LUTC PKT 04-15-1996
MJ¿
City of Federal Way
City Council
Land Use/Transportation Committee
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
April 15, 1996
5:30 pm
City Hall
Council Chambers
AGENDA
1.
CALL TO ORDER
2.
APPROV AL OF MINUTES
3.
PUBLIC COMMENT ( 3 minute limit)
4.
BUSINESS ITEMS
A. A WC Resolution Process Action
B. School Impact Fee Interlocal Action
C. SW Campus Drive and 6th Avenue SW Action
D. Discussion: Non-residential Code Action
Revisions/Design Guidelines
Laurent
McCormick
Miller
Michaelson-Schill
5.
OTHER ITEMS
6.
FUTURE MEETINGS/ AGENDAS
7.
ADJOURN
Committee Members:
Phil Watkins, Chair
Ron Gintz
Mary Gates
City Staff:
Greg Moore, CDS Director
Sandy Lyle, Administrative Assistant
661-4116
Ch)' of l<edera\ Wa'j
City Council
La fid... U se/Ttá nSp ()fta ti 011.. .Cotnn1Îtt ee
COMMITTEE OF 'nIE 'WHOLE
April 1, 1996
5: 3Opm
City Hall
Council Chambers
SUMMARY
In attendance: Committee members Phil Watkins (chair), Ron Gintz, Mary Gates; Mayor Skip Priest; Council members Jack
Dovey, Hope Elder, Michael Park; City Manager Ken Nyberg; Community Development Services Director Greg Moore; Public
Works Director Cary Roe; City Attorney Landi Lindell; Assistant City Attorney Jim McNamara; Assistant Community Services
Director Kathy McClung; Principal Planner Greg McCormick; Senior Planner Lori Michaelson-Schill; Administrative Assistant
Sandy Lyle.
1.
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 5: 3Opm.
2.
APPROV AL OF MINUTES
The minutes were approved as presented.
3.
PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment on any items not included in the agenda.
4.
BUSINESS ITEMS
A. St. Luke's Lutheran Church Master Plan - St. Lukes Lutheran Church has requested a master plan approval of
phase I of the redevelopment of the sanctuary with classrooms and related spaces connected to the existing
sanctuary. Through Use Process II, the Hearing Examiner approved variance requests to three of four existing
nonconforming elements at the site and denied the variance request to nonconforming signage. The final
decision of a Use Process III Hearing rests with the City Council. For the sake of discussion, it was m/s/c to
accept the Hearing Examiner report. Following discussion, the Committee m/s/c to forward the
recommendation of the Hearing Examiner to approve the St. Luke's project and place it on the April 16, 1996,
City Council consent agenda.
B.
FEMA Resolution to Join the National Flood Insurance Program - In order to participate in the FEMA Flood
Insurance Program, FEMA requires that the Ctiy adopt a resolution that affirms the City's commitment to
enforcing provisions of an ordinance equivalent to FEMA's own "Flood Damage Prevention" model. The City,
through its establishment of a surface water management utility has already adopted most of the model
provisions. Therefore, in order to avoid unnecessary duplication of City Code, the City has suggested to
FEMA that adoption of a resolution containing those few provisions of FEMA's model ordinance which are not
currently adopted City policies might be a preferred alternative to wholesale adoption of the provisions
contained within the model ordinance. FEMA has agreed that adoption of this resolution would constitute
concurrence with the provisions of the model ordinance. The Committee agreed and m/s/c forwarding the
FEMA Resolution to the consent agenda of the April 16, 1996, City Council meeting.
C.
Non-Residential Code Revisions/Design Guidelines - Staff and consultants presented overview material on non-
residential code revisions and design guidelines. The Committee requested that staff bring examples of height
and capacity of offices, typical retail, and the size of average businesses. Codes and guidelines will be
discussed in depth. The plan for discussion at the meeting on April 15, 1996, will focus on those revisions that
are mandatory and those that are advisory.
".
OTHER ITEMS
There was no other business.
6.
FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDAS
The discussion on Non-Residential Code revisions and Design Guidelines will continue at the April 15, 1996, meeting.
Final deliberations will occur at the May 6, 1996, meeting.
7.
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 8:30pm.
1:\LU-TRANS\APRILUfC.SUM
---
..
..
DATE:
April 5, 1996
TO:
City Council Parks Committee
City Council Land Use and Transportation Committee
City Council Public Safety and Human Services Committee
City Council Finance and Economic Development Committee
Dena Laurent, Senior Management Assistant ~~
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Proposed A WC Resolutions
Formation of the Association of Washington Cities' (A WC) annual legislative workplan begins
with the development and submission of topical legislative resolutions each spring. This year,
resolutions are being considered by A WC's Resolutions Committee at meetings in SeaTac on April
23 and May 10. Final adoption of the resolutions is scheduled during A WC' s Summer conference,
June 11-14, scheduled in the Tri-Cities area.
Based on direction from your April 2 Council meeting, we have prepared a series of draft
resolutions for your consideration before each of the Council's Committees in April. Additional
topics are welcomed at each of meetings. Additional resolutions can be drafted based on the
Committee's input, reviewed with the Committee chairs and circulated to the rest of the Council.
Consideration of the resolutions recommended for forwarding to A WC from each of the Council
Committees is set for the May 7 Council Business agenda. I will then carry your resolutions to
the A WC Resolutions Committee at their May 10 meeting.
Draft Resolution Topic Areas
The following topics are addressed in the attached draft resolutions:
.. Sales Tax Exemption for Construction of Public Park and Public Cultural Arts Facility
Construction
Transportation Funding Options for Local Government
Creation of Local Hotel/Motel Tax Options
Supporting Continued Criminal Justice Funding
Supporting Practical Solutions to Land Use Regulation Issues
..
..
..
..
I have also attached an "end of session" briefing paper. It is intended to give you the highlights
for issues of concern to cities. If you have additional issues of concern from the last Legislative
Session, please do not hesitate to contact me. I am happy to follow up on your concerns.
." "
Association of Washington Cities
Suggested Resolution
Resolution Title
Sales Tax Exemption for Public Park and Public Cultural Arts Facility
Construction
Background: Construction of public works projects is presently exempt ITom local and state
sales taxes. The same exemption is not allowed for public parks and public cultural facility
construction.
Issues: The same rationale for exempting public works projects fÌ"om sales taxes also applies to
the construction of public parks and cultural facilities. Taxing citizens to build a public facility and
then taxing them again in construction seems a poor use of time and resources. Further,
exemption of public park and cultural facility construction would be a very minor exemption in
the overall state and local sales tax revenue picture.
Position: The Association of Washington Cities should support State legislative action to exempt
public park and public cultural facility construction ITom state and local option sales taxes.
Association of Washington Cities
Suggested Resolution
Resolution Title: Transportation Funding Options for Local Governments
Background: The current state funding level for major local transportation projects leaves
numerous needed improvements on the drawing board for years before action is possible. In the
past, the Legislature has further depleted these limited funds by taking monies from the Public
Works Trust Fund to pay for state transportation improvements, at the expense of local projects.
The ongoing maintenance needs of local transportation systems are increasing with the
concentration of growth in urban areas. This increased maintenance requirement reduces this local
funding available for major road improvement projects.
Issues: Current state transportation funding inadequacies limit local governments' ability to plan
and construct needed improvements. The growth demand on local transportation inftastructure is
rapidly outstripping the ability of the current local government revenue structures to keep up with
needed maintenance. The growth rate for gas tax revenue is about 1% per year, while
transportation construction costs are rising about 3.5% per year. This net decline in funding has
depleted the ability of cities to maintain the transportation system level of service and to fund
capital improvements.
Position: The Association of Washington Cities should support efforts to obtain additional state
funding for major local transportation projects, should seek to guarantee that minimum level of
funding for local projects and should seek local option revenue authority for the expansion,
maintenance and operation of local transportation systems, possibly through a local gas tax
Increase.
Association of Washington Cities
Suggested Resolution
Resolution Tide:
Creation of Local Hotel/Motel Tax Options
Background: Beginning in 1955, the State of Washington has levied lodging taxes through five
methods, generally for support of tourism. These taxes are summarized in the table below.
Tax
Tax Rate (%)
Authorized to Impose
Retail Sales Tax
Local Retail Sales Tax
State-Shared Tax
6.5%
up to 1. 7%
2.0%*
State
All Counties & Cities
32 Counties & 126 Cities
(Dedicated to retirement of
Kingdome bonds through 2012)
State - Only in King Co.
5 Counties & 13 Cities
Trade & Convention Ctr. Tax
Local Option Taxes
7.0% **
up to 5%
* The 2.0% tax is credited against the state's 6.5% retail sales tax.
**The tax rate is 7.0% in the city of Seattle and 2.8% in the remainder of King Co.
Issues: Tourism is big business in Washington, generating jobs in a number of sectors. Tourism
development in small cities represents a significant potential for economic development in all
communities, but is best directed by those communities. Local governments continue to face a
challenging fiscal picture, and are in need of dedicated revenue streams to support expansion of
tourism in their communities. Several communities have been successful with the Legislature in
obtaining such a dedicated revenue stream. However, with the great economic potential, all
communities should have the option to adopt and implement such local option hoteVmotel taxes.
Position: The Association of Washington Cities should support a local option lodging tax with a
maximum rate of 5% for all cities and counties. Such action would not interfere with the local
options taxes already obtained by other cities and counties and would eliminate the need for
counties and cities to request increases in the tax rate for the foreseeable future.
Association of Washington Cities
Suggested Resolution
Resolution Title: Supporting Continued Criminal Justice Funding
Background: The Washington State Legislature has recognized the need for additional funding
support for local criminal justice agencies when they enacted the City/County Criminal Justice
Assistance Act. These funds have been used by communities across the state to improve the
criminal justice system at the 10callevel.
Issues: The criminal justice system and our communties continue to be adversely impacted by
crime. Cities and towns face not only differing problems, but also limited fiscal capacity. The
Criminal Justice Funding Distribution to Cities provision of the additional criminal justice
assistance provided in the legislation referenced above sunsets in 1997. A second issue concerns
the portion of these funds allocated for cities which contract for police services. Of the
$4,358,000 estimated for distribution in 1996, $723,000 is set aside for these contract cities.
Concern is raised in regard to the policy motive for giving cities an incentive to contract, while
they can also apply for funding under the other three grant areas. The entire balance of funding
available should be available for application by all Washington Cities.
Position: The Association of Washington Cities should request the Legislature continue the
criminal justice assistance funding, and further request the Legislature give cities and towns
additional local option funding sources for local criminal justice programs. As well, contract law
enforcement funding should not be subsidized by the State, leaving all funds available for
competition and receipt by all Washington cities.
\,
Association of Washington Cities
Suggested Resolution
Resolution Title: Supporting Practical Solutions to Land Use Regulation Issues
Background: The Growth Management Act of 1990 limits amendments to local comprehensive
plans to once a year and made no changes in State law to facilitate annexations within the
mandated potential annexation areas. In 1995, Washington citizens sponsored property rights
legislation in the form of Initiative 164 which was defeated as Referendum 48 in November, 1995.
Meeting the provisions of enacted legislation (GMA) as well as the issues raised by defeated
Referenda (48) create challenges for local government.
Issues: Local governments do not drive the annexation process, but do want to be responsive
when residents and businesses in the unincorporated areas chose to join cities and towns. To
accomplish the needs of the residents and businesses, cities and towns need a more flexible
annexation process and the ability to revise their comprehensive plans more often than annually.
Additional concerns are raised when, in promoting the public health, safety and welfare of the
community, local zoning is challenged as a regulatory takings of private property rights. Such
issues have the potential place an undue financial burden on taxpayers.
Position: The Association of Washington Cities should:
..
support legislation to facilitate annexations where ultimate jurisdictional boundaries have
been agreed upon in order to implement Growth Management Act provisions, and
..
support legislation to allow local comprehensive plans to be amended more than once each
year, and
..
support practical solutions to private property disputes that address specific concerns of
property owners, including regulatory reform if necessary. These solutions should not alter
the Constitutional definition of takings, place an undue financial burden on taxpayers, or
diminish local governments' ability to protect the public health, safety. and .welfare of their
communities.
1996 Legislation Session
End of Session Update
General Local Government
Several bills were introduced to restrict local government officials' access or lobbying efforts with
their State Legislators. Two were passed in the House, but died in Senate committee. The first
bill, ESHB 2289 would have allowed only elected officials and one additional designee to lobby
the State Legislature. The second, SHB 2669, would have prohibited local governments ITom
paying membership dues to a local government association if the total amount of the dues
constituted 67% or more of the association's revenues unless the association agreed to a state
audit, complied with open records and meetings laws, and did not use monies or facilities for
campaign purposes. It is not yet clear whether this issue will continue as an active one during the
1997 Legislative Session.
Other legislation passed this year will delete the requirement for cities to collect sales tax: on
charges levied for copying public records (ESSB 6284). SHB 2664, also passed and signed will
allow local governments to acquire electronic data processing or telecommunications equipment,
software or associated services through a competitive negotiation process, rather than a
competitive bidding process. Finally, SB 6718 directs county auditors to impose a $1 surcharge
on documents filed with their offices. The monies collected will be used only for local government
archives and records services, which are in need of improvement.
Law and Justice
It was anticipated that the 1996 Session would be the one for juvenile offender legislation.
However, this legislation died for both policy and budget reasons. The House wanted to
automatically refer 16 and 17 years olds who commit certain violent offenses to adult court. The
Senate wanted to establish a Youth Authority system which puts older juveniles in the juvenile
system with the possibility of referral to the adult system if the court determines they have not
been rehabilitated. The Senate also felt the House proposal was short of funding, and despite
numerous attempts to work out a compromise, . none was attained.
SB 6211, which requires each city, county or town to be responsible for costs incident to
misdemeanor and gross misdemeanor offenses committed by adults occurring in their respective
jurisdictions and referred by their law enforcement agencies, passed the Legislature. The final bill
gives cities who have enacted certain portions of the misdemeanor criminal code until July 1998
to do so.
SB 6204 also passed this session, redefining negligent driving and allowing for a charge against
drivers where alcohol or drugs are indicated but a Dill can not be assessed. The bill also reduces
driving without a valid operator's license to an inftaction. This change lightens the load on the
court system, while imposing a heavy fin on violators.
Land Use and Community Development
In the property rights arena, city interests sought to build consensus on the types and state and
local actions appropriate for addressing land owner fiustrations at the root of recent property
rights concerns. Several bills were introduced which would have:
~ insured that land is assessed to reflect applied regulations;
~ enhanced public notice about land use regulations affecting particular properties;
~ helped insure that local governments provide good customer services as regulators,
promoting creative regulatory techniques; and
authorized new funding sources to purchase lands for conservation.
~
These and other measures fell victim to political differences between the Democratically-
controlled Senate and the Republican-controlled House. illtimately only a few measures in this
area were signed into law.
~ SHB 2567 deals with county assessor notification of local land use changes.
~ SHB 2386 requires local governments to respond to citizen requests for infonnation about
land use regulations applicable to their property.
In the growth management arena, the Legislature passed bills which dealt with industrial
development and mater planned resorts, but the Governor vetoed all of these measures except HB
2467. HB 2467 creates a pilot program in Clark County for establishment of industrial site banks
to market to prospective developers. One piece of legislation detrimental to cities was passed,
SSB 6422. This bill requires cities to identify the need for general aviation facilities and the use of
regulations to insure these facilities are available and not encroached on by incompatible land
uses.
Personnel and Labor Relations
It was a very quiet session in the personnel and labor relations arena, and no controversial issues
were introduced. The Joint Pension Policy Committee discussed PERS 3 in December, 1995. This
proposal would create a new pension system consisting of both a defined benefit and a defined
contribution. State and local employee groups oppose PERS 3 because they want a richer benefits
package. The Legislature was only interested in considering the PERS 3 proposal, but given
labor's opposition, the issue died before the beginning ofthe session. If Republicans win control
of the House and Senate in the next election, the 1997 Legislative Session could be very active in
the personnel and labor relations arena.
Municipal Finance
During this session, the Legislature successfully overrode the Governor's veto of their Business &
Occupation tax cut from the previous session. They also entertained several pieces of legislation
from non-tribal gaming interests to reduce local taxes on card tables and pull tabs. If the
industry's contentions about the adverse impact of tribal gaming are substantiated by next session,
it may be more difficult to defend current local tax options.
Several property tax reduction measurers were also considered. The House passed two versions
of a proposal to reduce the 106% limit on property tax growth to the lower of 106% or inflation.
Because the measures applied to the state, counties and cities, it would have shifted tax capacity
to junior taxing district without necessarily reducing local taxes. The House and Senate were
unable to agree on this issue.
ESHB 6093 did pass and was signed by the Governor. This bill requires cities to repair sidewalks
when they cause the damage or fail to enforce an ordinance resulting in the damage. Finally, work
is already underway to hold a series of forums on state transportation funding in advance of the
next Legislative Session. This issue is expected to be a major one next spring.
MEMO
..
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Greg McCormick, AICP
SCHOOLIMPACTFEEINTERLOCALAGREEMENT
April 9, 1996
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Background
The Growth Management Act allows local jurisdictions to collect impact fees from new
residential development to provided public school facilities to serve new development. On
November 21, 1995 the City Council passed Ordinance 95-249 which put into place a
system for the city to collect impact fees from new residential developments on behalf of
the Federal Way School District. This ordinance requires an interlocal agreement between
the city and the District that sets forth the responsibilities of the city and District with
respect to the collection and distribution of impact fees. The City Attorney's office has
been working with the District over the past several months to develop an interlocal
agreement to meet the requirements of Ordinance 95-249.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the LUTC forward a recommendation authorizing City Manager Ken
Nyberg to sign the proposed interlocal agreement with the Federal Way School District.
1:\greg\intrlocLagr
3 /~/9k
¡--,-', r.'-.'j' ffiì ~~-' [U.
" ," I -
W U; [II
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR THE COLLECTION, DISTRIBUTION,
AND EXPENDITURE OF SCHOOL IMPACT FEES
TIllS AGREEMENT is dated effective the 22nd day of December, 1995 and is entered into
by and between the City of Federal Way (the "City") and the Federal Way School District
No. 210 (the "District").
WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature passed the Growth Management Act of 1990
and 1991, RCW 36.70A et seq. and RCW 82.02 et seq. (the "Act"), which authorizes the
collection of impact fees on development activity to provide public school facilities to serve new
development; and
WHEREAS, the Act requires that impact fees may only be collected for public facilities
which are addressed by a capital facilities element of a comprehensive land use plan; and
WHEREAS, the District has prepared a capital facilities plan in compliance with the Act
which has been adopted by the City of Federal Way as a subelement of the City of Federal Way
Comprehensive Plan by Ordinance No. 95-248; and
WHEREAS, the City of Federal Way has adopted Ordinance No. 95-249 for the assessment
and collection of school impact fees upon certain new residential developments on behalf of the
District; and
WHEREAS, the City of Federal Way and the District enter into this Agreement pursuant to
and in accordance with the State Interlocal Cooperation Act, Chapter 39.34 RCW, for the
purposes of administrating and distributing the authorized impact fees.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL PROMISES HEREIN, IT
IS AGREED THAT:
1. GENERAL AGREEMENT:
The City of Federal Way (the "City") and the Federal Way School District No. 210 (the
"District") agree to comply with the terms of this Agreement which govern the collection,
distribution, and expenditure of school impact fees.
II. RESPONSffiILITIES OF THE DISTRICT:
The District, by and through its employees, agents, and representatives, agrees to:
A. Annually submit to the City a six-year capital facilities plan or an update of a
previously adopted plan, which meets the requirements of the Act and Ordinance No. 95-249 on
or before April 1st of each year.
B. Authorize King County, as Treasurer for the District, to establish a School Impact Fee
Account into which school impact fees may be deposited.
C. Expend impact fee revenues provided to the District under this Agreement, and all
interest proceeds on such revenues, for expenditures authorized by Sec. 14-216 of the Federal
Way City Code ("FWCC").
D. Prepare an annual report in accordance with the requirements ofRCW 82.02.070 and
FWCC Sec. 14-218 showing the system improvements that were financed in whole or in part by
impact fees and the amount of funds expended. The annual report shall be sent to the City on
or before April 1st of each year for the preceding calendar year.
E. Refund impact fees and interest earned on impact fees when a refund is required under
applicable law; including but not limited to (1) when the proposed development activity does not
proceed and no impact to the District has resulted; (2) when the impact fees or interest earned
on impact fees are not expended or encumbered within the time limits established by law; or (3)
when the school impact fee program is terminated.
F. Maintain all accounts and records necessary to ensure proper accounting for all impact
fee funds and compliance with this Agreement, the Act, and Ordinance No. 95-249; including,
without limitation, accounting for fees received, interest earned on fees, date of receipt of funds,
and the capital or system improvements that were financed by the impact fees.
G.
Indemnification and Hold Harmless.
1. The District shall, at its own expense, protect, defend, indemnify, and hold
harmless the City, its officers, employees and agents, from any and all costs, claims,
judgments or awards of damages, arising out of or in any way resulting from the acts or
omissions of the District, its officers, employees or agents, relating to the District's
implementation of the school impact fee program, performance of the duties set forth in
paragraph II of this Agreement, or compliance with the terms of Ordinance No. 95-249, all
as may be amended from time to time. This indemnification by the District of the City shall
include, but not be limited to:
(a)
The District's responsibility to refund any fees with interest, which are
determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to have been
improperly paid, regardless of whether the City erroneously required
the fee amount;
(b)
The District's agreement not to impose any liability on the City for the
City's failure to collect the proper fee amount or any fee from a
developer conducting any development activity, but the City shall make
reasonable attempts to collect such fee;
(c)
All acts or omissions of the District, its officers, employees or agents
relating to implementation of the school impact fee program.
-2-
2. The District shall, at its Own expense, protect, defend, indemnify, and hold
harmless the City, its officers, employees, and agents, from any and all costs, claims,
judgments, or awards of damages, resulting from a challenge to the legality of Ordinance No.
95-249; provided however, that if the District offers to defend, the District shall not be liable
for any of the City's attorney's fees or litigation costs incurred after such offer to defend is
made; provided further, that if the District defends the City, the District shall be authorized
to settle any such challenge. If the City declines to agree to the settlement, the City may
continue the challenge, but shall be responsible for its own City attorney's fees and litigation
costs.
3. The District further agrees that the District shall, at its own cost and expense,
protect, defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, employees, and agents
from any and all costs, claims, judgments, or awards or damages arising out of or in any way
resulting from the District's failure to refund impact fees, or interest on such impact fees,
including but not limited to a determination that impact fees from development activity that
was not completed are not refundable because the funds were expended or encumbered by
the District whether or not the District's determination was made in good faith; provided
however, that if the District offers to defend, the District shall not be liable for any of the
City's attorney's fees or litigation costs incurred after such offer to defend is made.
4. The District's duties to the City under this Section shall not be diminished or
extinguished by the prior termination of this Agreement pursuant to Section VI.
III.
RESPONSffiILITIES OF THE CITY:
The City, by and through its employees, agents, and representatives, agrees to:
A. Timely review the District's updated Capital Facilities Plan and the District's revised
impact fee schedule.
B. Deposit promptly all impact fees collected on behalf of the District in the School
Impact Fee Account in the Office of the King County Treasurer, and advise the District
concerning the dates that the impact fees were received and the names of the applicants..
C. After receipt of the District's annual report required by Section II.D. above, prepare
an annual report based solely upon the District's annual report, as required by RCW 82.02.070(1).
D. Determine whether applicants are excluded from the application of the impact fee
pursuant to FWCC Sec. 14-214, as may be amended from time to time.
E. Indemnification. Except as provided in Section II.G. I, 2, 3, and 4, the City shall, at
its own cost and expense, protect, defend, indemnify and hold harmless the District, its officers,
employees, or agents, from any and all costs, claims, judgments or awards of damages, arising
out of the acts or omissions of the City, its officers, employees or agents relating to the City's
implementation of the school impact fee program and performance of the duties set forth in
-3-
Paragraph III of this Agreement~ provided However, that if the City offers to defend, the City
shall not be liable for any of the District's attorney's fees or litigation costs incurred after such
offer to defend is made, and provided further that the District shall promptly refund any fees as
required by a final court order including payment of any pre- or post-judgment interest. The City
shall not be liable for judgments or awards of damages unless there is a finding that the City's
conduct was at least negligent~ provided further, that if the City defends the District, the City
shall be authorized to settle any such challenge. If the District declines to agree to the settlement,
the District may continue the challenge, but shall be responsible for its own District attorney's
fees and litigation costs. The City's duties to the District under this Section shall not be
diminished or extinguished by prior tennination of this Agreement pursuant to Section VI.
IV.
GENERAL TERMS:
A. This Agreement shall become effective when executed by both parties and filed with
the Secretary of State and with King County, and shall remain in effect until tenninated pursuant
to Section VI of this Agreement.
B. It is recognized that amendments to this Agreement may become necessary, and such
amendment shall become effective only when the parties have executed a written addendum to
this Agreement.
C. The District acknowledges that the City is vested with the authority to impose and
collect school impact fees. The parties agree that the City shall in no event be liable to the
District for the payment of money in connection with the school impact fee program, with the
exception of remitting to the District the impact fees collected for the District.
V. AUDIT:
A. The District's records and documents with respect to all matters covered by this
Agreement shall be subject to inspection, review, or audit by the City or appropriate state agency.
B. The District agrees to cooperate with any monitoring or evaluation activities conducted
by the City that pertain to the subject of this Agreement. The District agrees to allow the City,
or appropriate state agencies and/or any of their employees, agents, or representatives, to have
full access to and the right to examine during nonnal business hours, all of the District's records
with respect to all matters covered by this Agreement. The City and/or any of its employees,
agents, or representatives shall be pennitted to audit, examine, and make excerpts or transcripts
from such records and to make audits of all invoices, materials, payrolls, and record of matters
covered by this Agreement. The City will give fifteen (15) days advance notice to the District
of fiscal audits to be conducted.
C. The results and records of said audit shall be maintained and disclosed in accordance
with Chapter 42.17 RCW.
-4-
VI.
TERMINATION:
A. The obligation to collect impact fees under this Agreement may be terminated without
cause by the City, in whole or in part, at any time. All other obligations under this Agreement
shall remain in effect until both of the following conditions have been satisfied: (1) the City or
the District provides written notice that this Agreement is being terminated; and (2) neither the
District, nor the City on behalf of the District, retain unexpended or unencumbered impact fees.
The obligations under Section D.G. and Section ill.E. of this Agreement shall be continuing and
shall not be diminished or extinguished by the termination of this Agreement.
R The District shall be responsible to ensure that upon termination of this Agreement,
any remaining unexpended or unencumbered impact fees are refunded pursuant to RCW
82.02.080.
C. Nothing herein shall limit, waive, or extinguish any right or remedy provided by this
Agreement or by law that either party may have in the event that the obligations, terms, and
conditions set forth in this Agreement are breached by the other party.
Vll.
SEVERABILITY:
In the event any term or condition of this Agreement or application thereof to any person or
circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other terms, conditions, or
applications of this Agreement which can be given effect without the invalid term, condition or
application. To this end, the terms and conditions of this Agreement are declared severable.
vm.
RIGHTS TO OTHER PARTIES:
It is understood and agreed that this Agreement is solely for the benefit of the parties hereto
and conveys no right to any other party.
IX.
GOVERNING LAW AND FILING:
This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with, and the validity and
performance hereof shall be governed by, the laws of the State of Washington. This Agreement
shall be filed with the Secretary of the Board of Directors of District No. 210, the City Clerk of
the City of Federal Way, the King County Records and Elections Division, the Secretary of State,
and the Washington Department of Community Development.
X. ADMINISTRATION:
A.
The Cityls representative shall be:
Marie Mosley
Deputy Management Services Director
City of Federal Way
33530 1st Way S.
Federal Way, Washington 98003
Telephone: (206) 661-4063
-5-
B.
The District's representative shall"be:
Jody Putman
Federal Way School District No. 210
31405 18th Avenue South
Federal Way, Washington 98003
Telephone: (206) 941-0100
XI.
ENTJRE AGREEMENT /WAIVER OF DEFAULT:
The parties agree that this Agreement is the complete expression of the terms hereto and any
oral representations or understandings not incorporated herein are excluded. Both parties
recognize that time is of the essence in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement.
Waiver of any default shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any subsequent default. Waiver or
breach of any provision of the Agreement shall not be deemed to be waiver of any other or
subsequent breach and shall not be construed to be a modification of the terms of the Agreement
unless stated to be such through written approval by the City, which shall be attached to the
original Agreement.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, W ASlllNGTON
FEDERAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICT
NO. 210
Kenneth E. Nyberg
City Manager
Gail Pierson
President
Board of Directors
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Londi K. Lindell
City Attorney
Thomas 1. Vander Ark
Superintendent
K:IINTERLCLIIMPACfFE.SD
3n.2196
-6-
Item
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL LAND USEtTRANSPORT A TION COMMITTEE
Date:
April 10, 1996
~~
From:
Ken Miller, Street Systems Manager
Subject:
SW Campus Drive and 6th Avenue SW Traffic Signal
Rackgrmmd'
The SW Campus Drive at 6th Avenue SW traffic signal design is approximately 30%
complete. We have also met with Campus Estates and Campus Highlands Homeowner
Associations to discuss the project and begin right of way acquisition.
After completing the preliminary design it appears that the center left hand turn lane can be
extended to the southeast thru the little league entrance within the existing bond project budget
of $799,00. Cost to extend the lane at the time of the project construction is estimated to be
$64,000. Campus Drive is a high speed, high capacity arterial and this type of facility
requires limited access and turn lanes at access points. The center left turn lane at the little
league entrance will provide for the safe operation of the street and reduce the possibility of
rear end accidents due to left turns to and from the driveway.
The preliminary project design plan will be presented at the meeting for discussion and
approval.
CnmmÏ1tp.p. Rp.cnmmp.ndntinn:
Land Use/Transportation Committee will recommend approval of following items;
1.
The 30% design plan, including the extension of the center left turn lane thru
the little league driveway to maintain safe operations.
Proceed with right of way acquisition and final design.
Forward the above recommendations to the May 7, 1996 Council meeting for
approval.
2.
3.
Property purchase and sale agreements will be brought back to Council for approval and the
final design for authorization to bid.
G:\CLERK\CMTE2.REC 3112/96
K: \STREETS\CAMPUS. CO V
~
SEATAC
..
M~A~L~L
April 1, 1996
City of Federal Way Land Use Committee
33530 1st Way South
Federal Way, W A 98003
RE: Non Residential Zoning Codes and Design Guidelines
Dear City Council Members:
SeaTac Mall Management, local architect and expansion architect have had an opportunity to review the
non-residential zoning codes and design guidelines recommended by the Planning Commission to the
Land Use Committee. Our concerns, which are addressed individually below, are focussed around a few
issues including economic impact on future remodels and expansion. no matter how large or small, and
control of design.
The City of Federal Way, Chamber of Commerce and SeaTac Mall share a common goal, economic
growth for the City of Federal Way. This has been displayed at the Economic Vitality Committee
meetings. We ask the Land Use Committee to review the following items which may actually prohibit
growth.
~
Propsed amendments to FWCC Article XVII, Landscaping - We request the landscape buffer of parking
areas along the street remain at five feet and not be expanded to ten feet. SeaTac Mall would be forced to
reorganize ~llot plus would suffer from the loss of land bey any expansion plans.
Proposed Zoning Code, Section 22-792. Retail Use and Section 22-794. Entertåinment - The current
expansion plans exhibit a need for a height of 50 feet for both of these uses. The proposed codes have a
height limit of 45' for retail and only 35' for entertainment. ..
Sec. 22-1634. Site Design (d) Pedestrian Circulation and Public Spaces. How many paths would the Ma1Ì,4?'
need to provide? How would this regulation be applied to an expansion? Every lost stall increases the ~.
cost of an' expansion by $6,500 per stalL
Guidelines have become regulation through Note nwnber 7 and Note nwnber 1 of the Zoning Code,
Section 22-792. Retail use. Control of design has become the responsibilty of the Community Director not"..
the Private Owner and their architect. During design, it is unclear to the developer the Dirêctor's"
interpretation of feasible, "shoulds", wùess precluding... Disagreements will extend the timeline of the
project, extending costs and could result in attorneys designing the project. Intent of current Director
may be consistent with current land owners but will future Directors?
Sec. 22-1634. Site Design (b) specifies parking shalf be lôCated behind the building wùess "site
characteristics preclude". Determination if site characteristics preclude will affect our proposal for a pad
location for retail trade dependent of good visiblity and access to parking.
1928 South SeaTac Mall~Federal Way, WA 98003~Fax (206) 946-1413
Management Office (206) 839-6156.Marketing Office (206) 941-9238.
Sec. 22-1634. Site Design (c) Parking structures. Ø-) An example of feasible.
Sec. 22-1634. Site Design (d) (3) An example offeasible.
Sec. 22-1634. Site Design. (f) Commercial service facilities (I) "Commerical services should be
grouped." The proposed pad needs its own service area. Servicing of the Mall is dependent on multiple
service yards.
Sec. 22-1634. Site Design. (f) Commercial service facilities (I)a. "Service yards... shall be completely
screened from view outside the service yard." This is not and will not always be possible. We need
flexibility in the location of service yards.
Sec. 22-1634 Site Design (g) It is very difficult to control spillover especially at property edges adjacent
to othèr properties.
Sec. 22-1635. Building Design (c) Form and scale. (1) "extent possible" This vague statement can be
expensive and frustrating as an architect revises drawings.
We recommend Design Guidelines be guidelines and not regulations. Lets create incentives to the private
property owner and not prohibit expansion through economic constraints of the proposed guidelines. ".
Enclosed is a copy of the October 25, 1995 letter submitted to the Planning Commission as written
testimony. If you have any questions on either document, please do not hesitate to contact Ed Buffalow,
(206)643-9100, or myself at 839-6156. As we further review the documents, we will sUbmit further
comments.
Sincerely,
fg~~~
I"
....
Elaine C. Mansoor
General Manager