HEX 18-002 Appeal - InterpretationARAMBURU & EUSTIS, LLP
Attorneys at Law
J. Richard Aramburu
rick@aramburu.eustls.com
Jeffrey M. Eustis
eustis@aramburu.eustis.com
720 Third Avenue, Suite 2000
Seattle, WA 98104
Tel 206.625.9515
Fax 206.682.1376
www.aramburu.eustis.com
November 27, 2018
Brian Davis
Director of Community Development NOV 2 7 2jt8
City of Federal Way ICC
lyrerksotfr e33325 8 Ave. S. Of ettera yl a
Federal Way, WA 98003
Re: Appeal of Interpretation #18-01 (18-105277-UP), Greenline Business Park
Application (File Nos. 17-105489-00-SE & 17-105490-00-SE)
Dear Mr. Davis:
This office represents Save Weyerhaeuser Campus (SWC), a Washington non profit
corporation. This letter constitutes the appeal of the Department of Community
Development's Interpretation #18-01 (18-105277-UP) issued on November 8, 2018.
The content of this appeal is as follows.
1. DECISION APPEALED.
SWC appeals Interpretation #18-01 (18-105277-UP) issued by the Department of
Community Development (DCD) on November 8, 2018, including its treatment of the
Weyerhaeuser Company Concomitant Pre -Annexation Zoning Agreement (CZA).
2. INTEREST OF SWC.
This appeal is filed by SWC on behalf of its members. SWC is a Washington non-profit
corporation concerned with the future use and development of the former
Weyerhaeuser Corporate Campus (WCC). SWC members own property and reside in
neighborhoods nearby the WCC and are adversely impacted by development on the
property, including aesthetic, visual, traffic, stormwater and other impacts that arise
from such development. SWC has filed numerous comments on proposals to develop
the WCC beginning in 2016, including comments on the Greenline Business Park
application in May, 2018, which are incorporated by reference herein.
November 27, 2018
Page 2
SWC is represented in this appeal by J. Richard Aramburu, telephone (206) 625-
9515, email rick@aramburu-eustis.com. Please note, Mr. Aramburu will be unavailable
from December 4 to December 20, 2018, and from March 4 to March 8, 2019, and
requests that nothing be scheduled during those times as well as immediately before or
after those dates.
3. PROPOSED PROJECT.
The applicant for the Interpretation appealed is Federal Way Campus LLC, which is the
applicant for development of the Greenline Business Park (File Nos. 17-105489-00-UP
& 17-105490-00-SE), the application for which was determined to be complete on May
14, 2018.
4. OBJECTIONS TO AND ERRORS IN THE INTERPRETATION DECISION.
4.1 InappEo
riate Subject Matter for Inte retation• Failure to Amend CZA.
The addition of S. 324th as a street in the City of Federal Way east of Interstate
5 was not anticipated or contemplated when the CZA was reviewed and approved by
the Federal Way City Council. The inclusion of S. 324th and its impact on the MFB is a
new major circumstance requiring an amendment of the CZA, and approval by the
Federal Way City Council instead of an interpretation.
In addition, the CZA did not consider the width of the MFB between compatible
uses, which is another new major circumstance requiring an amendment of the CZA,
and approval by the Federal Way City Council instead of an interpretation.
4.2 Failure to Incor orate Decision into Land Use A lication.
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) section 19.50.050(1) provides as follows:
1) Applicability. Interpretations issued by the director of community development
that are related to a land use or subdivision application shall be incorporated into
the director's decision on the application and be subject to applicable notice
provisions for the decision.
(Emphasis supplied). Both of the interpretations at issue are related to the application
for Greenline Business Park (File Nos. 17-105489-00-UP & 17-105490-00-SE) as they
pertain to development activity on the north side of that development proposal. The
Director erred in not incorporating any interpretation requests with processing and
review of that land use application.
4.3 Failure to Comply with SEPA.
The applicant for the Greenline Business Park has submitted an environmental
November 27, 2018
Page 3
checklist for that development and the issuance of a threshold determination is
pending. Any consideration of these interpretation requests, and the environmental
impact thereof, which includes the reduction and/or elimination of the Managed Forest
Buffer (MFB) should be reviewed and considered as part of the SEPA process for the
Greenline Business Park proposal.
4.4 Interpretation Issue #1: North Side of the CP-1 Property Should Have
Minimum Buffer of 50 feet.
In the event that the Hearing Examiner does not determine that the subject
matter of this interpretation requires an amendment to the CZA, then, in the alternative,
appellant contends that the DCD Director erred in establishing only a 25 foot buffer for
the north boundary of CP-1 property. The reasonable and appropriate interpretation of
the code is to have a minimum buffer of 50 feet in this area. Such a buffer is also
appropriate as a condition for the development of the Greenline Business Park
development under the State Environmental Policy Act. Filed plans in the application
for the Greenline Business Park already include a 50 foot buffer on the north side of the
property.
4.5 Interpretation Issue #2: MFB Adiacent to Extension of S. 324".
In the event that the Hearing Examiner does not determine that the subject
matter of this interpretation requires an amendment to the CZA, then, in the alternative,
appellant contends that the DCD Director erred in eliminating the MFB adjacent to the
proposed extension of S. 3241h along the north side of the CPA property. The CZA
requires a continuous buffer around the entire WCC, including the north side. The City
is not permitted to bargain away public interest and environmental protections to a
developer for dedication of a right-of-way. The possible construction of new streets,
with new right-of-way, was not contemplated at the time the CZA was adopted and is
not similar or analogous to the widening of an existing right-of-way. The minimum MFB
buffer should be 100 feet from the new S. 324'h Street when it is constructed.
5. RELIEF REQUESTED.
The Federal Way Hearing Examiner is requested to reverse the Interpretation #18-01
and specifically to:
5.1 Reverse the interpretation decision because the subject matter requires an
amendment to CZA as described in Section 4.1 above
5.2 Reverse the interpretation decision and require the interpretation request be
incorporated in the forthcoming decision on the Greenline Business Park;
5.3 Require consideration of any MFB setback as a part of analysis of the
November 27, 2018
Page 4
Greenline Business Park under SEPA;
5.4 If the Examiner does not grant relief under Subsections 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3
above, to require a minimum fifty -foot MFB along the north side of the CP-1 property;
5.5 If the Examiner does not grant relief under Subsections 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3
above, to require a minimum one hundred foot MFB setback from the right-of-way of S.
3241h if and when it is established;
5.6. For such additional relief as is appropriate and just under the premises;
5.7. Appellant reserves the right to amend this petition.
Dated this�day of November, 2018.
ctfull ubmitt d,
Richard Aramburu
WSBA #466
Attorney for SWC