infrastructure is in place to handle new housing developments. In the case of most public facilities, new development has its major impact on the facilities immediately adjacent to that development. School Districts are different. If the District does not have permanent facilities available, interim measures must be taken until new facilities can be built or until boundaries can be adjusted to match the population changes to the surrounding facilities. Adjusting boundaries requires careful consideration by the District and is not taken lightly. It is recognized that there is a potential impact on students who are required to change schools. Boundary adjustments impact the whole district, not just one school. It is important to realize that a single housing development does not require the construction of a complete school facility. School districts are required to project growth throughout the district and build or adjust boundaries based on growth throughout the district, not just around a single development. 11 55 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 20ll CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 12 56 ELEMEMTARY SCHQQL B�UNDARIES FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 13 57 MIDDLE SCH��L BQUNDARIES FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 14 58 HIGH SCHI�QL B�UNDARIES FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN SECTION 3 - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION Building Capacities - The Education Program Portable Locations Student Forecast — 2011 through 2017 Capacity Summaries King County Impact Fees - Single and Multi-Family Units 15 59 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Buildin� Canacities This Capital Facilities PIan establishes the District's "standard of service" in order to ascertain the District's current and future capacity. The Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes square footage guidelines for capacity, but these guidelines do not take into consideration the education program needs. In general, the District's current target class size provides that the average class size for a standard classroom for grades K through 2 should be 20 students. In grades 3-5 the target is 25 students. For grades 6 to 12 the target class size is 26 students. Classrooms for students with Individualized Education Program (Special Education) needs are calculated at 12 seats per classroom. Using the OSPI square footage calculation as a base line, the District has calculated a program capacity for all schools. A recent Study & Survey was the basis for changes to the OSPI building report. The following list clarifies the adjustments to the OSPI calculation. Music Rooms: Each elementary school requires a standard classroom for music instruction. All Day Kindergarten: Every elementary school operates at least one all day Kindergarten program. These all day Kindergarten program require additional capacity because the standard classroom is available for one all day session rather than two half day sessions. The District will operate 52 sections of all day Kindergarten in 2010/11. Special Education Resource Rooms: Each elementary and middle school requires the use of a standard classroom(s) for special education students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities. English as a Second Language Programs: Each elementary, middle school and high school requires the use of a standard classroom for students learning English as a second language. Middle School Computer Labs: Each middle school has computer labs. High School Career Development and Learning Center (Resource) Room: Each high school provides special education resource room and career development classrooms for students requiring instruction to address specific disabilities. 16 60 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITIES ELEMENTARY BUILDING MIDDLE SCHOOL BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACTTY PROGRAM CAPACITY Elementa Avera e 373 Notes: *Middle School Avera e 737 744 HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING PROGRAM CAPACITY *Hi h School Avera e 1 310 1 401 * Federal Way Public Academy, Career Academy at Truman High School, and Employment Transition Program are non-boundary schools. These schools are not used in the calculated averages. ** Technology Access Foundation Academy is housed entirely in portables on the Totem Middle School site. 17 61 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Portable Locations The Washington State Constitution requires the State to provide each student a basic education. It is not an efficient use of District resources to build a school with a capacity for 500 students due to lack of space for 25 students when enrollment fluctuates throughout the year and from year to year. Portables are used as temporary facilities or interim measures to house students when increasing population impacts a school attendance area. Portables may also be required to house students when new or changing programs require additional capacity. They also provide temporary housing for students until permanent facilities can be financed and constructed. When permanent facilities become available, the portable(s} is either used for other purposes such as storage or child care programs, or moved to another school �or an interim classroom. Some portables may not be fit to move due to age or physical condition. In these cases, the District may choose to buy new portables and surplus these unfit portables. It is the practice and philosophy of Federal Way Public Schools that portables are not acceptable as permanent facilities. The following page provides a list of the location of the portable facilities, used for temporary educational facilities by Federal Way Public Schools. 18 62 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN PORTABLE LOCATIONS PORTABLESLOCATED AT ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS NON INSTRUCTIONAL llNSTRUCCIONAL Adelaide 1 2 Bri adoon 1 Camelot 1 Ente rise 2 1 Green Gables 1 Lake Dolloff 1 1 Lake Grove 1 1 Lakeland 1 Mark Twain 2 1 Meredith Hill 1 2 Mirror Lake 4 Nautilus i Olympic View 2 Panther Lake Rainier View 1 2 Sherwood Forest 3 1 Silver Lake 1 3 Star Lake 3 1 Sunn crest Twin Lakes 3 Valhalla W ildwood 3 1 Woodmont 3 TOTAL 31 Zl PORTABLES LOCATED AT HIGH SCHOOLS homas Jefferson odd Beamer AF Academy OTAL NON INSTRUCT701VAL INSTRUCTIONAL 9 2 l 10 9 8 38 1 PORTABLESLOCATED AT SUPPORT FACILITIES MOT 1 TDC 5 TOTAL 6 HEAD START PORTABLES AT DISTRICT SITES Sherwood Forest 1 Total 1 19 63 PORTABLESLOCATED AT MIDDLE SCHOOLS FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 20I 1 CAPIT�4L FACILITIES PLAN Student Forecast Student enrollment projections are a basic component of budget development. Enrollment projections influence many of the financial estimates that go into budget preparation. The majority of staffing requirements are derived directly from the forecasted number of students. Allocations for instructional supplies and materials are also made on the basis of projected enrollment. Other expenditures and certain revenue projections are directly related to enrollment projections. Enrollment projections are completed annually in the Business Services Department. Projections must be detailed at various levels, district total, school-building totals, grade level and program level to include vocational and special education students. The basis of projections has been cohort survival analysis. Cohort survival is the analysis of a group that has a common statistical value (grade level) as it progresses through time. In a stable population the cohort would be 1.00 for all grades. This analysis uses historical information to develop averages and project the averages forward. This method does not trace individual students; it is concerned with aggregate numbers in each grade level. The district has used this method with varying years of history and weighted factors to study several projections. Because transfers in and out of the school system are common, student migration is factored into the analysis as it increases or decreases survival rates. Entry grades (kindergarten) are a unique problem in cohort analysis. The district collects information on birth rates within the district's census tracts, and treats these statistics as a cohort for kindergarten enrollment in the appropriate years. The Federal Way School District is using various statistical methods for projecting student enrollments. The resultant forecasted enrollments are evaluated below. The first method is a statistical cohort analysis that produces ten distinct forecasts. These are forecast of enrollment for one year. The projections vary depending on the number of years of historical information and how they are weighted. A second method is a projection using an enrollment projection soflware package that allows the user to project independently at school or grade level and to aggregate these projections for the district level. The Enrollment Master software provides statistical methods including trend line, standard grade progression (cohort) and combinations of these methods. This software produces a five-year projection of school enrollment. In December 2006, the District contracted a demographer to develop projections for the Federal Way School District. The report was comptete in January 2007. The model used to forecast next year's enrollment uses cohort survival rates to measure grade to grade growth, assumes market share losses to private schools (consistent with county-wide average), assumes growth from new housing or losses due to net losses from migration. This forecast was provided as a range of three projections. The long-range forecast provided with this report used a model with cohort survival rates and growth rates based on projected changes in the 5-19 age group for King County. Most of the methods used for long range enrollment reporting assume that enrollment is a constant percent of 20 64 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN something else (e.g. population) or that enrollment will mirror some projected trend for the school-age population over time. The report included 5 different calculations to provide a range of possible projections for the District to the year 2017. This model produces a projection that is between 23,000 and 24,000 when apptied to the low, medium and high range modes. This provides a reasonable range for long-range planning and is consistent with estimates from various models. Long-range projections that establish the need for facilities are a modification of the cohort survival method. The cohort method of analysis becomes less reliable the farther out the projections are made. The Federal Way School District long-range projections are studied annually. The study includes information from the jurisdictional demographers as they project future housing and population in the region. The long-range projections used by Federal Way Public Schools reflect a similar age trend in student populations as the projections published by the Office of Financial Management for the State of Washington. Near term projections assume some growth from new housing, which is offset by current local economic conditions. Current economic conditions do appear to be affecting enrollment. This is reflected in the District's projections. The District tracks new development from five permitting jurisdictions. Long range planning assumes a student yield from proposed new housing consistent with historical growth patterns. Growth Management requires jurisdictions to plan for a minimum of twenty years. The Federal Way School District is a partner in this planning with the various jurisdictions comprising the school district geography. These projections create a vision of the school district community in the future. 21 65 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Full Time Equivalent Enrollment History and Projections Simplified FTE (K Headcount =.5 FTE; Middle School FTE=.99 Headcount; High School FTE _.935Headcount) � Total K -12 I Per 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2004-OS 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 B2010-11 P2017-12 P2012-13 P2013-14 P2014-1 S P2015-16 P2016-17 � New ConfiQm 9,164 5,473 6,515 9,105 5,309 6,770 9,022 5,261 6,754 8,912 5,167 6,637 8,865 5,155 6,456 8,738 5,119 6,594 i 8, 786 5,105 6, 644 8,841 5,070 6,592 8,932 5,022 6,552 9,036 4,997 6,562 9,121 5,�40 6,526 9,197 5,115 6,481 9,302 5,160 6,446 Elementary K-S Middle School 6-8 High School9-l2 21,152 21,184 0.2% 21,037 -0.7% 20,716 -1.5% 20,476 -1.2% 20,451 -0.1% 20,535 0.4% 20,503 -0.2% 20,506 0.0% 20,595 0.4% 20,687 0.4% 20,793 0.5% 20,908 0.6% Enroliment History and Six Year Forecast 22,000 21,000 20,000 c � 0 � 19,000 A m x a 18,000 0 Y 1.1 � 17,000 16,000 15,000 ��°� a � ° s �� O� 0 O, � FTE 22 66 .o .o .o -o -o -o a oo' � � �� ao � � � O � C� t� D S O� �CP �i9 �O � �� SchoolYear FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 20ll CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Capacitv Summaries All Grades, Elementary, Middle School, and High Schools The Capacity Summaries combine Building Capacity information and the Student Forecast information. The result demonstrates the requirements for new or remodeled facilities and why there is a need for the District to use temporary facilities or interim measures. The information is organized in spreadsheet format, with a page summarizing the entire District, and then evaluating capacity vs. number of students at elementary, middle school, and high school levels individually. The notes at the bottom of each spreadsheet provide information about what facilities are in place each year. 23 67 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHQOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CAPACITY SUMMARY - ALL GRADES Budget - - Projected - - Calendar Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 CAPACITY School Year 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/1� BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOiJNT CAPACITY 19,466 19,466 19,566 19,566 19,566 19,566 19,566 Add or subtract changes to capacity Increase Capacity - Lakeland and Sunnycrest Headcount ENROLLMENT SURPLUS OR RELOCATABLE CAPACITY Current Portable Capacity Deduct Portable Capacity Add New Portable Capacity 100 19,466 19,566 19,566 19,566 19,566 19,566 19,566 2,300 2,300 2,275 2,275 2,275 2,275 2,275 ��) ��5} _ 50 , 24 68 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CAPACITY SUMMARY - ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS Budget - - Projected - - Calendar Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 CAPACITY School Year 2010/11 2011/12 2012l13 2013/14 2014/15 BUILDING PROGRAM HEAD COiJNT CAPACITY 8,575 8,575 8,675 8,675 8,675 1. Increase Capacity Lakeland and Sunnycrest Adiusted Pro�ram Headcount 1Q0 8,575 8,675 8,675 8,675 8,675 ENROLLMENT RELOCATAB C APACITY 3. Current Portable Capacity I Subtract vortables from Lakeland & SURPLUS OR (UNHOUSED) PROGRAM AND RELOCATABLE 2016 2017 )15/16 2016/17 8,675 8,675 675 8,675 775 725 700 700 700 I 700 � 700 [5(11 (25� NOTES: 1. Increase Capacity at Lakeland, and Sunnycrest 2. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. 3. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables will determine feasibility for continued instructional use. 25 69 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CAPACITY SUMMARY - MIDDLE SCHOOLS Budget - - Projected - - Calendar Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 CAPACITY School Year 2010/12 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2015/16 BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOLJNT CAPACITY 5,365 5,365 5,365 5,365 5,365 5,365 5,365 Add or subtract changes in capacity Adiusted Program Headcount Capacitv 5.365 5,365 5,365 5,365 5,365 5,365 5,365 ENROLLMENT SURPLUS OR NOTES: i. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. 2. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables will determine feasibiliTy for continued instructional use. 26 70 RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 2. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN CAPA BUILDING PROGRAM HEADCOUNT CAPACITY FTE CAt�ACITY '' , Add or subtract changes in capacity � Adjusted Program Headcount Capa Adjusteci,prograt�i �'T'E Capacity , ENROLLMENT Basic FTE Enrollment 1. Internet Academy (AAFTE) �asic �d. withi��t Ic�tern�t Acadeiny SURPLUS OR (UNH01 nuugci - - n��cc�cu - - Calendar Year 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 School Year 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 5,526 5,526 5,526 5,526 5,526 5,526 5,526 5,526 5,526 5,526 5,526 5,526 5,526 5,526 NOTES: 1. Internet Academy students are included in projections but do not require full time use of school facilities. 2. Relocatable Capacity is based on the number of portables available and other administrative techniques which can be used to temporarily house students until permanent facilities are available. This is a calculated number only. The actual number of portables that will be used will be based on actual student population needs. The District may begin to pull portables from the instructional inventory. Age and condition of the portables will determine feasibility for continued instructional use. 3. Capacity for unhoused students will be accommodated with traveling teachers and no planning time in some classrooms. 27 71 RELOCATABLE CAPACITY 2. FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES P LAN Kin� Countv the City of Federal Wav and the Cit�of Kent Impact Fee Calculations Single and Multi-Family Residences Each jurisdiction that imposes school impact fees requires that developers pay these fees to help cover a share of the impact of new housing developments on school facilities. To determine an equitable fee throughout unincarporated King County, a formula was established. This formula can be found in King County Code 21A and was substantially adopted by the City of Federal Way and Kent. The formula requires the District to establish a"Student Generation Factor" which estimates how many students will be added to a school district by each new single or multi-family unit and to gather some standard construction costs, which are unique to that district. - STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR ANALYSIS Federal Way Public Schools student generation factor was determined separately for single-family units and multi-family units. The factors used in the 2011 Capital Facilities Plan were derived using actual generation factors from single-family units that were constructed in the last five (5) years. - IMPACT FEE CALCULATION Following the calculations for the student generation factor is a copy of the Impact Fee Calculation for single family and multi-family units based on King County Code 21A and the Growth Management Act. ➢ Temporary Facility Cost is the average cost of a portable purchased within the last 12 months. Plan Year 2011 Plan Year 2010 Single Family Units I $4,014 Multi-Familv Units $2,172 $3, 832 $2,114 28 72 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN STUDENT GENERATION NEW CONSTRUCTION IN PRIOR 5 YEARS Single Family Student Generation Number of Number of Number of Number of Number of Elementary Middle School High School Total Single Family Multi-Family Elementary Middle School High School Student Student Student Student DEVELOPMENT Dwellin s Dwellin s Students Students Students Factor Factor Factor Factor 10 Creekside Lane 17 0 6 2 3 0.3529 0.1176 0.1765 0.6470 (10) Grande Vista 28 0 10 8 6 0.3571 0.2857 0.2143 0.8571 (09) Lakota Crest 42 0 9 8 6 0.2143 0.1905 0.1429 0.5477 (09) Tuscan 22 0 20 6 4 0.9091 0.2727 0.1818 1.3636 08) Northlake Rid e IV 90 0 30 12 20 0.3333 0.1333 0.2222 0.6888 (OS Collin tree Park 42 0 16 4 6 0.3810 0.0952 0.1429 0.6191 07) Colella Estates 84 0 40 11 25 0.4762 0.1310 0.2976 0.9048 (07) Woodbrook 172 0 38 27 42 0.2209 0.1570 0.2442 0.6221 (06) Devonshire 29 0 11 10 13 0.3793 0.3448 0.4483 1.1724 (06) Orchid Lane 50 0 22 10 11 0.4400 0.2000 0.2200 0.8600 Total 576 0 202 98 136 Student Generation* 6.3507 0.1701 0.2361 OJ569 � w ' Student Generation rate is based on totals. 29 Multi-Family Student Generation FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN IMPACT FEE School Site Acquisition Cost: Facility Elementary Middle School High School School Construction Cost: % Perm Fac./ Total S Ft Elementary 95.2` ..,..,_..___......__._........_._.... Middle School ....____.._..__. ...............�_._. High School Temporary Facility Cost: % Temp Fac. Total S Ft Elementary _..........�..._........_�_......_..._._ Middle School 19� ........._.__._._.___.._.._.......... High School State Matching Credit Calculation: Area Cost Allowance/S Ft Elementary $180.17 ...__..---_._.._ .............................. Middle School $180.17 ...._....�._........_.._..,.._.�..,.�..._...., High School $180.17 Tax Payment Credit Calculation Average Assessed Value (March 2010) Capital Bond Interest Rate (March 2010) Net Present Value of Average Dwelling Years Amortized Property Taac Levy Rate Present Value of Revenue Stream Cost / Acre Facility Cost >9,100,( Facility Cost $183,5 Sq. Ft. Student Facility Facility �a aci 200 Facility Size 25 State Match 61.86% Student Student Factor Factor SFR MFR 03507 0.1650 ~ � .. ��0.1701 � 0.0530 ......_._....__ ............ ..._._ 0.2361 0.0640 TOTAL Student Student Factor Factor SFR MFR 0.3507 0.1650 _.._.._.........._.._..._.. ...._.._.._......____....._..� 0.1701 0.0530 _._._._..__.....___..._. ._._______.....�...._._..�_. 0.2361 0.0640 TOTAL Student Student Factor Factor SFR MFR 0.3507 0.1650 ...._...__........_....._ _......�.__..._.._._._.__._. �� 0.1701 � ^m. 0.0530 � 0.2361 M 0.0640 TOTAL Student Student Factor Factor SFR MFR 0.3507 0.1650 ....__....._. _ ._.._.__ � ...._ 0.0530 ___ ............................... ._.......__.�..___........_... 0.2361 0.0640 Total Single Family Multi-Family Residences Residences Mitigation Fee Summary Site Acquisition Cost $ - $ - Permanent Facility Cost $ 15,199 $ 7,151 Temporary Facility Cost $ 25 $ g State Match Credit $ (3,518) $ (1,655) Tax Payment Credit $ (3,678) $ (1,160) Sub-Total $ 8,028 � 4,343 50% Local Share $ 4,014 $ 2,172 Im act Fee $ 4,014 $ 2,172 30 74 Costl SFR $0 $0 $0 $0 Cosb MFR $0 $0 $0 $0 Cost/ CosU SFR MFR $15,199 $7,151 $0 $0 $0 $0 $15,199 57,151 Cost/ Cost/ SFR MFR $25 $S $25 $8 Cost/ Cost1 SFR MFR $3,518 $1,655 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,518 $1,655 SFR MFR FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN SECTION 4 SUMMARY OF CHANGES FROM THE 2010 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN The 2011 Capital Facilities Plan is an updated document, based on the 2010 Capital Facilities Plan. The changes between the 2010 Plan and the 2011 Plan are listed below. SECTION I- THE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN SIX-YEAR FINANCE PLAN The Six Year Finance Plan has been rolled forward to reflect 2011/2017 SECTION III - SUPPORT DOCUMENTATION CAPACITY Elementary capacity includes space for All Day Kindergarten programs at every elementary school. Changes to the Building Program Capacities calculation are found on page 17. PORTABLES The list of portables reflects the movement of portables between facilities or new portables purchased. Portable Locations can be found on page 19. STUDENT FORECAST The Student Forecast now covers 2011 through 2017 Enrollment history and projections are found on page 22. CAPACITY SUMMARY The changes in the Capacity Summary are a reflection of the changes in the capacities and student forecast. New schools and increased capacity at current buildings are shown as increases to capacity. Capacity Summaries are found on pages 24-27. IMPACT FEE CALCULATION - HING COUNTY CODE 21A The Impact Fee Calculations have changed due to changes in several factors. The adjustment made in the Impact Fee Calculation, causing a change in the Impact Fee between the 2010 Capital Facilities Plan and the 2011 Capital Facilities Plan can be found on page 32 and 33. 31 75 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES FROM 2010 TO 2011 STUDENT GENERATION FACTORS Student Generation factors are based on rates for new developments constructed over a period of not more than five years prior to the date of the fee calculation. The changes in student Generation factors between the 2010 Capital Facilities Plan and the 2011 Capital Facilities Plan are due to developments that were deleted or added based upon the age of the developments and the year placed in the survey. The Student Generation worksheet is found on page 29. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION COSTS The anticipated cost for replacing Lakeland, Panther Lake, Sunnycrest and Valhalla is $70, 000, 000. The replacement will add 50 new seats to the school capacity at each building. The total capacity at these four elementary schools is currently 1505. Adding 200 additional seats will increase the capacity by 13%. Total Cost .13 X $70,000,000 = �9,100,000 The District will use the above formula created as a base from the 2008 Capital Facilities Plan for the 2011 Capital Facilities Plan. The capacity of the four elementary schools may vary from year to year as programs are added or changed and construction cost may increase over time. Far instance, for each new all day Kindergarten program, the building capacity will effectively be reduced by 20 headcount and the Board authorized an increase in construction cost of $lm for Valhalla. These changes would increase the construction cost. The District is using the base formula established in the 2008 plan in the Impact Fee calculation. 32 76 FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS 2011 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN IMPACT FEE CALCULATION CHANGES FROM ZO10 TO 2011 IMPACT FEE Item From/To Comment Percent of Permanent Facilities 95.62% to 95.71 % Report #3 OSPI Percent Temporary Facilities Average Cost of Portable Classroom Area Cost Allowance State Match Average Assessed Value Capital Bond Interest Rate Property Tax Levy Rate Single Family Student Yield Elementary Middle School High School Multi-Family Student Yield Elementary Middle School High School 4.38% to 4.29% $193,607 to $183,996 Updated portable inventory Updated average of portables purchased and placed in 2009 Change effective July 1, 2010 $168.79 to $180.17 61.09% to 61.86% SFR — $326,409 to $267,668 MFR — $86,497 to $84,429 4.96% to 4.33% Change effective July 2009 Per Puget Sound Educational Service District (ESD 121) Market Rate $1.48 to $1.72 .3317 to .3507 .1653 to .1701 .2224 to .2361 .1520 to .165 .0520 to .053 .0590 to .064 King County Treasury Division Updated Housing Inventory Updated Housing Inventory 33 77 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: NOVEMBER 16, 2010 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL MEETING DATE: November 1, 2010 SUBJECI': PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO COMMUNITY BUSINESS (BC) ZONING, DESIGN GUIDELINES, & LANDSCAPING POLICY QUESTION: Should the city: (1) Adopt proposed FWRC 19.220.050 pertaining to bulk and dimension of Multi- Unit housing in the BC zone as analyzed in the staff report and modified by the Planning Commission; and (2) Adopt proposed FWRC 19.220.080 pertaining to bulk and dimension of Senior Citizen-Special Needs housing as analyzed in the staff report and modified by the Planning Commission; and (3) Adopt FWRC 19.125.040(28) pertaining to perimeter landscaping requirements as analyzed in the staff report; and (4) Amend FWRC 19.115.090(n) pertaining to community design guidelines as analyzed in the staff report? COMMITTEE Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC) CATEGORY: ❑ Consent � Ordinance ❑ City Council Business STAFF REPORT BY: David ❑ Resolution Associate Planner � ■ ITEM #: Public Hearing Other DEP't': Community Development Services Attachments: (1) Draft minutes of the October 20, 2010, Planning Commission meeting; (2) Planning Commission staff report with E�ibits A-F; (3) Draft adoption ordinance; (4) Amended proposed zoning charts FWRC 19.220.050 and FWRC 19.220.080 per Planning Commission recommendation; (5) Additional explanatory height graphics. 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; 3) do not adopt the proposed policy; or (4) refer the proposal back to the Planning Commission for further proceedings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Option 1 CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: (vh ��I�� DIItECTOR APPROVAL: _�_ • Committee Council Committee Council COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION I move to forward the proposed ordinance to First Reading on Nov. 16, 2010. Dini Duclos, Chair Jim Ferrell, Member Jack Dovey, Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION(S): 1 READING OF ORDINANCE (DATE) I move to forward the ordinance to a second reading for enactment on the November 16, 2010 consent agenda. 2 READING OF ORDINANCE (CONSENT AGENDA DATE): `7 move approval o f " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) _ COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL # ❑ DENIED 1sT reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE # REVISED — 08/12/2010 RESOLUTION # 78 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY PLANNING COMMISSION September 29, 2010 City Hall 7:00 .m. Council Chambers MEETING MINUTES Commissioners present: Merle Pfeifer, Hope Elder, Lawson Bronson, and Sarady Long. Staff present: Planning Manager Isaac Conlen, Principal Planner Margaret Clark, Associate Planner David Lee, Assistant City Attorney Peter Beckwith, and Administrative Assistant Darlene LeMaster. CALL TO ORDER Chair Pfeifer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. ROLL Cai.L Commissioners Pfeifer, Elder, Bronson and Long present. excused. Con�.missioners Medhurst, APPROVAL OF MINUTES The minutes of August 25, 2010 and September 29, 2010 were approveci as written. AUDIENCE COMMENT None O'Neil and Carlson ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Planning Manager Conlen reported that Director of Cotnmunity Development Services Fewins has announced his retirement at the end o� �is year. Cangratulations and best wished to Greg Fewins who has provided the City with twenty years of ser�ic�. Planning Manager Conlen noted that there wi�l be ,a public hearing on the Urban Chicken/Rabbit Code Amendment on Vifedrtesday, �ov. 3, 2d310. PUBLIC HEARIlVG — BC Code Ame,ndment pertaining to Multi-Family and Senior Housing Chair Pfeifer expIained the guidelines for the Public Hearing. Associate Planner David I.ee reviewed the background and reasons for the code amendment and summarized the proposed code amendmer�ts, There was one public comment. Todd Lawson — Mr. Lawson spoke representing his client, a commercial property owner in Federal Way. Mr. Lawson spoke in favor and asked the Planning Commission to consider the proposed code amendments. Mr. Lawson stated that these code amendments would have many benefits to developers and the community (increase in density, mixed use, parking, building height, etc.). Chair Pfeifer asked if there were any questions/concerns from the commissioners. Vice-Chair Elder asked Mr. Lawson if he had any other concerns that the Planning Commission has not yet addressed. Mr. Lawson responded that as a developer, he always hopes for more flexibility. One suggestion, though, was to make the height limit for senior housing and multi-family the same. Vice — Chair Elder thanked Mr. Lawson for being present and sharing his input. 79 Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 October 20, 2010 In reference to the cross-sections depiction for proposed heights, Commissioner Bronson asked what the required setbacks in single-family residential zones are. Mr. Lee responded that there is a five foot minimum required side setback in single-family residential. Commissioner Bronson was concerned of the possibility of a home having only a five foot setback next to a zero lot line mixed use building. Principal Planner Clark commented that there should have been an additional cross-section depiction for single-family as well. To clarify, there is a five foot setback for single-family residential and a 20 foot setback for development in the BC zones (mixed use) for a minimum of 25 feet between the two structures. Also, height limit within BC zone is limited to 30 feet for the portion of the building that is located within 20 feet of the single-family residential zone. In the multi-family residential zone, there is a five foot minimum setback. In the BC zone that abuts a multi-family residential zone, there is zero setback, therefore the distance between the structures could be a close as five feet. Planning Manager Conlen asked the Commission's input on imposing a sethack on senior citizen/special needs housing of five feet. The current code is twenty feet, but the way the a�nertdment is written, if passed, would impose a five foot setback. Would the Commission recommend keep�hg the se�back for senior citizen/special needs housing to 20 feet? The current setback for multi-family next ta single farnily residential will remain at 20 feet. Commissioner Long asked for clarification that staff was suggesting that the setback for both multi- family and seniar citizen/special needs housing next to sing�e=family residential be 20 f��t. Planning Manger Conlen stated that is what is asking. Chair Pfeifer spoke in favor of a five foot setback between senior citizen/special needs housing and single- family residential and commented that the area in question (along the Pac Hwy S corridor) needs every foot available for development. Five feet is feasible to maintain the building's exterior. Planning Manager Conlen added that other building/land use codes and fire codes are still in effect. �f there is an issue with another code, the developer may have to use a greater setback. Commissictner Long concur��c�. Commissioner Bronson asked why there is a five foot setback for setiior Eitizen and special needs housing, why isn't there also a five foot setbacfc for other types of c.onstruction. Associate Planner Lee responded that a building within the BC zone tl�at has mut�i-family residences above is contingent on the uses below to determine how much of a setback is "required. Commissioner Bronson asked for clarification on what is trying to be accomplished with this code amendment.' Principal Planner Clark noted that many of the lots within the BC zone are only 100 feet wide. `�'�te code a�endment will make these lots more developable by reducing the existing setback requiretnents. Seniar housing is a stand alone building while mixed use has one use on the bottom (ie. retail) with mult�-family above. Commissioner Long inquired if mixed use buildings may create more noise tT�an senior housing. WouId ihis explain the greater setback for mixed use as compared to senior housing? Pr�cipal Planner said that is possble and wanted to clarify that the setback for mixed use from single-family residential would be 20 feet, but the setback from other multi-family residential would be zero. The amendment is continuing to pr�tect single-family residential. Chair Pfeifer asked far �ie reason �hat mixed use height limit was 65 feet while senior housing only 55 feet. Associate Planner Lee explained that the height allowed for housing is the same. The difference is because the mixed use buildings would �eed an allotted height for retail on the bottom. Mr. Lawson re-approached the Commission and stated that he was also interested in the height differences. As a developer, he may be interested in creating a building where senior housing and multi family exist in one building and suggested the Commission look at a 65 foot height allowance for both mixed use and senior housing. Or, could mixed use have retail on the bottom with senior housing above. 65 feet would adlow for more flexibility for development. Commissioner Long asked Mr. Lawson for his feedback on the proposed parking requirements. Mr. Lawson responded that he feels the City is proposing the minimum and personally, he would probably provide more. Another benefit of the proposed code is that there would be additional developable land to add additional parking and parking would now be clearly allowed at the ground level of a mixed use building. 80 Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 October 20, 2010 Commissioner Long moved approval of the proposed amendments to FWRC zoning charts 19.220.050 "Multi- Unit Housing", FWRC 19.220.080"Senior Citizen/Special Needs Housing", and FWRC 19.115.090(n), Community Design Guidelines, and adopt FWRC 19.125.040(28) "General Landscaping Requirements — All Zones" as amended to increase the allowable height for senior citizen/special needs housing to 65 feet and modify the setback requirements so that both mixed-use and senior citizen/special needs housing requires a minimum five foot setback next to single-family residential. Vice-Chair Elder seconded. Motion carried, 4-0. Chair Pfeifer closed the public hearing. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS/PUBLIC COMMENT None ADJOURN The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m. 81 r.•�aiA.,.,;..� �.,mm��;�.a�m mnn,.�r��o c��mmp.. i a�n_i n d� � CITY OF ': �� STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AMENDMENT TO FEDERAL WAYREVISED CODE TO COMMUNTTY BUSINESS (BC� ZOIVING CxaxTS 19.220.050 & 19.220.080, FWRC 19.125.040(28) "GENERAL LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS — ALL ZONES" Artn FWRC 19.115 A9O(N� "COMMUNITY DESIGN GUIDELINES." File No: 10-103393-QO-SE / 10-103538-00-UP Public Hearing on October 20, 2010 j, REASON FOR AMENDMENTS In working with developers, architects, and various other entities in the development community, staff has identified several changes that can be made to the e�tisting Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) to help encourage development on vacant or redevelopable tand. The proposed amendments also seek to streamline the development process by setting clear zoning requirements. The proposal is to amend FWRC Zoning charts 19.220.050 "Multi-Unit Housing," 19.220A80 "Senior Citizen I Special Needs Housing," FWRC 19.125.040, and FWRC 19.115.090(n) "Community Design Guidelines." Code amendments are proposed to allow increased heights of up to 65' outright, allow residential and parking uses on the ground floor, specify parking requirements, reduce front yard setbacks, remove density caps, reduce open space requirements, allow primary structures within landscaping yards when no yards are required per zoning chart, and reduce the applicability of pitched-roof requirements. The Planning Commission is being asked to review the proposed changes to the zoning code attached as Exhibits A through D, and forward a recommendation to the City Council. II . BACKGROUND The Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) describes the Community Business (BC) zoning designation as two major retail-commercial areas along the Pacific Hwy comdor inctuding small pockets between South 272 Street and South 312�' Street, as well as a pocket of area between South 324�' Street and approximately South 339�' Street. These areas are characterized by a wide range of uses that are centered generally around retail and service indusiries. Many of the single- story buildings present an excellent opportunity for redevelopment. Based on a recent GIS estimate, there are approximately 72.4 acres of vacant land, and 9I .69 acres of redevelopable land within the BC zoned sections of the city. III SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS A. Tables I and II compare the e�cisting and proposed code language related to bulk and dimension. 82 Table I Multi-unit Housing 19.220.050 2 Floor Uses Front Height Limit Parking Open Space Yard Setback Existing No multi-unit Same as 55' — 65' above Determined on a 300 square housing on l those ABE based on ease-by-case feet per floor. regulations administrative basis. (Parking dwelling for ground approval criteria. Study) unit. floor use Building height may not exceed 30 ft. above ABE when located between 20 ft. and 40 ft_ from a single- family residential zone, and may not exceed 40 ft. above ABE when located between 40 ft. and I00 ft. from such zone; and height over 35 ft. shall be set back from all other zones by one ft. for each one ft. of hei t over 3 S ft. Proposed Multi-unit No Change 65' a�ove ABE w/ 1.2 stalls for 2 150 square �' housir�g on 1�` no criteria. bedroom units, feet per floor with Building height 1.8 parking dwetling conditions. may not exceed 30 stalls per 3 unit. Parking in ft. above ABE for bedrooms units conjunction the portion of the or more (in with other uses buitding located addition to aIlowed on first within 20 ft. of a ground floor use floor. residential zone. parking). Or arkin study. 83 Planning Commission StatTReport K:120i 0 Code AmendmentslBC Zone funendmentslPtanning CommissionlStaff Report For PC FINAL_doc Page Z Table II Senior Citizen/Special Needs Housing in BC Zones (FWRC 19.220.080) 19.220.080 1 Floor Front Yard Height Limit Parking Open Space Uses Setback Egisting No restriction 20' 35' above ABE. Case by case Case-by- 55' above ABE with (Parking case basis criteria based Study) administrative approval. Building height may not exceed 30 ft. above ABE when located between 20 ft. and 40 ft. from a single family residential zone, and may not exceed 40 ft. above ABE when located between 40 ft. and 100 ft. from such zone. Proposed No change 0' S5' above ABE 4.5 parking No change outright. Building spaces per height may not dwelling unit exceed 30 ft. for (Parking Study portion af the Optional) building located within 20 ft. of a residential zone B. GENERAL LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS — ALL ZONES CurrentIy, Type III landscaping five feet in width is required along all perimeter lot lines including the front yard setback under FWRC 19_125.060 in the BC zone. Cunently an inconsistency exists where most commercial developments within the BC zone are granted a zero front yard setback, but can not build up to the property line due to this regulation. Furthermore, if the senior housing front yard setback reduction is adopted, it would further add to this inconsistency within code. Therefore, it is recommended to add FVVRC 19.125A40(28) which reads "Landscapin� is not re�uired along.,perimeter lot lines abutting ri t of wa� where no required vards a�plv pursaant to Division VI `Zonin� Re�ulations'." 84 Planning Commission Staff Report K 1?O70 Code Amendments\BC Zone Amendments�Pfannine Commission\SWffReport For PC FINAl..doc Pa€e'' C. COMMUNITY DESIGN GUIDELINES P�egardless of th� z�re, structc�:.s are also unde: t�e gurview of t�'�e �ommunit- Jesi� Guidelines as set forth by the FWRC, more specifically FWRC 19.115.090(n). FWRC 19.115.090(n) requires that aIl new buildings, including accessory buildings such as carports and garages, shall appeaz to have a roof pitch ranging from at least 4:12 to a maximum of 12:12. It is often chaltenging for structures over 30' to accommodate such a design requirement due to roof areas generally being used for elevator housing, ventiIation equipment, and various other development related machinery. Therefore, it is recommended to have FWRC 19.115.090(n) read: "All new buildings, including accessory buildings such as carports and garages in PO and BN zones onlv, shall appear to have a roof pitch ranging from at least 4:12 to a maximum of 12:12." limiting the pitched roof requirements ta the applicable developments within the PO (Professional Office) and BN (Neighborhood Business) zones, which have lower allowed height limits. A variety of architectural methods are avaiiahle to address aesthetics. IV. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF CODE AMENDMENTS The proposal is to amend the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC), Chapter 19.220.080, 19.220.050, and 19.115.090(n) by adopting each of the following amendments: 1. Under FWRC 19.220.050 "Multi-unit housing": a. Change "Height of Structure" to 65' outright. i. Reasoning: Applicants may aiready achieve the 65' above ABE height through an administrative review and a set of criteria. Allowing for an outiight height of 65' above ABE affords developers surety that the height will be atlowed and they can then design around a solid height. b. Require 12 — I.8 parking spaces per dwelling unit. i. Reasoning: A parking requirement survey of local jurisdictions revealed that a parking space per dweiling-type ratio was used for mixed-use residential units. This will provide predictability and help developers ptan for a base number of paxking stalls needed without having to supply a parking study as a pre-requisite. Applicants still have the option of submitting a pazking study if it is believed that less parking stalls aze appropriate. c. Change Note 1 to read "A11 non-residential gcound floor spaces must have minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 13 ft. and a minimum depth of 15 ft." - i. Reasoning: Preserves the original language of one of the previous criteria used to aIlow for increased height to 65'above ABE. This will preserve the original intent to �cld architectural aesthetics to this type of development. d. Change Note 2 to read "Building height may riot exceed 30 ft. above ABE for the portions of the building located within 20 ft. of a residential zone:' i. Reasoning: Tfie original buitding height restrictions placed on mixed-use residentiai deveIopments were too restrictive due to the relatively thin shaped lots that have been deemed redevelopable or vacant, and also did not protect multi-family (RI�Ij zones. Current code requirements limit the height in a �'estrietive stair-step manner. Of thc totai parcels within the 85 Planning Commission Staff Report K:\2010 Code AmendmertslBC Zone AmendmentslPlanning CommissionlStaffReport For PC FINAL.doc Page 4 BC zone, 29 parcels are within 20 feet of a single family residential zone, 29 parcels within 40 feet, and 52 parcels within 140 feet (Exhibit E). Broadeaing tha setbaek/height resuictions to all resideniial zones protects both adjacent single family and multi-family zones, and also allows for possible development on geographically constrained sites. e. Change Note 3 to read "Roof lines are designed to avoid a predominantly flat and featureless appearance through variations in roof height, forms, angles, and materials: ' i. Reasoning: Preserves the original language of the previous criteria used to allow for increased height to 65' above ABE. f. Change Note 4 to read "Multi-unit housing and accessory residential uses may be located on the ground floor of a structure only as follows: (a) ground level space that spans at least 60 percent of the length of the principal commercial fa�ade, as determined by the director, is occupied with one or more other use(s) allowed in this zone; and (b) ground level spaee that spans at least 40 percent of the length of all other street-facing facades is occupied with one or more other use(s) allowed in this zone. Parking in conjunction with other uses allowed in this zone may also be located on the ground floor of the structure if non-visible from the right-of-way or public areas." i. Reasoning: Allows for more options on the ground floor while mainta.ining the intermingling of commercial uses on the ground floor. This will also allow housing units on street frontages that are not conducive to retaiUcommercial uses. Additionally, allowing parking on the ground floor in a visually unobtrusive area may help alleviate parking lot landscaping requirements, avoid costiy underground parking, and provide easier access to future tenants of both commercial and residential units. g. Strike Note 4 which reads "The subject property must contain at Ieast one acre fo.r every 22 dwelling units:' i. Reasoning: Market forces, physical 1and constraints, and development requirements will adequately and organically determine density limits. Devetopments will still be required ta receive certificates of water/sewer availability and must complete a traffic concurrency analysis to determine cagacity and mitigation. h. Change Note 5 to read "1.2 parking stalls per dwelling unit for units of up to 2 bedrooms. 1.8 parking stalls for dwellings units of 3 bedrooms or more. D�veliing unit parking stalis are in addition to required parking for alI non-residential ground floor uses. Alternatively, applicant may choose to submit a parking study in accordance to FWRC � 9.130.080(2)." i. Reasoning: A parking requirement survey of Iocal jurisdictions revealed that a garking space per dwelling-type ratio was used for mixed-use residentiat units. This vviIl help deveIopers plan for a base number of parking stalls needed without having ta supply a parking study as a pre- requisite. The section also clarifies that the applicant is still entitled to submit a parking study to reduce the amount of parking required, as appropriate. 86 Planning Commission StaffRepott K.'�20t0 Code Amendments\BC Zone Amendments�Plannine Commission\StaffReport For PC FTNAL_doc Paee 5 i. Change Note 7 to read "The subject property must contain at least 150 square feet per dwelling unit of common recreational open space usable for many activities, and r,�ay include �rivate s�aces such as yards, pa�ios, and balconies, as welt as common areas such as playgrounds, recreation rooms, rooftop terraces, pools, active lobbies, atriums, or any other areas the director deems appropriate:' i. Reasoning: The currently required 300 square feet of open space is prohibitive in terms of the amount of land required to fulfili this requirement. Additionally, allowing for broader uses to be considered as open spaces (proximity to parks, trails, outdoor uses, etc;) may help applicants to achieve open space requirements. 2. Uuder FWRC 19.220.080 "Senior citizen — Special needs housing": a. Reduce front yazd setback to 0' i. Reasoning: Mixed use residential (FWRC 19.220A50) allows for 0' setback, as do most commercial uses. Zero front yard setbacks, when accompanied by quality architectural design are in keepirtg with a more urban aesthetic for the city's commercial & mixed-use areas. b. Change "Height of Structure" to 55' above ABE. i. Reasoning: Applicants may already achieve the 55' above ABE height through an administrative review and a set of criteria. Allowing for an outright height of 55' above ABE affords developers surety that the height will be allowed and can design around a solid height. c. Ghange Note 2 to read "Building height may not exceed 30 ft. above ABE for those portions of the building Iocated within 20 ft. of a residential zone." i. Reasoning: The original bui�ding height restrictions placed on senior and special needs housing deyelop�nents were too restrictive due to the relatively thin shaped Iots that may be redeveloped or vacant, and also did not protect multi-family (RM) zones. Current code language Iimits heights of a development in a restrictive stair-step manner. Of the total parcels within the BC zone, 29 pazcels aze within 20 feet of a single family residential zone, 29 pazcels within 40 feet, and 52 parcels within 100 feet (Exhibit E). Broadening the setback/height restrictions to att residential zones protects both adjacent single family and mutti-family zones, and aiso aIlows for possible development on geographically constrained sites. d. Require 0.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit. i. Reasoning: A parking requirement survey of local jurisdictions revealed that an average of 0.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit were required for this type of deyelopment. Tliis will help devetopers plan for a base number of parking stalls needed without having to supply a pazking study as a pre-requisite. Applicants still have the option of submitting a parking study if .it is believed that tess parking stalls are appropriate. e. Strike existing Note 1 which reads "If approved hy the director of community development services..." i. Reasoning: Unnecessary language if granting 55' height outright. Additionally, the increased setbacks of 1' for each additional l' granted in height along non-singlc family zones is restrictive aud does iicrl effectively mitigate any of visual impacts. Planning Commission StatFReport K:120I0 Code AmendmentslBC Zone AmendmentslPlanniug Commission\StaffReport For PC F[NAL.doc Page 6 f. Strike existing Note 3 which reads "The subject properly must contain 2,400 sq. ft. of lot area .per dwelling unit, or at least one acre for every 18 dwelling units". ;. ;Leasaning: P.�arket fo;�es, �hysicalla. �onstraints, and de�elopment requirements wilI adequately and organically determine density limits. Developments will still be required to receive certificates of water/sewer availability and must comp}ete a tra�c concurrency analysis to determine capacity and mitigation. g. Add Note 3 to read " Anvlicant may choose to submit a parkin� studv in accordance with FWRC 19.130.080(2)." i. Reasoning: Clarify that parking studies may be submitted to the city for review if it is believed that less parking stalls are appropriate. Adopt FWRC 19.125.040(28) which reads "Landscaping is not required aion� perimeter lot lines abutting right of-wavs where no required vards applv pursuant to Division VI `Zonin� Regulations'." i. Reasoning: Currently, Type III landscaping five feet in width shall is required along all perimeter lot lines including the front yard setback under FWRC 19.125.060 in the BC zone. Currently an inconsistency exists where most commercial developments within various zoning districts are granted a zero front yard setback, but can not build up to the property line due to this regulation. Furthermore, if the senior housing front yard setback reduction is adopted, it would further add to this inconsistency within code. 4. Edit FWRC 19.125.090(n) to read "All new buitdings, inctnding accessory buiIdings such as carports and garages in PO and BN zones only, shall appear to have a roof pitch ranging from at least 4:12 to a maximum of 12:12:' i. Reasoning: Pitched roofs are appropriate tn more residential settings. Additionally, it is often challenging for structures over 30' to aceommodate such a design requirement due to roof areas generally being used for elevator housing, ventilation equipment, and various other development retated machinery. Current trends also show roof tops being used for open space recreation. Other architectural methods such as cornices, modulated roof heights, and integrated architectural art pieces will adequately address aesthetic concerns. The proposed changes have been illnstrated in ��ibits "A" through "D" of this staff report in the form of potential zoning charts. Vo PROCEDURAL SUMMARY On August 13, 2010, the city issued an Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) on the proposed amendments, with a comment deadline of August 30, 2010, and an appeal deadline of September 13, 20�0. No comments on the DNS have been submitted to the city as of the date of transmittal of this staff report. Public notice of the October 24, 2010, public hearing was published and posted on October 2, 2410, in accordance with the city's procedural requirements. Stakeholders were notified of the impending pubtic hearing and were sent this staff report. 88 Planning Commission Staff RepoR K:120i 0 Code Amendmcnts�BC Zone AmendmentslP}annine Commission\StaffReport For PC FINAL-doc Pa°e � VI. PUBLIC COMMENTS There was one public comment received from Todd Lawson. The e-mail is attached to this staffreport as Exhibi± F. VII. REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION FWRC Chapter 19.80, "Process VI Council Rezones," esta.blishes a process and criteria for zoning code te� amendments. Consistent with Process VI review, the role of the Planning Commission is as follows: 1, To review and evaluate the zoning code text regarding any proposed amendments. 2. To determine whether the proposed zoning code text amendments meets the criteria provided by FWRC 19.80.130. 3. To forward a recommendation to the City Council regazding adoption of the proposed zoning code te�ct amendments. VIII. DECISIONAL CRITERIA FWRC I9.80.130 provides criteria for zoning text amendments. 'Fhe following section analyzes the compl�ance 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: 1. The proposed amendment is consistent wit'� the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan. The proposed FWRG text amendment is consistent with the following Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) policies: LUGl Improve the appeatance aud function of the built environment. LUG6 Transform Community Business areas into vital, attractive, areas with a mix of uses that appea:l to pedestrians, matorists, and residents, and enhance the community's image. ' LUPl Use residential design performance standards to maintain neighborhood character and ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. LUP2 Use design and performance standards to achieve a greater range of housing options in multiple-family designations. LUP6 Conduct regular reviews of development regulations to determine how to imprave ugon the permit review process. LUP20 Support a diverse community comprised of neighborhoods that provide a range of housing options; a vibrant City Center; well designed and functioning commercial areas; and distinctive neighborhood retail areas_ Planning Commission Staff Report K:12010 Code AmendmeMS�BC Zone Amendments�Planning Commission\SEaff Report For PC FINAL.doc Page 8 LUP41 Encourage a range of pedestrian-oriented retail, while continuing to accommodate auto-oriented retail, and provide supportive uses to meet the needs �+f *.'PS1G� 3P_ PI?2p��Jy 2T1 C.i'1� �.I'P3. EDP10 The City wiil work with the private sector to actively encourage the retention and expansion of existing businesses, as well as bring in new development, businesses, and jobs to the community. EDP18 The City will periodically monitor local and regional trends to be able to adjust plans, policies, and programs. EDP19 The City will actively work with representative groups of business and property owners, including the Federal Way Chamber and other local business associations, to enhance citywide and subarea improvements and planning. 2. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to public health, safety, or welfare. The proposed FWRC text amendment bears substantial relationship to the public health, safety, and welfare because it allows for more flexible integration of recreational areas in proximity to multi-family uses. Additionally, the te� amendments may also reduce the amount of vehicIes on pubiic right-of-ways at any given time due to the proximity of commercial services to the residence. The te�rt amendments as presented will serve the public health, safety, and welfare. 3. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the residents of the city. Approval of the proposed cade amendment would benefit the city as a whole as it would encourage development and redevelopment in the Community Business Zone by not encumbering developments to reach the maximum height, thus increasing density and also diversify the types of housing available within the city. Additionally, the proposed te� amendments would lead to more architecturally diverse deveiopments throughout the city. The potential to attract new businesses and devetopments (which in turn genera.tes taY revenue), would be in the best interest of the residents of the city. IX. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Based on the above staff analysis and decisional criteria, staff recommends the approval of the proposed amendments to FWRC zoning charts 19.220.050 "Mutti-Unit Housing", 19.220.080 "Senior Citizen / Special Needs Housing", and FWRC 19.115.090(n), Community Design Guidelines, and adopt FWRC 19.125.040(28) "General Landscaping Requirements — All Zones". X. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Consistent with the provisions of FWRC 19.80.240, the Planning Commission tnay take the following actions regarding the proposed zoning code text amendments: 1. Recommend to the City Council adoption of the FWRC text amendment as recommended by staff; 90 Planning Commission Staff Report K:\2010 Code Amendments\BC Zone Amendments�Planning Commission\Staff Repat For PC FINAL.doc Paee 9 2. Modify the proposed FWRC text amendment and recommend to the City Council adoption of the Planning Cammission modified FWRC text amendments; EX�IIBITS: A. B. C. D. E. F. 3. Recommend to the City CounciI that the proposed FWRC text amendment not be adopted; or 4. Forward the proposed FWRC text amendments to the City Council without a recommendation. Amended FWRC Zoning Chart 19.220.050 "Multi-Unit Housing" Amended FWRC Zoning Chart 19220.080 "Senior Citizen—Special Needs Housing" Amended Language for FWRC 19.115.090(n) "Community Design Guidelines" Language for FWRC 19.125.040{28), "Genera.l landscaping reyuirements — All zones" "Parcels Zoned BC & Adjacent To Single Family Zones" Map E-mail from Todd Lawson dated August 13, 2010 Plartning Commission StaffReport K:�20}0 Code AmendmentslBC Zone Amendments\Planning Commission�StafFReport Eor PC FINAL_doc Page 10 19.220.050 Multi-unit housing. � � �� w�r:7 � � � � � �r The followin uses shall be ermitted in communi business BC zone sub'ect to the re ulations and notes set forth in this section: USE ZONE CHART cn DIRECTIONS: FIRST read down to find use .,. THEN, across fo'r REGULATION5 p Minimums � Re uired Yards ZONE � N BC � � � w � � 3 u � o � � au UsE � ��'> `� o b � �� SPECIAL REGULATIONS AND NOTES u a�'o4 . w y � xv� xw Multi-unit Process II None Same as these 33 §5 ft. 8eter-�ed 1• ' �. • housing or with regulations for above e�-a�asa-l�y '' �'''� ' '" A4° ""` " " � °Q :`"`�`�"° (stacked SEPA, ground floor use average sase-basis ' ' dwelling Process building 1.2 — 1.8 �"��' $� �� non ground floor spaces m have a minimum floor height of 13 ft, and a units) III See notes 2 and 4 elevation spaces ner minimum depth of 15 R.; ]0 (AABE) dwelline �°°'��:..�•. *-.--, k^� un ,it a��;��s a�-�eter�als; ,q�$� 2. Buiiding height may not exceed 30 ft. AABE for the oortion of the buildine �kex located HeH+�een w't i 20 ft. en�-�viFhi+t�49-R. See note5. from e sixgie residential zone., . . , See notes � ' � �� Z 3 It o�f lines aze desi¢ned to avoid a oredominantiv flat and featureless anoeuance throu¢h variations in roof heirht forms aneles and materials. 3< 4 .�I,ulti-unit housin� and accessorysgsidential uses mav be located on the eround floor of a srivcture onlv as foitows' (� eround levei suace that spans at least 60 oercent of the leneth of the nrincival commercial facade as determined bv the director is occunied with one or more other use(,�,1 allowed in this zone� a�c c�(Q) eround level soace that spans at least 40 nercent o£ the leneth of all other street facine facades is occuoied with one or more other use(sl allowed in this zone. ' ' ' . Parkine in coniunction with other uses allowed in this zone matialso be located on the ground tloor of the swcture if non-visible from the right-of-wav or oublic areas. 5 1 2 oarking staUs ber dwellinp unit for units of ua to 2 bedrooms 1 8 oarkina stalls for dwelling units of 3 bedrooms or more Dwelfi_ng unit �arkinp. stalls are in addition ro reauired parkine for all non-residential ground floor uses. Alternativelv. a nlicant mav choose to submit a pazking st�dv in accordance with FWRC 19 130.080(2). 5- 6. Chapter 19.265 FWRC contains regulations regarding home occapations and other accessories, facilities and activities associated with this use. �: 7. The subject property must contain at least 389 ,�50 sq. ft, per dweiling unit of cotnmon recreational open space usable £or many activities, and may include privale spaces such as yards, patios, and balconies, as well as common areas such as plxygrounds, recreation tooms, rooRop tercaces, pools, active lobbies, en� aviums or other areas the director deems appronriate. a-: $, No maximum lot coverage is established. Instead, the buildable area will be determined by other site development requirements; i.e., required buffers, parking lot landscaping, surface water facilities, etc, 8; 9. For community design guidelines that apply to the project, see Chapter 19. i 15 FWRC. 9- j0 For landscaping requirements that apply to the project, see Chapter 19.125 FWRC. �}9: .� 1 For sign raquirements that appiy to tlie project, see Chapter 19,140 FWRC. �N-: � Refer to Chapter 19.265 FWRC to detertniee what other provisions of this chapter may apply to the subject prnperty, a�- 13 For rovisions that relate to tlie kee in of animals see Cha ter 19.260 FWRC. Process 1, [i, Ill and IV ve described in For other information about perking and parking areas, see chapter 19.130 FWRC. Chapter 19.55 FWRC, Chapter 19.60 FWRC, Chapter 19.65 FWRC, For daaite of whet may exoeed ihis height limit, see FWRC 19,110.050 et seq, Chapter t9.70 FWRC reepectively. For details regarding rcquired ynrde, eea �WRC 19.125.160 et eeq. N 01 K;�20I0 Code Amendments�BC Zone Amendments\$C Zone CNarta\19•220.050 Multi•Unit Housing [AMENDED].DOC 19-220-080 Senior citizen - Special needs housing � � e�aa�s! Il.ixf? w�-� � � � � � � The followin uses shall be ermitted in commurii business BC zone sub'ect to the re ulations and notes set forth in this section: USE ZONE CHART z DIRECTIONS; FIRST read down to find use ... THEN across for REGULATIONS O Minimums � Re uired Yards ZONE � � � BC � � w v � ,� 3 t��. a `a i o� � a° UsE � '� o � ; � �' � � � SPECIAL REGULATIONS AI�TD NOTES u o4 rx a w cn x x cn oG a 5enior Process II None �,9 0 5 ft. 5 ft. 33 �,5_ ft. �ete�iae� . • citizen or or with ft. above ea-a-ease�y , • �,� � special SEPA, £�se�9 average sese-besis (a , , needs Process �-aleag building .5 ar i , '' " � "''""° "' �'"""'" "°"'"� "°'��'` "£" a housing III. si�tg4e- elevation soacas ver . (stacked €a�i}y (AABE� d eliin dwelling �} te-33-€t: un �,it , • • units) �es �E "=�Q See notes 3-a+�-8 See note 3 (� 1_Roof lines are designed to avoid a predominantly flat and featureless appearance through variations in roof 2 and 7 See-netes height, forms, angles, and materials. �� 2. Building height may not exceed 30 ft. AABE w#�en for theportion of the buildine located�eEwee+t i hin 20 ft. n.,a AA i# F....., ..F a Ie C„w.:t.. � a �,�-res�dentia zon , . . tnnw �„„,.....u.. 3. , . dil�liHgHHit9:,�Rolicant mav chooae to submit a oarkin¢ studv in accordance with FWRC 19 130 080121 4. Chapter 19.265 FWRC contains regulations regarding home occupations and other accessories, facilities, and activities associated with this use. 5, Any open space requirements will be determined on a case-by-case basis. 6No maximum lot coverage is established. Instead, the buildable area will be determined by other site development requirements; i.e., required buffers, parking lot landscaping, surface water facilities, etc. 7, For community design guidelines that apply to the proJect, see Chapter 19.! 15 FWRC. 8. For landscaping requirements that apply to the project, see Chapter 19,125 FWIZC. 9. For sign requirements that apply to the project, see Chapter 19.140 FWRG 10, Refer to Chapter 19.265 FWRC to determine what other provisions of this chapter may apply to the s�bject property. I i. For provisions that relate to the keeping of animals, see Chapter 19.260 FWRC, Process I, R, III and IV are described in For other information about parking and parking azeas, see Chapter 19,130 FWRC. Chapter 19.55 FWRC, Chapter 19.60 FWRC, Chapter 19.65 FWRC, For details of what may exceed this height limit, see FWRC 19.11 0.050 et seq. Chapter 19.70 FWRC respectively. For details regarding required yards, see FWRC 19.125. t60 et seq. M O� K;12010 Code Amendments�BC 2one Amendments�BC Zone ChertsU9.220-OBO Senior Citizen, Speciel Needs (AMENDEDj.bOC ii10.� � � � � -r � �� 19.115.090 District guidelines. (n) All new buildings, including accessory buildings such as carports and garages in PO and BN zones only, shall appear to have a roof pitch ranging from at least 4:12 to a maximum of 12:12. 94 �./�� '-� �! 1 � � �,....� ��. L...... 19.125.04Q General iandscaping requirements — Ai! zones. �28) Landscapinq is not required alonq perimeter lot fines abuttinq riQht-of- wavs where no reQUired vards a�ptv pursuant to Division VI `Zoninct Requlations'. 95 - .._ - � ��sr-rn�� .. nn�, ��anmu� . � t.�--� � � - �� ; : � "� k :Y� �'i �� i � I� 1 �i � I f i 300 ST � � i i �� I �-�-; '�-' ! ' : ' ; � :' � �,'' i � ' i � I � ( i�� -T;. �' jF' � � N - �L �� R�� Parcels Zoned BC & Adjacent � to Single Family Zones �� is%o l►4i �:s� . � �,�i 7 � � ,G � i Fyf-t?r�� '" '1 � ~ '��►* cs* �� ;) i • ..��Aa�� M `l�'<:�9�'r'il _ �r�.��p� .� • .nun�� a�r:��,-�a ` ��l��I - `u -,� . ..... .�, [�.a� ��. ,.: ; � � � " �- ii� :� o .. .::i c � � : �� , .� .�trn � � ��.' �,� -� � . •�=�...� - � - i� �� Legend ��#��._.��.��=�.,, � � Parcels Parceis Within 20ft of SF Zone _- ; Parcels Within 40ft of SF Zone f Parcels Within 100ft of SF Zone _.._ .:_�:� Parcels Zoned BC Parcel Counts: Parcels within 20ft : 29 Parcels within 40ft : 29 Parcels within 100ft : 52 p �� "� \ � '��I`; _a.r _ �� ._ �-�1 � �� `t'j 1 � -� � i � �$ \� \� '—_ �SL! .9� �� \ � David Lee � Sent: To: Subject: Tuesday, October 12, 201010:03 AM Todd Lawson RE: How are the code proposats? -----Original Message----- From: Todd Lawson [mailto:pawgo@yahoo Sent: Friday, August 13, 2010 2:29 PM To: David Lee Subject: Re: How are the code proposals? Thanks David �� l'1Li �.��.L�.�,�.,�..�.. We'll need to look at the project from scratch again. This will let us build a parking structure. It changes everything in a good way. Best Todd Lawson Architecture + Design Todd(�Iawsonad. com On Aug 12, 2010, at 3:29 PM, David Lee <David.Lee(a)cityoffederalway.com> wrote: Hey Todd, Sorry I missed your call. I've attached the zoning charts that we've changed. Unfortunately, we couldn't find a way to do a fee-in-lieu method for the open space without sacrificing the timeline for adoption on this. It's something we may try to work on again next year. However, we did drop the open space requirement down to 200square feet and also made what can count towards open space more discretionary. Additionally, we clarified the parking stall requirements instead of it being case-by-case basis. However, this does not mean you can't get reduced parking requirements through a parking study. Also, we've gotten rid of the pitched roof requirement in the BC zone. 7ust a quick question though, since the density caps for both senior and mixed use residential �units have been removed, how much of each do you think you can squeeze on to your lot? Dave David Lee Associate Planner City of Federai Way [Oj (253) 835-2622 [F] (253} 835-2609 david.lee(a)cityoffederalwav.com -----Original Message----- From: Todd [mailto:todd@Iawsonad.com] 9� Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 2:39 PM i To: David Lee Subject: How are the code_proposals? __ _ - ..;-- � = = —:--- --- . , Hope a"11 is well. - <19-220-080 Senior Citizen, Special Needs [AMENDEDj.DOC> <19-220-056 Multi-Unit Housing [AMENDED�.DOC> � " _. . ��,;.�.; "�� j _ �� , 6 98 2 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to Community Business (BC) Zone and Development Regulations; amending FWRC 19.220.050, FWRC 19.220.080, FWRC 19.115.090(n); and adding new sections to FWRC 19.125.040. (Amending Ordinance Nos. _, _, and _ ) WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need to periodicall Way Revised Code (FWRC}, "Zoning and DeveIopment federal law, codify administrative practices, clarify in zonmg Title 19 of the Federal Co conform to state and �.r4�> re � l:�tions as deemed �, ,: . necessary, and improve the efficiency of the regu��ans and ��, development reui`ew process; and 4 '}��y:N WHEREAS, this ordinance, containi�g.,amendments ta c�E ,' S :: text of Title 19 FWRC, has complied with Process �� re�ew, ch� y �� '' ' regulations and the 19.80 FWRC, pursuant to chapter 19.35 FWRC; and � _ WHEREAS, �t rs ,,in the � amendment for,,.ihe Commi � � ,:-:-- which establishes deve�opxr senior/speei�l. needs housin€ ::S WHERE�S, FWRC , ��,''+4�5': height of 65' above auerag c interest ��or the City Council to adopt a new code � �� (BG) -zone and associated development regulations, ons far mixed-use multi-family residential buildings and within the City of Federal Way; and 0.050 requires the administrative approval of criteria to attain a building elevation, requires a 20' setback from residential zones, requires ihe submittal of a parking study, restricts residential and parking uses from being Iocated on the ground floor, and restricts the density to 22 dwelling units per acre of land; requires 300 square feet of useable open space per d�velling unit, requires that the building height not exceed 30' when located between 20' and 40' from a single-family residential zone, restricts Ordinance No. 10- Page 1 of 22 Rev 1/ l 0 LU 99 t the height to 40' when locatea between 40' and 100', and that the height over 35' shall be set back from all other zones by one ft. for each one ft. of height over 35'; and WHEREAS, FWRC 19.220.080 requires a 20-foot front yard setback, a 2Q-foot side & rear yard setback along single-family zones, requires the administrative approvaI of criteria to attain a height of 55-feet, requires the submittal of a parking height above 35-feet be set back from non-single family feet, restricts the building height to 34-feet when 1 residential zones, restricts the building height to family zone, and restricts the density to 1 dwelling WHEREAS, FWRC 19.115.09 pitch ranging from at least 4:12 to a m�imctm new ..,..: ; and ..;.<:f _ . that the building for each foot over 35- of single family 40-100��fe�� a single feet; to appear to have a roof WHEREAS, FWRC 19.125.040 requires �� 5' �t�e �'�ype III perimeter landscaping regardless of buildmg s�tback rec�uirements, and �:;:; WHEREAS the��tt}z�is prapasing to allow maximum heights for both Multi-unit housing and Seniar C��ze� Special Needs. housmg outright, specify minimum parking requirements for ::�. � :>.: both _ R�i�lti-unit housing �rid Seniar .�stizen — Special Needs housing, allow parking and residential� us�s on the grounc� floor for Muiti-unit housing, reduce the side and rear yard for multi-unit housirig"and sema�lspecial needs housing when abutting a residential zone from 20- feet to 5-feet, reduce the required open space requirement to 150 square feet per dwelling unit for mulii-unit housing, reduce the front yard setback for Senior Citizen-Special Needs housing to 0', and increase the maximum allowed height of Senior Citizen-Special Needs housing to 65' outright, and modify the stepped height increases for both Multi-Unit and Senior-Citizen-Special Needs housing; and Ordinance No. 10- 100 �within Page 2 of 22 Rev 1 / 10 LtJ WHEREAS, the City is proposing to add to the General Landscaping Requirements of FWRC 19.125.040 to allow for relief of landscaping requirements for developments that are afforded a zero-yard setback in the BC zone, and also amend FWRC 19.115.090(n) to limit the pitched-roof requirement to just the Professional Office (PO) and Neighborhood Business (BN) zone; and WHEREAS, an Environmental Determination of N issued for the Proposal on August 14, 2010, and no com�ients DNS was finalized on September 13, 2010; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission (DNS) was properly received �nd the � duly noticec�'`�public hearing on these code amendments on Oct�b�r 20, 2010, aii� �forwarded to City Council a recommendation of approval with two modif ca��o�ts, as follows ��educe the side and rear :�.: , , yard setbacks for Multi-Unit housing abutting �esiderr`��: �ones from 20' to 5' from all ;, residential zones for 1V�i�It2-umt h�au under FVt�RC 19.220.050; (2} and increase the height of Senior Citizen- Special�I�F�e�s ho�z�ag.under FWR��I�9.220.080 from 55' to 65'; and Committee of the Federal Way City Council cons�de�e�. these code am�r�iiients�o`� ��vember 1, 2010, and recommended adoption of the teart : ,;•: amendments as:;recommende�4�by the Planning Commission. NOW, TH��ZEFORE;>THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, DO�URDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findin�s. The City Council of the City of Federal Way makes the following findings with respect to the proposed amendments. (a} These code amendments are in the best interest of the residents of the City and will benefit the City as a whole by encouraging development on vacant or redevelopable land, Ordinance No. 10- Page 3 of 22 Rev 1/10 LU 101 remove obstacles to development, set clear zoning requirements, and create development consistency throughout the BC zoning. (b) These code amendments comply with Chapter 36.70A RCW, Growth Management. (c) These code amendments are consistent with the int�:�tf ��aii� purpose of Title 19 :�:'.',4'. : J.' FWRC and will implement and are consistent with the applic��ile��i'�isions of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan. ��r'= (d) These code amendments bear a suhstantial rel�tionship to, anc��rr�ll, �otect and ti ��.��,; :-�,:r not adversely affect, the public health, safety, and welf�'�r�,, ,�� -� _ (e) These code amendments":haye followed the p�Eiper procedure required under the FWRC. r � �:.,�, ,.:_. .;.° .� �� ., Section 2. Conclusions. Pursuant to chapte� 19.8�U ��R� and chapter 1935 FWRC, and based upon the recrtals:xand the f�dings set fort� in Section 1, the Federal Way City Council .,,,�, makes the following Cori�Ii�ions o��.Law with respec� to the decisional criteria necessary for the adoption o��p��ed americ�ients � ��;: �� The propo�� FWR�-�:>amendments are consistent with, and substantially implement, �h�:��ollowing Fed��al Way Comprehensive Plan goals and policies: appearance and function of the built environment. LUG6 �T�ansform Community Business areas into vital, attractive, areas with a mix of uses that appeal to pedestrians, motorists, and residents, and enhance the community's image. LUPI LUP2 Ordinance No. 10- Use residential design performance standards to maintain neighborhood character and ensure compatibility with surrounding uses. Use design and performance standards to achieve a greater range of housir�g options in multiple-famil}r designations. Page 4 of 22 Rev 1/10 LU 102 LUP6 Conduct regular reviews of deve3opment regulations to determine how to improve upon the permit review process. LUP10 Support a diverse community comprised of neighborhoods that provide a range of housing options; a vibrant City Center; weil designed and functioning commercial areas; and distinctive neighborhood retail areas. LUP41 Encourage a range of pedestrian-oriented retail, whil�:�ntinuing to :..,.��. accommodate auto-oriented retail, and provide su�:portive��uses to meet the needs of residents and employees in the area. ,�;�;;;::;,;,;,* EDP10 The City will work with the private expansion of existing businesses, as businesses, and jobs to the commu�: EDP18 The City will periodically motii�i��;:local a plans, policies, and programs. �'�;;:;x::.. EDP19 The City will actively work with represeii owners, including tf�e:�ederal Way Cham associations, to enhariee cltywide and sub in the retention and trends to to adjust groups of business and property d other local business nproy�ments and planning. �:;,- u-- , (b) The proposed FWRC amendrr�ent bears � a sub`�antial relationship to the public health, safety, and we�fare because it allows for more flexible integration of recreational areas in proximity to multi-famiiy us��, Addi�onally, the teYt amendments may also reduce the amount of :-s:.� vehicles on ,pubtic r��=:of-wavs ��a�� any given �time due to the proximity of commercial services to the residen�e text amendri�e�'Cs as prese�te.d will serve the public health, safety, and welfare_ (c} �:: The proposed �:tnendment is in the best interest of the public and the residents of the City of Fede�a� ; Way. The amendments encourage development and redevelopment in the Community Business `�one by not encumbering developments to reach the maximum height, thus increasing density and also diversify the types of housing available within the city. Additionally, the proposed text amendments would Iead to more architecturally diverse developments throughout the city. The potential to attract new businesses and developments (which in turn generates tax revenue), is in the best interest of the residents of the city. Ordinance No. 10- Page � of 22 Rev l/10 LU 103 Section 3. 19.220.050 Use Zone Chart "Multi-unit Housing" of the Federal Way Revised Code is hereby amended to read as folIows: Ordinance No_ 10- Page 6 of 22 Rev 1/10 LU 104 19.220.050 Multi-unit housing. The followinR uses shall be permitted in � DIRI�C"fIONS:I O � � N °� � o w a � � �o °? 3 � � 11SE � '�5� � u Multi-unit Process II None housing or with (stacked SEPA, dwelling Process units) fIl r O � e 0 ci. business (BC) zone subject to the USE ZONE CHART down to find use ... TNEN, across for REGULATIONS imums 1 Yards U � � b � �n � �ame as �nese regulations for ground floor use � � a � � o � � � bA`� �� v� xv� a 33 65 ft. Aeter+�+t�ed 1 above e�-a-ease-Hy A average ease-�s'ts N building 1.2 — l.8 n elevation spaces aer (AA.BE) dwellin te-63--t�- un ,,it e See notes 2 and 9 t1�4�F 10 See note5. See notes k-a�# 2 _ . 2. Auilding F 49-�. from a 4. �ns and notes set forth i�z�(ii� sectic r ��,: .,:�; .,� z , .�. ZONE BC ,�';�:::r, SPECIAL REGULATIO. f aN All non-rasidentia�'� 15 ft.; � �� , inay not er�q�@� 14:Q: abc �-€a�+ly r�SYd`eriti�t'io�ies, 3�pgd to avoid a Qredori' spacas must have a minimum floor-to-ceiling height of 13 ft. and a w4�ee Iocated HeEweex wi iin 20 ft. �n�-wi�i� Multi-unit housi� and accessoiv residential uses t r :.,..-��. 3-°'�,i'�.;;�pter 19,265 FWRC contains regulations regarding home occupations and other accessories, facilities and activities ass�f`A'ied with this use, �:�` The subject property must contain at least 399 150 sq. ft. per dwelling unit of common recreational open space usqble for many activities, and may include private spaces sucli as yards, patios, and balconies, as well as common areas such as playgrounds, recreation rooms, rooftop terzaces, pools, active lobbies, an� atriums, or other azeas the director deems ap�ro,�riate. �- 8. No maximum lot coverage is established. Instead, the buildable area will be determined by other site davelopmant requirements; i.e., required buffers, parking lot landscaping, surface water facilities, etc. 8- 9 For community design guidelines that apply to the project, see Chapter 19.1 I S FWRC. 9, 10 For landscaping requiroments that apply to the project, see Chapter 19.125 FWRC. +e, 1� For sign requirements that apply to the project, see Chapter 19.J40 FWRC, J-� ] 2. Refer to Chapter 19,265 FWRC to determine what other provisions of this chapter may apply to the subject property. J�- 13. For orovisions that relate to the keeaine of animals, see Chauter 19.260 FWRC, I Process I, Il, 111 and IV aro described in I I � For other information about parking and parking areas, sce chapter 19.IJ0 FWRC. ChaDter 19.55 FWRC. Urdinance No. 10- Page :J of 22 Rev 1/10 LU �� Por details of what may excead this height limit, see FWRC 19.1 I O.OSQgj se9. For detaiis regarding required yards, sce FWRC 19.125.160 et seq. ,,;;,.,:;{.,: y � �,;. y „� ..�;?,, , ,��' . .�;::,-,�`` . ��; ,:: �; f•�� '� .:;,:., �. r M: � �;�; . .. . , r 0 rn Ordr.'nance No. 10- �,., y Page $ of 22 Rev 1/10 LU Section 4. FWRC 19.220.080 Use Zone Chart "Senior Citizen — Special Needs housing" is hereby amended to read as follows: Ordinance No. 10- Page °� of 22 Rev 1/10 LU 107 19-220-080 Senior citizen - Special needs housing The following uses shall be pernutted in community business usr ll senior Clfl'I.CII Of S�7�CIil� needs housing (stacked dwelling utti[s) r 0 � � � � � a a �a �, � o � .�� .. 3 N a� .. ❑ � en USE ZONE C.HART T DIRFCTIONS: FIRST, read down to find use .,. THEN, across for O Minimums F' Re uired Yards � a� � g G c� b Q > � O '� �'�d' ' ` � X a� � � � � x� �a Process II None �E) 0 5 ft. 5 ft. 3-� 65 ft. Beter+�++te� or with R. above eN-a-sase Hy Sf::PA, {,�� average ses�-Has+s Process #}�}� building 0.5 parking Ill. S�flg}a elevation s�aces oer 1arR+ly (AABE} dwellin r�+de+�Eia{ Ee-3$-�t- unit. �,eries � See notes 3-�-�8 See �i�oC'e 3,�: 2 and 8 � � Proccss !, II, [lf and IV are describad in Chapter 19.55 FWRC, Chapter 19.00 PWRC, ri..,.,rA. in�c c�imr• Ordinance No, 10- zone subject to i JS ;.�; �r egulations and notes set forth in this section: ZONE BC _ ;;�-: L RECULATIONS AND I�TOTES �� 1 Roof lmes arCxdesignad to avoid;a'predominantly flat and featureless appearance through variations in roof ght, forms, angles;;�nd materials. 3uilding height ma��ot exceed 30 ft. above ABE ivl�en for the portion of the building located-13e6we�t3 within 20 ��-of a si�gle-fe►wiFy-residential zone, , . �: .4. Chapter 19,265:�'WRC contains regulations regarding home occupations and other accessories, facilities, and ;�' ��tivities associated with this use. S; �Apy open space requirements will be determined on a case-by-case basis. 6. �4;4"I�a�Fifnum lot coverage is astablished. Instead, the buildable area will be determined by other site development requ�r�t�rlents; i.e., required but�'ers, parking lot landscaping, surface water facilities, etc. ? 7, FpY�community design guidelines that apply to the project, see Chapter 19.115 FWRC. '' 8. For landscaping raquirements that apply to the project, see Chapter 19.125 FWRC. 9. For sign requirements that appiy to the project, see Chapter 19.140 FWRC. s:::f 10, Refer to Chapter 19,265 �WRC to detennine what o[her provisions of this chaptar may apply to the subject property. 1 l, For provisions that relate to the keeping of animals, see Chapter 19Z60 FWRC. For other inform�tion flbout parking and parking areas, see Chapter 19.130 FWRC. Page jD of 22 Rev 1/10 LU � r 0 � Urdinance No, 10- Page/'/of 22 Rev 1/10 LU Section 5. FWRC 19.115.090 "District Guidelines" is hereby amended to read as follows: "In addition to the foregoing development guidelines, the following supplemental guidelines apply to individual zoning districts: ;.�:; .�,,.,, ,�. (1) Professional office (PO), neighborhood business (BN), a�d co�munity business (BC). (a) Surface parking may be located behind the bi building, or adjacent to the right-of-way; provided, howev adjacent to the right-of-way maximizes pedestrian ac�es FWRC 19.115.050(4). (b) Entrance facades shall front on, fac�� or be cl� right-of-way; and shall incorporate windows anc�`��her m� ,. n; . (c) Building entrances shall be architecturall�;:em� transparent glass. R��a- : c�ing;: to the side(s) of the r, that'�'p;af�Cing focated and circu#at�on pursuant to �rly recognizaf�tre s�xo� the k�ods of articulafro;r�: �asized and shakf�incorporate shall incorporate plaza ��text-sensitive amount and ntrance(s) to the overall a�r existing plaza or (d) Ground floor entrances to�:r�tai! sales or serv�ces features or furnishings, and/or streetsGap� amenities, in a�� combination, considering the scale of tfie re�ail and e building or development, and the proximity and�a�ss,tc streetscape features. �`� �� r �: ..,.�> >,. , - (e) Ground-Ieve��i�Frred or reflective�"glass is r�o Y �` right-of-way or pede��lan area =;� al(owed adjacent to a public (fl If utiliz��#, ��iain-link fe�ices visible f�om.,public rights-of-way or adjacent properties, and not scr'��ed byT�pe I landscaping as defined by Chapter '[9.125 �WRC, shall ut�t�ze vinyt ec�a�ed'm��, �vwde�-coated poles, dark color(s), and architectu.��ef��r��s) sucF��s. pole caps�'and/or decorative grid pattem. For [��identiat us� ,:•�� .),, Landscapec �rking ��s be (h)" �a�kina lots adjacent stalTs��;��e (i) Pedes#� interior of the proj� (j) Lighting shields. Ordinance No. 1 � �ds shatt,�ae provided between building(s) and public street(s). f� or be�iind buildings that front upon streets. �`:ild be broken up into rows containing no more than 10 b� p(anting areas. �ays (minimum six feet wide} shall 6e provided befinreen the he public sidewalk. should not exceed 20 feet in height and shall include cutoff wal Page �� of 22 Rev 1/10 LU 110 (k) Principal entries to buildin containing pfanting, lighting, seating, located and designed so windows o� :;:-{:xY: s shall be highfig� �e[lises and other with plaza or garden areas ures. Such areas shall be Figure 17 — FWRC 19.115.090(1) (I) Common recreational spaces shalt be focated and arranged so that windows overlook them. Ordrnance No. 1(1- Page l✓of 22 Rev 1 / 10 LU 111 : ��* t� i ` ;�� C �^ ;n. Figure 18 — FVI/RC 19.115.0 (m) Units on the ground floor (when permitted)'Y�� adjacent to them so those exterior portions of the site are i households. � .S�"� . f:�:Y�� . � , gara 4:12 Figure 20 — FWRC 19.115.090(1) Ordinance No. 10- � outdoor spaces ndividual :"�# ;h as carports and itch ranging from at least Page j� of 22 Rev I/IO LU 112 (o) Carports and garages in front yards should be discouraged. (p) Building facades that exceed 120 feet in length and are visible from an adjacent residential zone, right-of-way, public park, or recreation area shall incorporate a s�gnificant structuraf modulation (offset). The minimum depth of the modulation shall be approximately equal to 10 percent of the total length of the subject facade and the minimum width shal{ be approximately twice the minimum depth. The modulation shall be integral to the building structure from base to roofline. (q) Buildings should be designed to have a distinct "base.t �`°middle" and "top." The base (typically the first floor) should contain the greatest �r�i�ie�sof architectural elements such as windows, materials, details, overhangs, c�;��ce lines, and masonry belt courses. The midsection, by comparison, may be si��e:"'y�;�te: single-story buildings have no middle.) The top should avoid the app��ranc��a flat roof and include distinctive roof shapes incfuding but not limi��;��o�"pitched, �a�[�ed or terraced, - � etc. ,�5��`�- . �� ... ,5� � ��, r,r``�"�.`, . � Y, .'.' i) ted to entry porches, ows (rather than strip �II be incorporated into all or painted detaiting that (s) Sut��ction (1)(n��of this section shafl apply to self-service storage facilities. (2) Office park`��P), co�iiorate park (CP), and commercial enterprise (CE). (a) SurFace �a�t�ig may be focated behind the building, to the side(s) of the building, or adjacent to the right-of-way; provided, however, that parking located acljacent to the right-of-way maximizes pedestrian access and circulation pursuant to FWRC 19.115.050(4}. (b) Entrance facades shall front on, face, or be clearly recognizable from the right-of-way. _ (c) Buifding entrances shall be architecturally emphasized and shaf( incorporate transparent glass. (d) Ground floor entrances to retail sales or services shall incorporate ptaza features or furnishings, and/or streetscape amenities, in a context-sensitive amount and Ordinance No. 10- Page �J�of 22 Rev 1/10 LU 113 combination, considering the scale of the retail use(s) and entrance(s) to the overall buifding or development, and the proximity and accessibility from the building to other existing plaza or streetscape features. (e) Ground-level mirrored or reflective glass is not al{owed adjacent to a public righf-of-way or pedestrian area_ (fl If utilized, chain-link fences visible from public rights-of-way or adjacent properties, and not screened by Type f landscaping as defined in Chapter 19.125 FWRC, shall utifize viny!-coated mesh, powder-coated pofes, da��color(s), and architectural element(s) such as pole caps and/or decorative g�rc��p�a�ltern. For non-single-family residential uses only: .��;: (g) Subsections (1)(g) through (r) of this section shafl �p��;Gjr. (3� City center core (CC-C) and city center frame (CC�). �� (a) The city center core and frame contain tr��sitio�al form��,�levelopment with surface parking areas. However, as new developrrient or redevelopm��nt�occurs, the visual dominance of surface parking areas shal� be elimir�ated or reduce�r;��, .;: Therefore, parking shall be located b��iinc��,building�;s�, with building�s�`located between rights-of-way and the parking area(s}, or r�isstruc�u��ed parking, anc! any parking located along a right-of-way is subject to the followin��:�eiteria: (i) fn the city center core�,surface parking a�d driving areas may not occupy more than 25 percent of the project's fi along �rincipal pedestrian right(s)- of-way, as determined by the director :: t�� , , '��'��' (ii) In the city center frame, ��urface ��kCtk�g and c��riving areas may not occupy more than 40 percent of the projec�s,f�riear fr�t�ag�e along principal pedestrian right(s)-of-way, as dete��k�'er#.;;by the direcf�;r: (iii) A gr��ter amc�u�# of parkmg and driving area than is specified in subsections (3)(a��r� a�� (ii) of �t�s section ma� be. located along other rights-of-way; provided, that the parki�'t� ►s nat �he ,predomina�� use along such right-of-way, as determined b� #tae directd� ,, ," � .-. '�' (b�.��i��r��ranc� fa�ades stiafi front on, face, or be clearly recognizable from th��'ight-of-wa�f��d/or frc�rrt,�the principal pedestrian right-of-way, as determined by th.e-� ��ctor, for proj�� expos��;:��i more than one right-of-way. t �. (��uilding facad�s shall incorporate a combination of facade treatment options as listed ir��RC 19.115.t�60(2) and (3)(b), to a degree that is appropriate to the buildin size, ��`'' desE n'�'and site context, and according to the following guidelines: 9 ��le, 9 �,. (i)��ipal facades containing a major entrance, or located along a right- of-way, or clearly v��le;:from a right-of-way or public sidewalk, shall incorporate a variety of pedestrians`oriented architectural treatments, incfuding distinctive and prominent entrance features; transparent glass such as windows, doors, or window displays in and adjacent to major entrances; structural modulation where appropriate to break down building bulk and scale; modulated roof(ines, forms, and heights; architectural articulation; canopies; arcades; pedestrian plazas; murals or other artwork; and streetscape amenities. At least 40 percent of any ground levef principal facade located afong a right-of-way must contain transparent glass. Landscaping shall be used to define and highlight building entrances, plazas, windows, walkways, and open space, and may include container gardens, wafl and window planters, hanging baskets, Ordinance No. 10- Page /� of 22 Rev 1/l0 LU 114 seasona( beds, trellises, vines, espaliered trees and shrubs, and rooftop gardens. Landscaping should not block views to the building or across the site. Foundation landscaping may be used to enhance but not replace architectural treatments. (ii) Secondary facades not containing a major building entrance, or located along a right-of-way, or clearly visible from a right-of-way or public sidewalk, may incorporate facade treatments that are less pedestrian-oriented than in subsection (3)(c)(i) of this section, such as a combination of structural modulation, architectural articulation, and foundation landscaping. (iii) Principat facades of single-story buildings with,�.i�iore�than 16,000 square t a. feet o# gross ground floor area shall emphasize facade trea��ts that reduce the overall appearance of bulk and achieve a human scale. T�is `i�a�,be accomplished through such design fechniques as a series of distinctive��entran��.iodules or "storefronts" framed by projecting, offset rooflines, an�l�or'�� ma�or pe��strian plaza adjacent to the entrance. 1� (d} Pedestrian pathways shall be provic��d from rights-of-way, bu� �tops, parking areas, and any pedestrian plazas and public��pa�e�to prirnary building ent��es. Where a use fronts more than one right-of-way, p�e�triar� access shall be� provided from both rights-of-way, or from the right-of-way nea"�e�� the principal building entrance. Multiple-tenant complexes`s provide pede��an walkways connecting afl major business entrances on the site Pe�es,trian pathways �#�all be clearly delineated by separate paved routes using a vana`�ion��olor and texture;-�and shall be integrated with the landscape plan. Principal cross-s�te pe�s�t�an pathways shatl have a minimum clear width of six feet in the city center fraime,,�,a�id a��a'i�n clear width of eight feet in the city center core, ar�sk��be protected �€r�m abutting`'parking and vehicular circulation areas w��k�`�ndsca��. �� (e) Drive-tk�r� ;��, faciht��`� and stacking��lanes shall not be located along, or in �onjunction with, a bu��,faca�d�.�hat faces a�,is cfearly visible from a right-of-way, public sidewal�, pedes��pf�z� ��iek� �€a�iCities shalf be located along other, s�� secondar,y.�ac;a��s, by tfie �irector, and shaN meet the separation, level: , and d building's linea('� (ii} A facade; or ri�s��sted in FWRC 19.115.050(7)(b)(ii), (iii), and (iv). ig s�f with a ground tevel facade visible from a any_�mbination of the following elements at the ground � il, com�ercial, or otfice uses that occupy at least 50 percent of the tage �tong the right-of-way; or ��c��`wide strip of Type Itl landscaping along the base of the (iii) A decorative grille or screen that conceals interior parking areas from the right-of way. (g) Facades of parking structures shall be articulated above the ground level pursuant to FWRC 19.115.060(3)(a). (h) When curtain wall glass and steel systems are used to enclose a building, the glazing panefs shafl be transparent on 50 percent of the ground floor facade fronting a right-of-way or pedestrian area. (i) Chain-link fences shall not be allowed. Barbed or razor wire shall not be used. Ordinance No. IO- Page )]of 22 Rev 1!10 LU 115 (j) For residential uses, subsections (1)(g) through (j), (I), (m), (o), (q), and (r) of this section shalt apply. (4) For all residential zones. (a) Nonresidential uses. Subsections (1)(g) through (k) and (n) through (r) of this section shali apply_ (b) Non-single-family residential uses except for zero !of line townhouse residential uses and attached dweiling units. Subsections (1)(g} through (r) of this section shall apply. :��,� (c) Zero lot line townhouse residential uses and attach .��welling units. j , a Subsections (1)(j), (!) through (o), and (r) of this section sh��;pply. (Ord. No. 09-610, § 3(Exh. A), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 09-604, ,��'��A), 3-3-09; Ord. No. 09-593, § 36, 1-6-09; Ord. No. 07-559, § 3(Exh. A), 7_ 3��, Ord § 5(Exh. A(15}), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 06-515, § 3, 2-7-06; Ord.,l'�v;}�0��506, §�;��}�18-05; Ord. No. 03-443, § 3, 5-20-03; Ord. No. 01-382, § 3, 1-16 0=`f; Ordj: No. 99-333;��, 1-19-99; Ord. No. 96-271, § 3, 7-2-96. Code 2001 § 22-1638�.� -; �,.r... Section 6. FWRC 19.125.040 to �i��dQ�zted to read as "(1} All portions of a lot not used for bi.�dings;�� bu�ld��gs, parking, storage or accessory uses, and proposed landscapec�.ar�s s��retained in a"native" or predeveloped state. TI-t�.riep�ttment of corn��unity dev�Topment may allow or requi�e suppfemental planting,s in the�;-�reas, purst��,nt to the provisions of this titfe. (2) All outside �tor�� tial! be fully s�r.eened by Type I(andscaping a minimum of frve feet in width, as'��cnb�tl 19 � unless determined by the community de�el necessary�:t��"�a�a (3) S��pes in a or le.ss,��ength to height�� function e�f[Eiently. In oth� height, ma}� b�e..used if ac� geotechnicalfsoi�s, study s Ordinance No. 10- � � �rtiew �or�€�c�i�tee,��DRC) that such screening is not rria"�eriafs are nof'visually obtrusive. hav��en landscaped with lawn shall generatly be a 3:1 ratio �.assist��i� �naintenance and to aAow irrigation systems to ��areas of��plantings, a slope of up to a 2:1 ratio, length to ej�table to the public works director, upon review of a rtimitted by an appficant to ensure soil slope integrity. Page �$ of 22 Rev 1/ I 0 LU 116 Figure 1 — FWRC 1 (4) All trash enclosures shall be screened �fror� rights-of-way by a 100 percent sight-obscuring fe screen. (5) Type iil landscaping, defined ir�:,,EV11F sight-obscuring fences abutting public��i��i determined by the director of communi�,;d detrimental to the stated purpose of this��r (6) With the exception of lawn areas, af�: (i.e., plants, trees, and ��c�eovers) shal developments are e��`�'ouragec��#o. include r minim plant materials for a�t��ojects �£� (7) Deciduous trees'��a�J ha�e,�a,_,caliper of measured 4.5 f�,et abovey� (8) Evergreer�`�r��s shal the gro��ic!) at the trrr�p#,� (9)<:S�%rubs shall be a �ii to the graund) at the time:� (a}��a(1 shrubs —` (b) Medrum shrubs C 19.125 4) landscape that shall be placed outside of �sements unless �`� would be >5 p��:�of new landscaping materials ist of dr�iaght-tolerant species. AI! Pacific Northwest and drought-tolerant �ast 1.5 inches at the time of planting cture. feet in height (measured from tree top to num=r'�.2� 24 inches in height (measured from top of shrub .,�.:. �lantirig based on the fotlowing: inches. 18 inches. (c) Large sh -.;��4 inches. (10) Groundcoveis s�tat! be planted and spaced, using a triangular planting arrangement, to resu�t in total coverage of a landscaped area within three years. (11) Areas planted with grass/lawn shall: (a) Constitute no more than 75 percent of landscaped areas, provided, there shafl be an exception for biofi{tration swales; and (b) Be a minimum of five feet wide at the smaflest dimension. (12) Grass and required fandscaping areas shall contain at least four inches of topsoil at finish grade. (13) Existing clay or sandy soils shall be augmented with an organic supplement. Ordinance No. 10- 117 Page ��of 22 Rev I/10 LU (14) Landscape areas shall be covered with at least finro inches of mulch to minimize evaporation where plant materials wil! cover and three inches of mulch over bare soil. (15) In order to reduce irrigation requirements, design principles using xeriscape techniques are encouraged. In meeting water conservation goals, and to deliver appropriate amounts of water necessary to maintain planted vegetation, species that are not drought tolerant should be grouped together and have irrigation systems, and be separated from any other irrigation system provided for drought-tolerant species. (16) Mulch shall be used in conjunction with fandscaping in afl areas to meet xeriscaping goals, assist vegetative growth and maintenance o��to vi�ually compliment plant material. Mulches include organic materials such as wciod chips and shredded bark. Nonvegetative materia! shall not be an allowable substifufi��for plant material. (17) All development shal! comply with city of Federal�i`lVay street:#ree requirements. (See the City of Federa! Way Right-of-Way Vegetat�o�St�ndards a�tf�Specifications Manual.) �� 5 •. (18) Landscaping proposed to be located w��, ��i or adjacent to utility ea$eme�ts shall be reviewed by the respective �ttility agencyFi�`s�� ; ��,, ``°' ��"� (19) Landscaping and fencing shafl not violate ffi��s�gh��f�stance safety requirements �... at street intersections and points of ingress/egress fo��;��ie development. (20) All tree types shall be spaced'�ppropriate for th��.�o�npatibility of the planting area and the canopy and root charac��'��res, the tree. � v� 2 (21) All permanent lawn or sod area�;sha��ave permanert� ��igation systems. (22) Screening of blank buildmg wal/s��uildi� r ��4s_whrch�are uninterrupted by window, door, or other architectural featur��s� t�s i�"��pter 19.115 FWRC, � ,,.. Community Design Gut ��=`�'`� ; FWRC 19 'F'�Y:�.060(3)(t��; are 240 square feet or greater in area, and�t locaf�:�in a properf��line, shall be screened by landscaping. >��.. Such planting shaN t�de trees;'shrubs and ��oundcover appropriate for the area proposed. h�� ; �q n s�� (23) Foundaf landsca�ii� is °��r�agett for all developments to reduce the scale, �� '� �= bulk and h��` r ��ctures'�{ r .:' '�� (24) A��'loading ar��`�hall b�`�lly screened from public right-of-way or noninc�us�riaUmanufact�� uses�`�r��'Type I landscaping. •t�■■�■ .�� - � � r�� _ � � .. s � � � Ordinance No_ 14- STREEf Page�. of 22 Rev 1 / ] 0 LU 118 Figure 2 — FWRC 19.125.040(23) (25) Use of products made from post consumer waste is encouraged whenever possible. (26) Soi( in parking lot landscaped areas must be noncompacted to a depth of 18 inches prior to planting of any shrubs, trees, or groundcovers. (27) Landscaping shall not be required along interior iot lines within a development where parking is beirrg shared. (28) Landscapina is not reauired alona nerimeter (ot lines abe�in`�r:�riaht-of-wavs where no required vards appfy pursuant to Division VI'Z (Ord. No. 09-610, § 3(Exh. A), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 07-559, 93-170, § 4, 4-20-93. Code 2001 § 22-1564.)" Section 7. Severabilitv. The provisions ��this ,� � � > � ��, severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, par'��a� ..}�. this ordinance, or the invalidity of the �p�lication thereof not affect the validity of the remainder other persons or circumstances. l _ Section 8. Ca�rectior: autharized to make neceS� c� . ��. �=��;�s�. correction of s�rt�e��lclencal�~i �: -_:s�:, J numbe�s �nd any referenc�s.;�he. r �„_>_ ,.,._ City Cle� Zs to this F��;; 7-3-07; Ord. No. °:�� : a�> �`:S� I'.`.. ��T:�. ,"l.' �e are decIar�d. separate and , �z ��, rvision, sectiar�; or portion of person or circumstance, shall or the va�i�'�ity of its application to any the codifiers of this ordinance are r��ance including, but not limited to, the .� ordinance nutnbering, section/subsection Secti6�r-. 9. Ratificat�a�i. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective �:�: date of this ordmanc�.is here�xy ratified and affirmed. This ordinance shall be effective five (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED by the City Councii of the City of Federal Way this 20 Ordinance No. 10- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 119 da}T of Page,�,�l of 22 Rev 1/10 LU ATTEST: Ordinance 1No. 10- MAYOR, LINDA KOCHMAR 120 Page�2 of 22 Rev 1/10 LU 19.220.050 Multi-unit housing. [PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED CHANGES] � N r The followin uses shall be ermitted in communi business (BC) zone sub'ect to the re ulations and notes set forth in this section: USE ZONE CHART z DIRECTIONS: F1RST, read down to find use ... 1'HEN, across for fZEUULATIONS p Minimums Q Re uired Yards ZONE � " " BC � � a � w � � w a a „ � � � ° � � on • y =� .�.. ,� ..�. ..�'. C USE �'� o o ; � �� SPECIAL REGULATIONS AND NOTES u �� .� w � � �� 0. Multi•unit Process II None Same as these 3--5 65 ft. �ta�iae� �. � �r��e , . � :�,!'..,...t,. .,�:.... / A A QC\ �,. ., ».....:». ... ..CLC Q A n OC '!'.,II ,.C�I.e C.11 .....:.... ...'� housing or with regulations for above efr-a-sast�b�} �••��6 ��°�.°•r� (stacked SEPA, ground floor use average base-�asis � > > ' dwelling PCOCess ex 5 ft building 1.2 — 1.8 �� All nou-residential ground tloor spaces must have a minimum tloor-to-ceiling height oF 13 tt. a�id a minimum depth of IS ft.; units) IfI abuttine elevation snaces per ,,,, ,,..:..�.. ..�..,.,�;o� ....�, ..,.... �. residential zones (t�ABE) dwelline ' i Ee-(i�: uni[. ......�.,� ,...� . .. . . . . . . SCe tlOtes 2 tutd 9�� 2. Building lieight may not exceed 30 ft. AABE for the poruon of the buildiue wH�a located l�eEwe�w witliin 20 fi. ^°' •• �•�,a-.., ;,.,�o-n'^ ^^ ". 10 See note5. 1�oui u ^�°°� �..� resideuti�l zone„ . e; See no[es 3, Roof lines are desiKned to avoid a predmninandv flat and featureless appearance throueh variations in roof height, forius. aiigles. � 2 und materials. ? 4 ��..i.: ....:. � .......:.... ....... ..... ti,. �,........a ,....�.o ._.,, .,a a,.,....e., ..... ,... -°. Multi-unit housin¢ and accessorv residential uses may be located on the ground floor of a stnicture onlv as follows: (aLeround level space diat spans at least 60 oercent of the leneth of the arincipal commercial facade. as detertnined bv the director. is occuoied with one or more other use(sl allowed in diis zone; a��d (b) eround tevet soace that spans at least 40percent of the leneth of all other street-facine fac�des is occupied widi one or more other use(sl allowed in this zone. Parkin�in coniunction with otl�er uses allowed in this zone mav also be located o» tl�e yruund floor of the structure if' non-visible from t►�e ri�ht-ot=way or public areas. A T1.._ . . L.'o,.� ....�..o.... ..,....� ,.�..�..:.. ..� 1 ....... ...... ....... C . .,. ,,..., ')'1 ,1.. ,.I�'.... . ..:�.. 5 L2 uarkingstalls oer dwellin� unit for units of up to 2 bedrooms. 1.8parking stalls tbr dwelliug wtits of 3 bedromns ur more pwellin unit parkinE stalls are in addition to required oazkin@ for all non-residential �round tluor uses. Alternativelv. �pplicant mav choose to submit a parking studv in accordance with FWRC 19.130.080(2). � 6. Chapter 19.2G5 FWRC coutains regulations regarding home occupatious and other uccessuries, facilities �uid activities assoeiated with d�is use. Er 7.'fhe subject propnrty tnust contaiu at least 39O I50 sq. Yi. per dwelling uuit o(commou recreatiuual opeu spacc usable for many activities, and m�y include private spaces sucli as yards, patios, aud bxlconies, us well as cumwou areas suclt as playgrounds, recreation ruoius, rooltop tenaces, pools, active lobbies, uxd atriums. or odier areas the director deems approoriate. � 8. No utaximum lot coverage is established. Lnstead, the buildable area will be ctetenuined by other site development reyuuements; i.e., reyuired buffers, parking lot landscapiug, surfuce water facilities, etc. F� 9. For conununity design guidetines [hat apply ro die project, see Chapter 19.115 FWRC. 1 1- lU. E'or landscaping requirements diat apply [o the ptojec[, see Chapter 19.125 FWRC, 4& 11. Fur sign requirements that apply to the project, see Chapter 1), t40 FWRC. k-l- 12. Reter to Chapter 19265 FWRC to determine what other provisions of this chapter may apply tu the subject propetty. 1�- 13. For rovisions that relate to the kee in of'animals, see Clia ter 19.260 FWRC. Process I, Il, Ill and IV m�e desCribed in For other iufortnation about parking and parking areas, see chapter 19.130 FWRC. Chapter 19.55 FWRC, Chapter 19.60 FWRC, Chapter 19b5 FWRC, Pur details of whxt mey exceed this height limit, see FWRC 19.110A50 et seq. Chapter 19J0 FWRC respectively. For deenils regarding requimd yards, see FWRC 19.125,160 ei seq. K:�2010 Code AmenJments\BC'Lone Amendments�BC "Lone ChartsV'Ixnning Commission Recommendation\19-220-050 Multi-Unit Housing [AMENDED].DOC 19-220-080 Senior citizen - Special needs housing [PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED CHANGES] The followin uses shall be ermitted in communit business BC zone sub'ect to the re ulations and notes set forth in this section: USE ZONE CHART z DIRECTIONS: FIRST, read down to find use ... THEN, across for REGULATIONS O Minimums Q Re uired Yards ZONE ; � ; BC 0 r w �0.' � 3 N � ° _ � �' usE �'� o ` b � v 2 �� SPECIAL REGULATIONS AND NOTES u rx u: ..i w v� rx x v� x a Senior Process !I None �A 0 5 ft. 5 ft. 33 65 ft. �etertxi�ed . citizen or or widi ft. above en-�a-sase-Hy • , . special SEPA, �.�g average sas�-bas'ts (a) • Etd� needs Process �• "� building 0.5 parkin� , g,�u ;� �: ; ;; � � �^..� ^ m �,,.�• • �,:�;„•, ��;.,�� „+' � 1 housing III, s�� elevation snaces per *�, ^�a °-^�^;�^.,^� a�-•�^ �� c a (St2cked �i}� (AABEj dwelline rti� o,.:ia:.,.. we:..�.. ,. .,i:o... :.a .. a �• dwelling �E �e SS-�t- unit. tmits) z9ReS ,4�,�E �c . See notes 3-ar�d-8 See note 3 (� 1_,. Roof lines are designed to avoid a predominantly flat and featureless appearance dirough variations in rouf' 2 �� 8 3ee-Ne�s height, 1'orms, angles, and materials. ',,.�,,' 2. Building height may not exceed 3U ft. AABE � Y'or the portion of the building lucuted�e�weee wichiu 20 ft. �d-49-4�:-��ttrof a °'^�•�,'o--.'��residentixl zone, t nn a t.,..,, .. ,,.ti , 3. . , EsrY--1-8 �'�� °'�..�,-.' .,�^s�;,;�T Applicant may choose to submit a�arking studv in accordance with FWRC 19.130.080(2). 4. Chapter IJ.265 FWRC contains regulations regarding home occupations and ocher accessories, facilities, and activities associated with this use. 5. Any open space requirements wiil be detemtined on a case-by-case basis. 6. No ntaximum lot coverage is estabiished. Instead, the buildable area will be determined by other site development requirements; i.e., required bufters, parking lot landscaping, surf'ace water f'acilities, etc. 7_ For community design guidelines that apply to the project, see Chapter 1).115 FWRC. 8. For landscaping requirements that apply to the project, see Chapter 19.125 FWRC. 9. For sign requirements that apply to the project, see Chaprer 19.140 FWRC. 10. Refer to Chapter 19.265 FWRC to determine what other provisions of this chapter may apply to the subject property. l l. For provisions that relate ta the keeping of animals, see Chapter 19.260 FWRC. Process 1, II, Ill aud lV are described in Fur other informatiou about parking and parking areas, see Cl�apter 19.130 FWRC. Chapter 19.55 PWRC, Chapter 19.60 FWRC, Chapter 19.65 FWRC, For detuils of'what may exceed diis height limit, see FWRC 19.1 lU.U50 et sey. Chapter 19.70 FWRC respectively. �or details regarding rcquired yards, see FWRC 19.125.16U et seq. K:�2010 Code Amendments�BC Zone Amendments�BC "Lone Charts�f'lanning Commission Recommendation\19-220-080 Senior Citizen, Special Needs [AMENDGD].DOC Mixed-Use Building under Existing Code ny esidential Offce on th� Ground Floor �ne Any Other �,� � �N. Zone NO '�o 3S ,°�'�A�AdiPC.yl'� r,.,,�;�e �,,,. D4 � N W �ny tesidential ;one �S 3� 0 5 20 � _ �. ��,.......r...� p 1 S S� One inch represents 50 feet � c� o Mixed-Use Buildin� under Proposed Code Office on the Gruund Floor Any Other Zone � svp 0 Q '�O 110 1 V4 � ��, tc�,';�x" . E, �. z .+ . 'fYA,"� �;. 5ingle H'amily �one 5S yo 30 � N �P Any Residential Zone 4� 3 Senior Housing u,nder Existing Code Any Qther Zone � �s Seniar Housing under Proposed Code Any Other . Zone �5 � �5 20 �no �Op �'� . _ _ Ioo Zmo � . _ ....�.1.........�,_�..+ 0 1 S so One inch represents 50 feet _�..�.._.....a_. .�..��_...�.. _�,,.,_._._.,_...__.._,..�...._.._.n.._�...._____.,..__......._.._.__�... �.�..._...�._... c�1 �.0 4t� � O a �,o O ^w �vv `0 0 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 16, 2009 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL ITEM #: AGENDA BILL SUB.IEC'r: Department of Ecology Freshwater Algae Control Program Grant Opportunity — FY 2011-2012 POLICY QUESTION Should the Council authorize staff to submit a grant proposal for the Freshwater Algae Control Program Grant to fund the development and implement an Algae Control Program for public and private lakes within the City of Federal Way. COMMITTEE Land Use and Transportation Committee CATEGORY: � Consent Council Business ❑ Ordinance ❑ Resolution MEETING DATE: November l, 2010 ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Other STAFF REPORT BY: Willlaln A leton, P.E., Surface Water Mana er� DEPT: Public Works _ ............._..........................................._....................._..........................��....._......................._................................................................�................................................�..................._......._.._..._......................._.................._.................---._._..._........_........_...................._.._._.__.._...._...__........_._._.....----._.._.._ Attachments: Memorandum to Land Use and Transportation Committee dated November 1, 2010. Options Considered: 1. Authorize staff to submit a grant proposal for the Freshwater Algae Control Program Grant to fund the development and implement an Algae Control Program for lakes within the City of Federal Way. 2. Do not authorize staff to pursue the Algae Control Program Grant. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Forward Option 1 to the November 16, 2010 City Council Consent Agenda for approval. CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: Q, N•Iw+ �� DIRECTOR APPROVAL: Committee Council Co 'ttee Council COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Committee recommends forwarding Option 1 to the November 16, 2010 City Council Consent Agenda for approval. Dini Duclos, Chair Jim Ferrell, Member Jack Dovey, Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION "1 move to authorize staff to submit a grant proposal for the Freshwater Algae Control Program Grant to fund the development and implement an Algae Control Program for public and private lakes within the City of Federal Way" (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED — 02/06/2006 125 COUNCIL BILL # 1 reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: November l, 2010 TO: Land Use and Transportation Committee VIA: Brian Wilson, City Manager/ Police Chief FROM• Cary M. Roe, P.E., Director of Parks, Public Works and Emergency Management � ' William Appleton, P.E., Surface Water Manager� „/ SUBJECT: Freshwater Algae Control Program Grant �� BACKGROUND• In recent years, improved algae education and early detection efforts developed by the Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) and the Washington Deparhnent of Health (WADOH) have been successful in increasing public awareness and safety with respect to freshwater algae blooms. The City of Federal Way has disseminated this new educational information, and implemented the published health-based management guidelines. However, we are seeing an increase in lake algae bloom-related reports (by both City Parks Department personnel and the community at-large). Federal Way lakes are located in highly urbanized settings, are sensitive to excessive nutrient loadings and temperature and are shallow. These conditions favor algal bloom formation. The SWM Division is proposing to implement a Federal Way Lake Algae Program that will focus on both public and private lakes comprising a total surface area of 153 acres. Lakes targeted for this could include: Steel Lake, North Lake, Twin Lakes (Lake Lorene and Lake Jeane), Mirror Lake, Fisher's Bog, Easter Lake, French Lake, and Brooklake. Performing any activities on these or other water bodies in Federal Way will be dependent upon the need to address algae related water quality issues. Both public and private lakes will be included in order to provide a comprehensive program capable of assessing the overall health of our City's natural conveyance system. The following specific algal bloom management elements will be included in the project: response to reports, early detection investigations, water quality sampling, sample delivery/analyses, public notification, data collecting and reporting, and community outreach. The Federal Way Lake Algae Project will identify problematic conditions occurring in City of Federal Way freshwater lakes that contribute to algal bloom formation. Most importantly, it will reduce public health threats and assist in the development of long-term nutrient reduction solutions. Additionally, the project will complement the following on-going surface water quality programs and public outreach efforts: the Steel Lake Management District, the North Lake Management District, the Dumas Bay Saltwater Algae Management/Kesearch grant, and the Municipal Phase II Stormwater Permit. Staff is requesting authorization to apply for funding for this project through a DOE grant opportunity for Freshwater Algae Control Programs. The subject grant requires a 25% match, which will be obtained from unallocated SWM funds. The total amount being proposed for this program is $44,690.00, of which $11,172.50 would be SWM matching funds. 126 COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 16, 2010 ITEM #• Sus.�cT: South 320`�' Street at I-5 Southbound Off Ramp — 85% Design Status Report POLICY QUESTION Should the Council authorize staff to proceed with design of the South 320�' Street at I-5 Southbound Off Ramp Project and return to the LUTC and Council at the 100% design completion for further reports and authorization? CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL COMMITTEE Land Use and Transportation Committee CATEGORY: � Consent ❑ City Council Business ■ � Ordinance Resolution STAF'F REPORT BY: Brian Roberts, P. E., Street S MEETI1vG DATE: November 1, 2010 ❑ Public Hearing Other DEPT Public Works Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated November 1, 2410. O�tions Considered: ........................................................................................................................................................................_.._......................_.....�.........._..._..._....._............................_.........__._._._....._..._....�...._._....._..._........_.__..._...__......_..._....._._......._...-----.......... 1. Authorize staff to proceed with the design of the South 320 Street at I-5 Southbound Off Ramp Project and return to the LUTC and Council at the 100% design completion stage for further reports and authorization. 2. Do not authorize staff to proceed with finalizing the present design of this project and provide direction to staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends forwarding Option 1 to the November 16, 2010 City Council Consent Agenda for approval. CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: �.�� Committee Council DIRECTOR APPROVAL: � Committee Council COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Forward Option 1 to the November 16 , 2010 City Council Consent Agenda for approval. Dini Duclos, Chair Jim Ferrell, Member Jack Dovey, Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION "I move to authorize staff to proceed with the design of the South 320` Street at I-S Southbound Off Ramp Project and return to the LUTC and Council at the 100% design completion stage for further reports and authorization. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED ❑ DENIED ❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTIOIv ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) REVISED — 02/06/2006 COUNCIL BILL # 1 reading Enactment reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # 127 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: November 1, 2010 TO: Land Use and Transportation Committee VIA: Brian Wilson, City Manager/Police Chief FROM• Cary M. Roe, P.E., Director of Parks, Public Works and Emergency Management � ' Brian Roberts, P. E., Street Systems Project Engineer� SUBJECT: South 320`�' Street at I-5 Southbound Off Ramp — 85% Design Status Report BACKGROUND This project consists of widening the southbound off ramp from the present 3 lanes to 5 lanes. The updated ramp will have dual left turn lanes and three right turn lanes. The lane configuration on South 320`" St will not be modified. Other modifications include relocated curb, gutter and sidewalk at the northwest quadrant of the intersection, shifting the South 320` Street median island and signal pole westward, constructing a retaining wall along the west side of the widened ramp, and modifications to the existing drainage and detention pond. Illumination will be upgraded along the length of the widened ramp. The following provides a brief synopsis of the progress on this project to date. Currently, the project design is approximately 85% complete, which includes the following completed tasks: • The Topographical Surveys • The Geotechnical Investigation • Channelization Plans • Final Paving Design • Final Drainage Design • Project Design to 85% Ongoing Tasks Include: • WSDOT Approval of Channelization Plans • Retaining Wall Design • Traffic Signal and Illumination Design • NEPA Environmental Documentation and Approval • Project Design to 100% This project is scheduled to go to bid in Apri12011 with construction beginning June 2011. 128 Land Use and Transportation Committee I-5 Southbound South 320 Street Off Ramp November 1, 2010 Page 2 of 2 PROJECT ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES: Planning and Design (WSDOT) ROW Acquisition 2011 Construction Cost 10% Construction Contingency Construction Management (WSDOT) TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $ 646,000 0 3,600,000 360,000 562,000 $5,168,000 AVAILABLE FUNDING: Federal Grant (STPUL) Budgeted City Funds Mitigation TOTAL AVAILABLE BUDGET $ 3,200,000 1,840,000 165,000 $ 5,205,000 (Transfer from Project 150) 129 K:\LUTC\2010\] 1-01-] 0 S 320th St @ I-5 SB Off Ramp - 85% Design Status Report.doc COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 16`�', 2010 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL AGENDA BILL ITEM #: Sus.�C'r: School Zone Flashing Beacon Grant Application — Silver Lake Elementary POLICY QUESTION Should the City apply for a grant through the Washington Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC) to install school zone flashing beacons at Silver Lake Elementary? COMMITTEE Land Use and Transportation Committee CATEGORY: � Consent ❑ Ordinance ❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution MEETING DATE: November 1, 2010 � �I Public Hearing Other STAFF REPORT BY: Jesse Hannahs P.E. Seniar Traffic En ineer � DEPT Public Works _......__ ..............................................................................................................................................._.....> > $ ��._..._. Attachments: Memorandum to Land Use and Transportation Committee dated November 1, 2010. Options Considered: 1. Authorize staff to submit the WTSC grant application to fund up to $7,500 for installation of School Zone Flashing Beacons at Silver Lake Elementary School. 2. Do not authorize staff to submit the WTSC grant application to fund up to $7,500 for installation of School Zone Flashing Beacons at Silver Lake Elementary School and provide direction to staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends forwarding Option 1 to the November 16 2010 City Council Consent Agenda for approval. CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ,/� Ls,e�(,•►.�� DIRECTOR APPROVAL: '�/�, vf� � Committee Council Committee Council COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Committee recommends forwarding Option 1 to the November 16, 2010 City Council Consent Agenda for approval. Dini Duclo Chai Jim Ferrell, Me Jack Dovey, Member PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION "I move to authorize staff to submit the WTSC grant application to fund up to $7, S00 for installation of School Zone FZashinR Beacons at Silver Lake Elementary School. " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLBRKS OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: ❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL # ❑ DENIED l reading ❑ TABLED/DEFERREDJNO ACTION Enactment reading ❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE # REVISED — 02/06/2006 RESOLUTION # 130 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: November 1, 2010 TO: Land Use and Transportation Committee VIA: Brian Wilson, City Manager/Police Chief FROM• Cary M. Roe, P.E., Director of Parks, Public Works and Emergency Management �' ''' ` ' Jesse Hannahs, P.E., Senior Traffic Engineer � j SUBJECT: School Zone Flashing Beacon Grant Application BACKGROUND: The Washington Traffic Safety Commission (WTSC) has concluded from its own studies that driver compliance with the 20 mile per hour school speed limit and collision history were improved when drivers were given clear direction over when the school speed limit was in effect, and the best way to accomplish this is with the installation of school zone flashing beacons ("Speed Limit 20 When Flashing") rather than the subjective "Speed Limit 20 When Children Are Present". To help road agencies adopt this change, the Commission created a grant program that provides up to $7,500 for flashing beacon hardware components per school zone that flashing beacons are installed at elementary schools. The grant would also require that the City provide education materials and targeted enforcement at the added locations. City staff has had a similar goal, and currently all but four elementary schools have school zone flashing beacons installed. With funds from the same WTSC grant program in 2009, school zone flashing beacons were installed at Sherwood Forest Elementary School and the recently completed follow-up study shows a significant speed reduction at all hours but especially during the flashing beacon operation. The remaining four schools are all located on low volume residential streets: • Silver Lake (SW 325 St & 13`" Ave SV� • Adelaide SW 304`�' St & 16`�' Ave SW) • Nautilus (S 289`�' St & 1 l�' Ave S) • Wildwood (S 300` St & 26`�' Ave S) Staff has determined that the highest priority and most feasible installation at this time would be the Silver Lake Elementary School Zone located on SW 325`�' Street at 13`�` Ave SW. Due to the relatively late release of the call for projects, staff is still evaluating the existing traffic conditions for this location. Total installation would cost between $15,000 and $20,000 with up to $7,500 reimbursable for flashing beacon hardware components. The adopted budget allocates $20,000 for school safety improvements in the Neighborhood Traffic Safety Program, thus limiting the number of installations for which the City could provide the match. The deadline for submittal of the grant applications is November 19, 2010 with successful applicants being notified on December 1, 2010. Installations must be completed prior to Apri130, 2011. cc: Project File Day File 131