The URL can be used to link to this page

LUTC PKT 05-02-2005 City of Federal Way City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee May 2, 2005 5:30 p.m. MEETING AGENDA 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 18, 2005, and April 4, 2005 3. PUBLIC COMMpNT (3 minutes) 4. BUSINESS ITEMS A. South 336th Street at 1$1 Avenue South Intersection Improvements- 30% Design Status Report Lakota Creek East Branch Restoration Project - Bid Award Joe's Creek Habitat Restoration Project, 50% Design Status Report AG 05-037 SW 356th Pond Fence Project Acceptance CTR Interlocal Agreement with King County 23rd Ave S & S 3I4tll Street (Private Rd) Traffic Signal, Project Acceptance 2004 Comprehensive Plan 1. Follow Up on Puget Sound Partnership Request 2. Kitts Comer SR99 Phase 11- north bound left turn lane @ 332nd B. C. D. E. F. G. H. L Explanation of City Tree Ordinance 6. ADJOURN 5. FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDA ITEMS City Hall Council Chambers Action Sallown/5 Min Action Bucich/5 Min Action Bucich/S Min Action Bucich/S Mill Action Perezll 0 Min Action Miller/S Min Action Clark/IS Mill Action ClarklHarris/iS Min Infonnation Perez/5 Min Information McCIung/lO Min Committee Memhers Jack Dovey, Chair Eric F(lison Michael Park GILUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summa"ies 2005\05-02-05 LUTC Agcnda.doc City Staff Kathy McCll/ng, Comml/nity Development Services Director Marianne Stiles, Administrative Assistant 253-835.270 I City of Federal Way City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee April 18, 2005 5:30pm City Hall Council Chambers MEETING MINUTES In attendance: Committee members Jack Dovey, Chair, Council Member Michael Park, Council Member Eric Faison, Deputy Mayor Linda Kochmar; Council Member Jim Ferrell; City Manager David Moseley; Assistant City Attorney Karen Kirkpatrick; Community Development Services Director Kathy McClung; Public Works Director Cary Roe; Public Works Deputy Director Ken Miller; Traffic Engineer Rick Perez; Surface Water Manager Paul Bucich; Senior Planner Margaret Clark, Associate Planner Isaac Conlen, Consultant Betsy Czark, and Administrative Assistants E. Tina Piety & Marianne Stiles, 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Dovey called the meeting to order at 5:34 pm. 2. AMMENDMENT TO AGENDA Motion to add Maravista Platt update to agenda moved & passed. 3. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES The minutes of April 4, 2005, were not approved. Cary Roe - Requested clarification on an item in the 04-04 minutes: were they authorized to move forward with both the bridge and the pavement analysis, and authorized to contact King County? Council member Dovey said this understanding was correct. LIoyd's is to pay for the study. Mr. Roe suggested that revised minutes for 04-04-05 be submitted to the May 2nd meeting for approval. This was accepted. 4. PUBLIC COMMENT There were no public comments at this time. 5. BUSINESS ITEMS A. AG #03-141 - 2003 Citywide Pavement Marking Project Acceptance - Mr. Perez went over the background on this project. He suggested the City accept the work as complete. It is finished for $99,226.89, The Committee accepted the staff recommendation. It was Moved/Seconded/Carried (m/s/c). This issue will be placed on the May 3, 2005, City Council Agenda. B. 181 Avenue South @ South 312lh Street Access Management ~ Mr. Perez went over the background on this proposed safety project. Project reviews safety access for left-hand turns out of the driveways of the two businesses. Staff investigated and found there have been three collisions in the last two years, a total of 12 collisions since 1997, all of which involved access on 1 sl A venue only. 10 collisions involved left-hand turns onto 181 from the businesses. Implementing restrictions would prevent further accidents. Mr. Perez outlined three options, recommending installation of the C-Curb. 1) Take no action (not recommended). <11L1.JTC\LUTC Agendas and Sun""""i" 2005\04-18-05 LInc Minules.doc Land Use/Transportation Committee Page 2 April 18,2005 2) Install a barrier line (18" solid yellow line) and a right-hand turn only sign, $1,000 to implement and require police enforcement. 3) Install a C-Curb, which is a raised curb and would be more effective, $2,500 to implement and would be self- enforcing. There would be a one-mile detour and perhaps some loss of business. John Wilde, Citizen - He told the committee that there were more close calls than reported accidents. He said that an 18" line was not enough of a deterrent Preventing collisions should be most important. He has seen vehicles turn left and travel north in the southbound lane for a distance before merging into the northbound lane. When the re-zone comes back up heurges the city to address safety issues along with the re-zone. Councilman Ferrell asked what the access impact to the businesses would be? He suggested that any action needs forethought. He asked, what is the back up at that light? Southbound, people are trying to break through the backed up traffic. He stated that access to business matters. As he heard it, nine accidents were from people turning left to get out of the project. One accident was for a left-hand turn into the driveway. People are driving on the wrong side of the road to avoid traffic back-ups. Councilman Ferrell told his fellow council members that he would approve a C-Curb, The committee discussed the location of entryways to the upcoming Lakota Platt (Which is located NW of this site on ISI) and the potential grocery/drug store, which is located east of this site. The Committee discussed U-turn capability, how the existing businesses would deal with the restriction ofleft hand turns on to 1 s\ whether the businesses have been notified (they have, Mr. Perez stated), visibility at the comer, and the cost of installation and removal of a C-curb. The Committee accepted the staff recommendation of Option #3. The recommendation was Moved/Seconded/Carried (m/slc). This issue will be placed on the May 3, 2005, City Council Agenda C. 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Margaret Clark, Senior Planner. 1) Puget Center Partnership Request - Request to change zoning from PO (Professional Office) to BN (Neighborhood Business). Staff recommended approval on condition of the deed restriction offered by the property owner. Don Barker - He told the committee he is with Powell Development Co, works with the owner, Paul Benton. He supports the staff recommendation and stated that they have 600' of frontage on I sl A venue so accessing the site will not be a problem. Paul Benton - The owner submitted a copy of a letter he wrote agreeing to deed restrictions. He stated that he was raised on the church property (whose pastor has concerns about what is built there) and that his father pastored the church. He is fully in accord with restricting development to exclude adult entertainment, taverns, and vehicle repair shops. The letter was entered into the public record. Bill Murphy - Mr. Murphy is a practicing attorney who lives close to the mentioned property and has lived there for 28 years. He stated that Bob Roper asked him to attend on behalf of the Mirror Lake Residential Community. Mr. Murphy stated that from the corner of this intersection east on 3I2th to Pacific Hwy is less than a mile- there are multiple large grocery and retail stores there. South on 1 sl is the Merrill Lynch building, which has unoccupied office space. The Quad shopping center is also close by. He disputes the facts of the developers and is concerned, as the discussion on the C-curb for this same intersection previously in the agenda demonstrates, about traffic, safety, and also water quality. He urges the developers rezoning request be denied and submits that there is no new need for development. No questions. Councilman Faison stated that Federal Way has a general policy to protect single-family residences. He said the uses and converting ITom PO to BN are significant. He will support a change but wants it to be done like Kitt's Comer to address specific development. Councilman Dovey asked, if the change were approved as recommended, what would happen? They will work with applicant to come up with a site plan that will come back to LUTC. Motion was passed for Item C subtopic 1, with the addition of an added development agreement. (Later it is rescinded. This item did NOT PASS but was held for next meeting.) G,\LUTCILUTC Agendas and Summaries 2005\04.18-05 LUTC Minutes doc Land Use/Transportation Committee Page 3 April 18,2005 Ms. Clark stated that staff will need to receive direction from the council on this issue before they can work with the applicant and bring the plan back to the next LUTe. Council members discussed restricting fast food restaurants, car washes, vehicle services & repair shops, the amount of light pollution, surface parking, and the fit in the neighborhood of a grocery or drug store. Further discussion with the property owner regarding group homes, multi-unit staff housing was suggested. Ms. Clark said that the process is for the council to approve. Councilman Dovey suggested that the council talk it over as it goes through the process; as the developer is attending the meeting, there will be no surprises. Ms. McClung expressed a wish to find the simplest way to address the council's goals. Decision: Hold for next meeting. The Committee decided to hold the item. This issue will be revisited on the May 2, 2005, LUTC Agenda. 2) Housing Chapter Update ~ Consultant Betsy Czark provided an update of 'Chapter 5, Housing' current policies and went over text that had been added to support the data. Federal Way is affordable compared to the rest of the area. There are seven policy categories: a) Preserving Neighborhood Character - changes are HPI, to have more moderate densities (such as cottage housing) be considered. HP2, moved to HP 13. HP3 to be reviewed and revised looking at accessory house development. b) Community Development c) Good Design & Diversified Housing Choice - now is more in accord with the Growth Management Act. d) Housing Affordability - three new policies are listed. e) Special Needs Housing - the defmition of family was simplified. f) Emergency & Transitional Housing - title was added; eliminated HP38. g) Regional Participation Council members discussed home prices in Federal Way, noting t hey are still $120,000 less than other parts of King County and that the market will bear out if prices are affordable or not. It was felt the council needs to better understand HP27, 28, & 29 before voting. Ms. Czark noted that the policies she outlined in the plan (such as density bonuses) are already in place. After a bit more discussion, Staff Recommendation was moved & passed, but as only part of item C, it was held with the rest of item C to be revisited at the next LUTC meeting. 3) Kitts Corner Request - Request to change zoning from BP (Business Park) to BC (Community Business) & RM2400 (MuItil-Family). D. Cottage Housing -Associate Planner Isaac Conlen went over the background on this concept. The council discussed the desirability of cottage housing in Federal Way, both for Seniors and for young or childless families. Mr Conlen was given direction to further study this. E. Maravista Plat annexation - Ms. McClung presented additional follow-up information on this agenda item from the last meeting. The citizens had attended that meeting to express their concerns. Maravista consists of 43 lots on 10.5 acres partially bordering Lake Geneva in the city's PAA. The City picks the issues to contest with King County and although this plat did not meet all the city's requirements, it did meet King County's, and is part of unincorporated King County. The builder has already agreed to widen its streets to meet Federal Way's city code. Ms. McClung met with concerned citizens following the last meeting and presented additional information to them. Council member Faison asked what R4/R6 zoning means in King County. Ms. McClung stated that the county (3000 sq ft) has a smaller minimum lot size than the city (7200 sq ft). The county uses a fonnula with maximum density, minimum density and lot averaging, which may result in a density closer to six lots per acre than four. 6. FUTURE MEETINGS The next scheduled meeting will be May 2, 2005. 7. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 7:05 p.rn. HILUTCILUTC Agendas and Summaries 2005\04.18-05 LUTC Minu!es.doc City of Federal Way City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee April 4, 2005 5:30 pm City Hall Council Chambers MEETING MINUTES In attendance: Committee Members Jack Dovey, Chair, and Council Members Michael Park and Eric Faison; Deputy Mayor Linda Kochmar; Council Member Jeanne Burbidge and Jim Ferrell; Public Works Director Cary Roe; City Attorney Pat Richardson; and Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety. 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Dovey called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. 2. RECESS - Field trip to the site. Mr. Roe gave the Committee an overview of his memo and explained four issues staff feels the Committee should consider during the field trip and during their deliberations, which are to be held once they return. 3. RESUME - The meeting reconvened at 6:21 p.m. 4. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES The minutes of March 21, 2005, were approved. 5. PUBLIC COMMENT None 6. BUSINESS ITEMS A. Lloyd Request for Amending Designated Vehicle Routes (376thI373rd) - King County closed this route to trucks before the City incorporated. The City does not know why they closed the route to trucks. Before that time, Lloyd Enterprises had used this route to travel to jobs to the south. Currently, their trucks must travel north and then south, which adds some 45 - 60 minutes to the trip and adversely affects their ability to effectively bid onjobs to the south. Mr. Couper, fi'om Lloyd Enterprises, came to the front to answer the Committee's questions. Bob Couper - In response to the Committee's questions, he commented that the total number of truck trips fi'om the gravel pit is 60 ~ 100 per day. When they were competitive to the south, some 20 - 30 percent of these trips used the route under discussion. The pit is open from 6:30 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., but for the most part, trucks are traveling in and out of the pit between 7:00 a.m. and 2:30/3:00 p.m. They want to avoid rush hour traffic. He stated they feel they can increase the tax base. They lost 15- 20 percent of their capacity and approximately 200 jobs when they lost the southern route. The Committee discussed the staffs four areas of concern. L Hylebos Creek bridge capacity. Due to the 1-5 HOV project, Hylebos Creek and the bridge may be moved further to the east. If this is done, the new bridge would be built to handle the trucks. A bridge capacity evaluation could be done in 30 to 60 days, possibly sooner. G,\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and SunuTlari<s 1005\04-04-05 LUTC Minutes Revised doc Land Userrransportation Committee Page 2 April 4, 2005 2. Roadway pavement section evaluation. The Federal Way section of this route was paved about two years ago. Mr. Roe commented that while the Federal Way pavement is in good shape, it is unknown what the road bed beneath the pavement is like and how it would handle the trucks. A pavement evaluation could also take 30 to 60 days. 3. Potential intersection improvements. Mr. Roe feels the sight distance and turning radius at the Milton Road and South 3761h Street intersection is probably fine, an analysis should be done to be sure. The vegetation at the 8th Avenue South and South 373rd intersection is a significant problem. Mr. Roe commented that regardless of the outcome of this meeting, he will probably ask the property owners to trim the vegetation themselves, or allow the City to use City equipment to trim the vegetation. He commented that an analysis should also be done on the turning radius at this intersection. The Commíttee discussed the suggested Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis for South 373rd Street and Pacific Highway South. When asked if the state would pay for the light (considering that Pacific Highway South is a state road), Mr. Roe replied that they might only if the Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis showed a need for a signal. Mr. Couper commented that their trucks traveled that intersection before the restriction with no problems. 4. Possible neighbor/public opposition. The Committee agreed that if this proposal goes forward, a neighborhood meeting should be held. Council Member Ferrell suggested that a first step should be to frod out why King County closed the route to trucks. The Committee expressed concern with the speed of the trucks. Mr. Couper replied that are very careful with their speed. They would probably travel the route in question at about 20 mph. Mr. Couper asked the Committee if the trucks could be allowed to use this route on the return trip. The trucks would be empty. Joshua Ubanks - He commented that the City should review the history of why the road was closed before spending money on the bridge analysis. It was moved to direct staff to research the King County history and ifno significant reason is found for the restriction, proceed concurrently with the bridge analysis and roadway evaluation. The motion died for the lack of a second. It was m/s/c to direct staff to request from Lloyd Enterprises, Inc. the necessary funds to conduct the Hylebos Creek bridge capacity analysis and roadway pavement evaluation, so the City can comprehensively evaluate the request and identify any required improvements; with the understanding that staff will research the King County history and speed limits. 5. FUTURE MEETINGS The next scheduled meeting will be April 18, 2005. 6. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 6:56 p.m. G,ILUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summ3J'ies 2005\04-04-05 LUTC Minute!; Revi<ed.doc Land Use/Transportation Committee Page 2 April 4, 2005 2. Roadway pavement section evaluation. The Federal Way section of this route was paved about two years ago. Mr. Roe commented that while the Federal Way pavement is in good shape, it is unknown what the road bed beneath the pavement is like and how it would handle the trucks. A pavement evaluation could also take 30 to 60 days. 3. potential intersection improvements. Mr. Roe feels the sight distance and turning radius at the Milton Road and South 376d1 Street intersection is probably fine, an analysis should be done to be sure. The vegetation at the 8th Avenue South and South 373rd intersection is a significant problem. Mr. Roe commented that regardless of the outcome of this meeting, he will probably ask the property owners to trim the vegetation themselves, or allow the City to use City equipment to trim the vegetation. He commented that an analysis should also be done on the turning radius at this intersection. The Committee discussed the suggested Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis for South 373rd Street and Pacific Highway South. When asked if the state would pay for the light (considering that Pacific Highway South is a state road), Mr. Roe replied that they might only if the Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis showed a need for a signal. Mr. Couper commented that their trucks traveled that intersection before the restriction with no problems. 4. Possible neighbor/public opposition. The Committee agreed that if this proposal goes forward, a neighborhood meeting should be held. Council Member Ferrell suggested that a fIrst step should be to find out why King County closed the route to trucks. The Committee expressed concern with the speed of the trucks. Mr. Couper replied that are very careful with their speed. They would probably travel the route in question at about 20 mph. Mr. Couper asked the Committee if the trucks could be allowed to use this route on the return trip. The trucks would be empty. Joshua Ubanks - He commented that the City should review the history of why the road was closed before spending money on the bridge analysis. It was moved to direct staff to research the King County history and if no significant reason is found for the restriction, proceed concurrently with the bridge analysis and roadway evaluation. The motion died for the lack of a second. It was m/s/c to direct staff to request from Lloyd Enterprises, Inc. the necessary funds to conduct the Hylebos Creek bridge capacity analysis and roadway pavement evaluation, so the City can comprehensively evaluate the request and identify any required improvements; with the understanding that staff will research the King County history and speed limits. 5. FUTURE MEETINGS The next scheduled meeting will be April 18, 2005. 6. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 6:56 p.m. G:\LUTCILUTC Agendas and Summaries 2005\04.04.05 LUTC Millules Revised doc CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: May 2, 2005 Land Use and Transportation Committee David H. Mose~anager ~ Marwan Salloum: ¥E.~ S~et Systems Manage . S336th Street at rt Ave South Intersection Improv ents; 30% Design Status Report POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council authorize staff to proceed with the design of the S336th Street at I sl Ave Intersection Improvements project and return to the Council at the 100% design completion for further reports and authorization? BACKGROUND: This project will add a westbound right-turn lane and extend the westbound left-turn lane on S 336th Street and extend the southbound left-turn lane on 1 Sl Way South. The traffic signal will be modified to accommodate the added lane. The purpose of the project is to improve traffic flow and reduce accidents by eliminating conflicts. The following provides a brief synopsis of the progress on this project to date. Currently, the project design is approximately 30% complete, which includes the following completed tasks: . The Topographical Surveys Right of Way Acquisition SEP A Submittals Project Design to 30% . . . Ongoing Tasks Include: . SEP A Approval and Project Pennitting Project Design to 100% . This project is scheduled to go to bid in July 2005 and start construction September 2005 . PROJECT ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES: Planning and Design Construction Cost (estimate) 15% Construction Contingency Construction Management TOTAL PROJECT COSTS $60,000 230,000 35,000 35,000 $360,000 AVAILABLE FUNDING: General Fund REET Fund $160,000 234,000 8,744 $402,744 Mitigation TOTAL A V AILABLE BUDGET May 2, 2005 Land Use and Transportation Committee S336th Street at 1'1 Ave Intersection Improvements- 30% Design Status Report Page 2 OPTIONS: 1. Authorize staff to proceed with design of the S336th Street at I st Ave South Intersection Improvements Project. Bid the project and return to LUTC Committee with a request for permission to award the project to the lowest responsible, responsive bidder. Authorize staff to proceed with design of the S336th Street at 1 sl Ave South Intersection Improvements Project. Return to LUTC Committee at the 100% design completion stage for further reports and authorization. Do not authorize staff to proceed with finalizing the design of this project and provide direction to staff. 2. 3. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends forwarding Option I to the May 17, 2005 City Council Consent Agenda for approval: Authorize staff to proceed with design of the S336th Street at 1st Ave South Intersection Improvements Project. Bid the project and return to LUTC Committee with a request for permission to award the project to the lowest responsible, responsive bidder. COMM ITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Forward the above staff recommendation to the May 17,2005 City Council Consent Agenda. Y<'/',:~~;"',,:';:','.';:.:~"r.'ì~,,:;,,; " ",,',~.,""~:!,,":.::,!)¡.;~~.L.::...:,.:.'.ft-:~':,', 1:0':",::::" "",ii':¡II"::;,i";;,,,:,:,:,,,:::';~'::,r]~:.::~ii~ 'AP'PIt'ÐVV¿\W'~IG~~MMITTEEREPORl'. ,,",', """"~":~~"'f¡":'¡'¡"""~~" "'"I!"II"::I""I"Ii,i,II!!I!,,,,I!"ilii""!:::i"'!''" ..i.:,..L~ :':J1~;¡;);r~t':'1:,;,.t>:~;,~i}J'... ,,' .....: ....', ...'.~~~;l~¥;É~-,;~~.":: Z',j:~, ''" J~ck .J)o~~l."ç~;m~ .,. .,.," .' ..' ',Mlc1ï~,el!"'~rk~ Mcrn~4iJ:.;~\O;<\,,;!;.'!"j/¡i;'~Â~~i~ii~' "",s n1~Fm~e~'::!;:¡:,,¡.,0 : ....;;,:,~;~":,,.:,,;::.1::.;:!::'::;~~1Ir!:~.::::::~~.:?::~;!::::....:.......-:- "':.::'i!;.,~~;':,:.,~~,;,,':"~~',':,'::' ":.:,:::.J(~:r~¡\~ií,',,' '~"i"!",;,;~J;,,,.~~ .,\:.::::'.'~i~i:;i:.¡~~~~~1;'.:'CJ1l~::~ cc: Project File Day File CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: May 2, 2005 Land Use and Transpo David H. M i anager Paul A. Bucich, .E., Surface W ater Manage~ RFB 05-104, Lakota Creek East Branch Restoration Improvement -Bid Award POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council award the Lakota Creek East Branch Restoration Improvement project to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder? BACKGROUND: Council gave authorization to bid this project on March 1,2005. Six bids were received and opened on April 1 I, 2005; please see attached Bid Tabulation Summary. The apparent low bidder is Kemper Construction Corporation with a total bid of $444,247.50. This is $80,683 lower than the engineer's estimate. Due to uncertainty of pipe availability, the bid package provided for two different bid schedules for pipe based on different pipe wall thicknesses. Kemper Construction Corporation was low bidder on both alternatives. The alternative thinner pipe thickness would only be selected if the prefeITed, thicker walled pipe were unavailable at time of ordering. Reference checks on Kemper Construction Corporation by staff indicates that the contractor has perfonned similar work. As a result, staff believes Kemper Construction Corporation can successfully complete this project to the city's satisfaction. Therefore, the lowest responsive, responsible bidder is Kemper Construction Corporation in the amount of $444,247.50 PROJECT COSTS AND CONTINGENCY: ESTIMATED PROJECT EXPENDITURES: Preliminary Design Final Design Year 2005 Construction 10% Construction Contingency Construction Management (estimate, 15% of construction cost) Post Construction Monitoring (estimate, 2.5% of construction cost) TOTAL PROJECT COSTS AVAILABLE PROJECT FUNDING: $ 162,518.00 $ 57,844.00 $ 444,247.50 44,424.75 $66,637.00 $11,106.00 $786,777.25 $1,480,597.00 PROJECT SAVINGS: Current project estimates indicate a savings of up to $693,820 contingent upon final costs of construction, construction management, and post construction monitoring. OPTIONS: 1. Award Lakota Creek East Branch Restoration hnprovement project to Kemper Construction Corporation, the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, in the amount of $444,247.50, and approve a 10% contingency of $44,424.75, for a total of $488,672.25, and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract. 2. Reject all bids for the Lakota Creek East Branch Restoration hnprovement project and direct staff to rebid the project and return to Committee for further action. 3. Do not award the Lakota Creek East Branch Restoration Improvement project to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder and provide direction to staff. Staff Recommendation: Authorize forwarding Option I to the May 17,2005 City Council Consent Agenda for Approval: Award Lakota Creek East Branch Restoration Improvement project to Kemper Construction Corporation, the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, in the amount of $444,247.50, and approve a 10% contingency of $44,424.75, for a total of $488,672.25, and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract. Committee Recommendation: Forward option 1 to the May 17,2005 City Council Consent Agenda. .",""'" ,... ..... ,,;e.,'.,' """""'. ... ..... """'..... ........."..............., ... .' ... .." ....' .' ........ ... :~looäèlÞårk, Member" k:',lu1c\Jmc 111t""0 tc"'plak ,.. ncw.doC' Unit Bid Tabulations Estimated Probable Cost CITY OF FEDERAL WAY Capital Improvement Project RFB#: 05-1 04 Project Title: lakota Creek East Branch Restoration Project Prepared by: Fei Tang Date: 4111/05 _. . K.mp., ConsUucUon A-1 Landscaping and Contractor Name: Engineer's Estimate Corporation Jansen Illc. Anderson Construction .- ., ~'! !::;~ ,. Bid Plan Unit Price Unit Price 2nd II rJld.ßërn.' lJnit Price 3 Unit Price 4th U, Item Description Unit Qty. Unit Price Low Bklder Bid ;~?taì~¡~Œ"¡ Bid Bid --- 1 Surveying LS 1 $ 13,056.00 $ 13,056.00 $ 14.000.00 $ 14.000.00 $ 38.100.00 $ :Il\, 'on r~1 s 7,632.89 $ 7,632.89 $ 22,500.00 $ 22,500.00 $ 2 Temporary Water Pollution/Erosion Control LS 1 $ 29,376.00 $ 29.376.00 $ 3.000.00 $ 3.000.00 $ 3.560.00 $ ]",(~) üO S 12.722.27 $ 12,722.27 $ 9.500.00 $ 9.500.00 $ 3 Utilrties Locate and Protection LS 1 $ 5,440.00 $ 5,440.00 $ 3.000.00 $ 3.000.00 $ 3.321.00 $ :I.:I;¿ 1 (!( S 1.220.49 $ 1,220.49 $ 5.000.00 $ 5.000.00 $ 4 Diversion and Care of Water lS 1 $ 11.750.40 $ 11,750.40 $ 20,000.00 $ 20.000.00 $ 6,583.00 $ ;:.!,,¡:iOO S 22,850.40 $ 22.850.40 $ 15,000.00 $ 15.000.00 $ 5 Force Account FA 1 $ 10,880.00 $ 10,880.00 $ 10.000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ I::.:~~).m ~ 10,000.00 $ 10.000.00 $ 10.000.00 $ 10.000.00 $ 6 Mobilization (6.0%) lS 1 $ 29,376.00 $ 29,376.00 $ 40.00000 $ 40.000.00 $ 45,000.00 $ '-'-. "I>:) 00 S 44.539.07 $ 44.539.07 $ 68,000.00 $ 68.000.00 $ 7 Temporary Traffic Control LS 1 $ 9,879.04 $ 9,879.04 $ 15.000.00 $ 15.000.00 $ 4,751.00 $ ;1.1',1 cn S 11.530.84 $ 11.530.84 $ 6.000.00 $ 6.000.00 $ 8 Clearing and Grubbing AC 0.3 $ 26,112.00 $ 7,833.60 $ 12,000.00 $ 3,600.00 $ 9,000.00 $ ¿. 7; :';.t:O S 86,484.03 $ 25.945.21 $ 9.800.00 $ 2,940.00f$ 9 Removal of Structures and Obstructions lS 1 $ 6,978.43 $ 6,978.43 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 15,556.00 $ ~ ~-,.r,:~; GO $ 10.016.69 $ 10.016.69 $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 $ 10 Excavation, including Haul. Stockpile, Placement lS 1 $ 6,147.20 $ 6,147.20 $ 20,000.00 $ 20.000.00 $ 8.211.00 $ !;.21UõO S 31.413.96 $ 31,413.96 $ 25.000.00 $ 25,000.00 $ 11 Foundation Material TN 15 $ 48.96 $ 734.40 $ 15.00 $ 225.00 $ 307.86 $ II (;1 ! 'ii) $ 16.90 $ 253.50 $ 29.00 $ 435.00 $ - 12 Grave!lCobble Mix TN 30 $ 65.28 $ 1,958.40 $ 30.00 $ 900.00 $ 314.80 $ :! ,'.1.1.:1I) :S 27.25 $ 817.50 $ 35.00 $ 1.050.00 $ - 13 Cobble!Boulder Mix TN 375 $ 76.16 $ 28.560.00 $ 9000 $ 33.750.00 $ 68.32 $ ~'. ;;:':: o;~ S 35.90 $ 13,462.50 $ 75.00 $ 28.125.00 $ 14 24" Boulders EA 160 $ 87.04 $ 13,926.40 $ 200.00 $ 32.000.00 $ 26.25 $ I. :.>:i:~ n:: S 38.38 $ 6,140.80 $ 110.00 $ 17,600.00 $ 15 Shoring or Extra Excavation Class B SF 3,200 $ 7.62 $ 24,371.20 $ 1.25 $ 4.000.00 $ 1.16 $ :i f1:¿.O:: S 6.33 $ 20,256.00 $ 6.00 $ 19.200.00 $ 16 Geotextile SY 40 $ 4.35 $ 174.08 $ 20.00 $ 800.00 $ 58.15 $ "I ]"1,(; í!~: :; 2.02 $ 80.80 $ 8.00 $ 320.00 $ 17 Ballast TN 240 $ 38.08 $ 9,139.20 $ 36.00 $ 8,640.00 $ 45.03 $ :0 WJ7 20 $ 15.48 $ 3,715.20 $ 120.00 $ 28.800.00 $ 18 Crushed Surfacing TN 180 $ 38.08 $ 6,854.40 $ 36.00 $ 6.480.00 $ 54.50 $ <jill:;!!O S 16.90 $ 3,042.00 $ 27.00 $ 4.860.00 $ - 19 Asphalt Concrete Pavement, Class B TN 5 $ 163.20 $ 816.00 $ 330.00 $ 1.650.00 $ 573.75 $ "lg';i! 7::; S 635.25 $ 3.176.25 $ 500.00 $ 2.500.00 $ 20 SDR 26 HOPE Storm Sewer Pipe. 24" Diam. Lf 536 $ 152.32 $ 81,643.52 $ 106.00 $ 56,816.00 $ 72.88 $ ::<; 0;;].;;(\ $ 109.69 $ 58,793.84 $ 30.00 $ 16.080.00 $ 20A SDR 32.5 HOPE Storm Sewer Pipe. 24" Diam. Lf 536 $ 145.79 $ 78,144.51 $ 100.00 $ 53,600.00 $ 65.14 $ :1-1 ~I:;:)t. $ 103.29 $ 55.363.44 $ 25.00 $ 13.400.00 $ 21 HOPE Pipe Elbow LS 1 $ 8,160.00 $ 8.160.00 $ 7.800.00 $ 7,800.00 $ 1,314.32 $ 1 :\14.:11 S 1.525.00 $ 1,525.00 $ 2,000.00 $ 2.000.00 $ 22 P1ain Conc. Storm Sewer Pipe, 12" Diam. Lf 28 $ 52.22 $ 1.462.27 $ 130.00 $ 3,640.00 $ 129.00 $ 3,612.00 $ 282.25 $ 7.903.00 $ 65.00 $ 1.820.00 $ 23 Catch Basin Type 1 EA 1 $ 3.808.00 $ 3.808.00 $ 1.000.00 $ 1.000.00 $ 3,657.92 $ 3,657.92 $ 3,024.80 $ 3.024.80 $ 1.350.00 $ 1.350.00 $ 24 Manhole 60" Diam. Type 3 EA 2 $ 9,792.00 $ 19.584.00 $ 3,900.00 $ 7.800.00 $ 5,091.00 $ 10,182.00 $ 4.486.60 $ 8,973.20 $ 12,500.00 $ 25.000.00 $. -- 25 Catch Basin Type 2 84" Diam. EA 1 $ 15,232.00 $ 15,232.00 $ 6,000.00 $ 6.000.00 $ 7,473.00 $ 7,473.00 $ 7.092.64 $ 7,092.64 $ 19.540.00 $ 19.540.00 $, 26 Box Culvert Lf 12 $ 272.00 $ 3.264.00 $ 320.00 $ 3.840.00 $ 705.16 $ 8,461.92 $ 792.70 $ 9,512.40 $ 60.00 $ 720.00 $ 27 Safety Rack EA 1 $ 3.808.00 $ 3.808.00 $ 2,300.00 $ 2.300.00 $ 899.00 $ 899.00 $ 1.192.53 $ 1,192.53 $ 6.000.00 $ 6.000.00 $ 28 Topsoil Type A CY 50 $ 54.40 $ 2.720.00 $ 100.00 $ 5.000.00 $ 72.05 $ 3.602.50 $ 53.23 $ 2,661.50 $ 33.00 $ 1.650.00 $ 29 Erosion Control Matting SY 770 $ 3.26 $ 2.513.28 $ 10.00 $ 7,700.00 $ 3.52 $ 2.710.40 $ 1.61 $ 1.239.70 $ 4.00 $ 3,080.00 $ 30 Compost CY 115 $ 65.28 $ 7,507.20 $ 50.00 $ 5.750.00 $ 78.00 $ 8,970.00 $ 54.47 $ 6.264.05 $ 33.00 $ 3,795.00 $ 31 Invasive Species Control Type A SY 1.095 $ 3.26 $ 3,574.08 $ 2.00 $ 2.190.00 $ 6.56 $ 7,183.20 $ 0.87 $ 952.65 $ 16.00 $ 17,520.00 $ 32 Invasive Species Control Type B SY 2,495 $ 3.26 $ 8,143.68 $ 2.50 $ 6.237.50 $ 4.19 $ 10,454.05 $ 0.87 $ 2.170.65 $ 14.00 $ 34,930.00 $ 33 PSIPE Douglas Fir (staked) EA 21 $ 81.60 $ 1,713.60 $ 55.00 $ 1,155.00 $ 25.03 $ 525.63 $ 21.36 $ 448.56 $ 22.00 $ 462.00 $ 34 PSIPE Big Leaf Maple (staked) EA 7 $ 81.60 $ 571.20 $ 55.00 $ 385.00 $ 17.42 $ 121.94 $ 21.36 $ 149.52 $ 18.00 $ 126.00 $ 35 PSIPE Red Alder (staked) EA 21 $ 81.60 $ 1,713.60 $ 55.00 $ 1.155.00 $ 17.42 $ 365.82 $ 21.36 $ 448.56 $ 16.00 $ 336.00 I $ 36 PSIPE Western Red Cedar (staked) EA 50 $ 81.60 $ 4.080.00 $ 60.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 30.08 $ 1,504.00 $ 21.36 $ 1,068.00 $ 22.00 $ 1,100.00 I $ 37 PSIPE Western Hemlock (staked) EA 36 $ 81.60 $ 2.937.60 $ 60.00 $ 2,160.00 $ 30.08 $ 1.082.88 $ 21.36 $ 768.96 $ 26.00 $ 936.00 I $ K:\SWM\projects\Active Projects\(Project Name)\RFBO5-1 04 BidTabs (4-11-05 Bid) Page 1 I 2 Unit Bid Tabulations Estimated Probable Cost CITY OF FEDERAL WAY Capital Improvement Project RFB#: 05-104 Project Title: Lakota Creek East Branch Restoration Project Prepared by: Fei Tang Date: 4/11/05 Kemper Construction A-1 Landscaping and Contractor Name: Engineer's Estimate Corporation Jansen Inc. Anderson Construction Bid Plan Unit Price Unit Price 2nd Unit Price 3rd Unit Price 4th U, Item Description Unit Qty. Unit Pri Low Bidder Bid Bid Bid 38 PSIPE Sitka Spruce (staked) EA 21 $ 81.60 $ 1,713.60 $ 52.00 $ 1,092.00 $ 30.08 $ 631.68 $ 21.36 $ 448.56 $ 28.00 $ 588.00 $ 39 PSIPE Bitter Cherry (staked) EA 6 $ 81.60 $ 489.60 $ 75.00 $ 450.00 $ 20.59 $ 123.54 $ 21.36 $ 128.16 $ 22.00 $ 132.00 $ n 40 PSIPE Beaked Hazelnut EA 82 $ 16.32 $ 1.338.24 $ 40.00 $ 3.280.00 $ 20.56 $ 1,685.92 $ 24.76 $ 2,030.32 $ 19.00 $ 1,556.00 $ 41 PSIPE Vine Maple EA 168 $ 16.32 $ 2,741.76 $ 40.00 $ 6.720.00 $ 20.19 $ 3,391.92 $ 21.36 $ 3.588.48 $ 20.00 $ 3.360.00 $ 42 PSIPE Stink Currant EA 24 $ 16.32 $ 391.68 $ 20.00 $ 480.00 $ 17.88 $ 429.12 $ 9.78 $ 234.72 $ 20.00 $ 480.00 $ 43 PSIPE Sitka Mountair1 Ash EA 12 $ 16.32 $ 195.84 $ 50.00 $ 600.00 $ 30.08 $ 360.96 $ 21.36 $ 256.32 $ 23.00 $ 276.00 $ 44 PSIPE lr1dian Plum EA 242 $ 1632 $ 3,949.44 $ 20.00 $ 4,840.00 $ 25.34 $ 6,132.28 $ 9.78 $ 2,366.76 $ 13.00 $ 3,146.00 $ 45 PSIPE Pacific Crabapple EA 13 $ 16.32 $ 212.16 $ 35.00 $ 455.00 $ 30.08 $ 391.04 $ 21.36 $ 277.68 $ 18.00 $ 234.00 $ 46 PSIPE Thimbleberry EA 56 $ 16.32 $ 913.92 $ 20.00 $ 1.120.00 $ 14.25 $ 798.00 $ 9.78 $ 547.68 $ 13.00 $ 728.00 $ 47 PSIPE Sa1monberry EA 17 $ 16.32 $ 277.44 $ 20.00 $ 340.00 $ 15.83 $ 269.11 $ 9.78 $ 166.26 $ 13.00 $ 221.00 $ 48 PSIPE Ocear1 Spray EA 71 $ 16.32 $ 1,158.72 $ 30.00 $ 2.130.00 $ 15.84 $ 1,124.64 $ 9.78 $ 694.38 $ 14.00 $ 994.00 $ 49 PSIPE Red Elderberry EA 251 $ 16.32 $ 4.096.32 $ 20.00 $ 5.020.00 $ 17.00 $ 4,267.00 $ 9.78 $ 2,454.78 $ 12.00 $ 3.012.00 $ 50 PSIPE Snowberry EA 152 $ 16.32 $ 2,480.64 $ 15.00 $ 2.280.00 $ 25.00 $ 3,800.00 $ 9.78 $ 1.486.56 $ 13.00 $ 1,976.00 $ 51 PSIPE Lady Fern EA 28 $ 10.88 $ 304.64 $ 15.00 $ 420.00 $ 16.00 $ 448.00 $ 9.78 $ 273.84 $ 12.00 $ 336.00 $ 52 PSIPE Sword Fern EA 451 $ 10.88 $ 4.906.88 $ 15.00 $ 6,765.00 $ 18.00 $ 8.118.00 $ 9.78 $ 4,410.78 $ 11.00 $ 4.961.00 $ 53 PSIPE Salal EA 22 $ 10.88 $ 239.36 $ 6.00 $ 132.00 $ 18.00 $ 396.00 $ 3.55 $ 78.10 $ 11.00 $ 242.00 $ 54 PSIPE Red-Osier Dogwood Cuttings EA 470 $ 3.26 $ 1.534.08 $ 3.00 $ 1,410.00 $ 3.00 $ 1,410.00 $ 2.66 $ 1.250.20 $ 3.00 $ 1,410.00 $ 55 PSIPE Scouler's Willow Cuttings EA 200 $ 3.26 $ 652.80 $ 5.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 4.00 $ 800.00 $ 2.48 $ 496.00 $ 3.00 $ 600.00 $ 56 Cemer1t Concrete RoHed Curb LF 75 $ 26.11 $ 1,958.40 $ 40.00 $ 3,000.00 S 14.50 $ 1,087.50 $ 10.50 $ 787.50 $ 13.00 $ 975.00 $ 57 Cemer1t Concrete Sidewalk SY 42 $ 87.04 $ 3.655.68 $ 50.00 $ 2,100.00 $ 96.00 $ 4,032.00 $ 94.82 $ 3.982.44 $ 59.00 $ 2,478.00 $ 58 Hand Placed Riprap TN 22 $ 97.92 $ 2.154.24 $ 70.00 $ 1,540.00 $ 374.00 $ 8,228.00 $ 17.33 $ 381.26 $ 135.00 $ 2,970.00 $ 59 3-Man Roc!<. EA 15 $ 326.40 $ 4,896.00 $ 300 . 00 $ 4.500.00 S 200.00 $ 3,000.00 $ 30.95 $ 464.25 $ 380.00 $ 5,700.00 $ 60 4-Man Rock EA 2 $ 544 .00 $ 1,088.00 $ 400.00 $ 800.00 $ 500.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 77.38 $ 154.76 $ 550.00 $ 1,100.00 $ 61 5-Man Rock EA 4 $ 761.60 $ 3,046.40 $ 1,800.00 $ 7.200.00 $ 275.00 $ 1,100.00 $ 145.93 $ 583.72 $ 850.00 $ 3,400.00 $ 62 Streambar1k log EA 20 $ 2.393.60 $ 47,872.00 $ 1,150.00 $ 23.000.00 $ 2.134.18 $ 42,683.60 $ 3.107.87 $ 62.157.40 $ 2.900.00 $ 58.000.00 $ 63 Deflector Log EA 8 $ 2.720.00 $ 21.760.00 $ 1,150.00 $ 9,200.00 $ 1.774.53 $ 14.196.24 $ 4.070.48 $ 32,563.84 $ 3.100.00 $ 24,800.00 $ 64 Rootwad EA 13 $ 1.632.00 $ 21.21600 $ 800.00 $ 10.400.00 $ 1,716.90 $ 22,319.70 $ 2,596.94 $ 33,760.22 $ 2.600.00 $ 33,800.00 $ Total A!ternate Total $ 524.930.62 $ 521,431.62 $ 444,247.50 $ 441,031.50 $ 454,596.36 $ 450,447.72 $ 499.030.90 $ 495.600.50 $ 564,752.00 $ 562.072.00 K:18WMlprojects\Active projectsl(project Name)\RFB05-104 BidTabs (4-11-05 Bid) Page 2 I 2 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: April 19,2005 Land Use and Transportation Committee David H. Mos~anager Paul A. Bucich, p\{: Surface Water Division Manage~ Joe's Creek Habitat Restoration Project - 50% Design Status Report POLICY QUESTION: Should Surface Water Management proceed with the design of the Joe's Creek Habitat Restoration Project to the 85% design level? BACKGROUND: This project restores approximately 640 lineal feet of Joe's Creek located along the southerly boundary of the Twin Lakes Golf and Country Club Driving Range. The existing channel is narrow and incised with ongoing bank erosion that is threatening the stability of the stream bank and private property. Restoration activities will include regrading the stream channel and banks, placement of fish habitat structures such as log obles and rootwads within the stream channel, wetland mitigation planting and creation, and removal of 71 feet of broken storm drain pipe lying in the channel. Up to 255 feet of 66-inch diameter pipe will replace an existing failing storm line from the pedestrian underpass to the creek. Currently, the project design is approximately 50% complete, which includes the following completed tasks: . The Topographical Survey and Mapping . Hydrological and Hydraulic Analysis . Stream Geomorphology Assessment . Fish Use, Passage, and Habitat Assessment . Preliminary Wetland Analysis . SEP A, Draft JARP A, and Draft Biological Evaluation Ongoing tasks include: . SEP A, JARP A and Biological Evaluation Detennination and Project Permitting . Easements Negotiations . Project Design to 85% Level PROJECT ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES: Design Year 2006 Construction (Estimate) 10% Construction Contingency 10% Construction Management Long Term Monitoring TOTAL l)ROJECT COSTS $447,745 $1,092,623 $109,262 $109,262 $10,000 $1,768,892 AVAILABLE FUNDING: TOTAL AVAILABLE BUDGET (EST.) SURFACE WATER UTILITY KING COUNTY FUNDING OUTSIDE FUNDING $1,856,000 $750,000 $250,000 $856,000 OPTIONS: 1. Authorize Surface Water Management staff to proceed with design of the Joe's Creek Habitat Restoration Project and return to the LUTC Committee at the 85% design completion stage for further reports and authorization. Authorize staff to negotiate necessary easements for the project and return to Council for authorization as outlined in City policy. 2. Do not authorize staff to continue with the project and provide direction to staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends forwarding Option 1 to the May 17tl\ 2005 Council Consent Agenda for approval: Authorize Surface Water Management staff to proceed with design ofthe Joe's Creek Habitat Restoration Project and return to the LUTC Committee at the 85% design completion stage for further reports and authorization. Authorize Surface Water Management staff to negotiate easements with property owners along the stream corridor of Joe's Creek then return to Council for authorization to execute the easements as outlined in City policy. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Forward the above staff recommendation, Option 1, to the May 17th, 2005 City Council Consent Agenda. """ PB:mas cc: Project File Central File k'lu(duw memo t""lpIatt'œw.ù"',, CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM SUBJECT: May 2, 2005 Land Use and Transportation Committee David H. Moseì~anager Paul A. Bucich, P.E.: Surface Water Division Manage~- AG 05-037, SW356th Street Regional Retention Facility Fence Project- Project Acceptance DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council accept the SW356th Street Regional Retention Facility Fence Project constructed by Sea West Construction, Inc. as complete? BACKGROUND: Prior to release of retainage on a Public Works construction project, the City Council must accept the work as complete to meet State Department of Revenue and State Department of Labor and Industries requirements. The above referenced contract is complete. Upon City Council's acceptance of the project, and meeting certain conditions by State law, the City will release and pay in full the amounts retained during perfonnance of the contract. PROJECT SAVINGS AND CONTINGENCY: The final construction cost is $30,247.73 with sales tax. This amount is $155.34 below the authorized contract total of $30,403.07, which includes $478.72 with sales tax for approved Change Order #1. The final cost is $2,668.27 below the authorized construction budget of $32,916 approved by the City Council on March 15,2005. OPTIONS: 1. Authorize final acceptance of the completed SW356th Street Regional Retention Facility Fence Project constructed by Sea West Construction, Inc., in the amount of$30,247.73, as complete. 2. Do not authorize final acceptance ofthe completed project and provide direction to staff. STAFF RECOMMENDA nON: Staff recommends forwarding Option 1 to the May 17, 2005 City Council Consent Agenda for Approval: 1. Authorize final acceptance of the completed SW356th Street Regional Retention Facility Fence Project constructed by Sea West Construction, Inc., in the amount of$30,247.73, as complete. May 2, 2005 Land Use and Transportation Committee AG 05-037 Project Acceptance Page 2 oI2 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Forward the above staff recommendation to the May 17,2005 City Council Consent Agenda. '. ~ :', :':', ' '.. APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE REPORT: i I ' ',','- . "",,", " ::,," .. ' .. ........... ".-.-..-------....,-..-.., .....' .........., ..,.. ' .. , '.. ...'.., , ....,..,.. ., .....'"......,.............. ,_........,...-"....,~:,::""'......~l~_-"":.......,----...::.... :Jack Dovcy,Chair Micltacl Park, ,Member:Eric Faison, ~cmbcr"!': ~",':"':'~~~"'¡",,':.' ,'~"""', ..,.."",.'...."",.."',,..'.'.'.--":...,,;,::,,:;,:~,';'.",:,,,,;".:'..¡i,~;d'~; _"""_".,.,"",,."~.~. ---.."",.'-0....." " - JW:dl cc: Project/Day File K:)O<W\f\ph'icl't.>SW356TJJ\Fcncc h,sl¡Ùla1;ou\Cl'u,lru,:t;"m',Appr"v"h (aw;ot<llhru l'1",urc'\\l,UTC.Coun.;jrL\ 'T(- \-lêJJJ,,{'J'n>j<oct Aú'tpla!\('(:\Al,;OS..IH7 l. UTI.' P,,'je"l Al""'P~,nç,çMçll)(,-d(><: CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: May 2nd, 2005 Land Use and Transportation Committee D~vid H. MOS~ager Rlck Perez, Ctty Traffic Engmeer 2005 Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Program for City Hall (Area FlexPass) POLICY OUESTION: Should the council adopt a staff recommendation to continue Federal Way's compliance with Washington State's Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Law by purchasing Area FlexPasses for employees? BACKGROUND: Washington State's Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Law was adopted by the 1991 Legislature and incorporated into the Washington Clean Air Act as RCW 70.94.521 through 70.94.551. Its intent is to improve air quality and reduce fuel consumption and traffic congestion through employer-based programs by encouraging the use of alternatives to single occupant vehicles (SOV) for the commute trip. The law requires that all major employers, both public and private, who employ one hundred (100) or more full- time employees who are scheduled to arrive at a single worksite between 6:00 a,m. to 9:00 a.m. to make a good faith effort as defined in RCW 70.94.534(2) and to develop plans and programs to reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and Single Occupant Vehicle (SOY) commute trips. City Hall is one of 14 employers in Federal Way that are affected by the CTR Law. The City currently provides up to a $30 incentive in the fonn of Commute Bonus/Bonus Plus vouchers for employees using alternative modes of transportation. The incentive program is funded via the City's one time 2003/2004 CTR budget of $4,250. This one time budget has been exhausted and no funding is provided in the 2005/2006 budget. The incentive program has been very effective in reducing single occupancy vehicles (SOV). Currently, there are about 15 employees participating in the incentive program. Staff anticipated employee participation to increase to about 25 employees or about 9% of all employees due to more employees being located in City Hall. Based on our current $30 per month incentive, guaranteed ride home and minor internal promotion, staff anticipates spending $9,544 for the 2005 CTR Incentive program. PROJECT SAVINGS AND CONTINGENCY: Proposed Area Flex Pass for City Hall Employee The Area FlexPass program is a low-cost annual pass sponsored through King County Metro. The program includes elements beyond the nonnal bus pass at the price of $40 per person per year. The City may elect to purchase the pass for either all 176 affected full time employees starting work between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. or all full time employees in City Hall, whether they use it or not. Based on 176 affected employees at City Hall, the Area FlexPass will cost approximately $7,040 for 2005. Please note that the price of the Area FlexPass will likely go up in years two and three of the agreement. Staff believes this is the most cost effective method of implementing the CTR law for the City Hall site. Please see Table I for the existing and proposed CTR elements and costs associated with implementing the program. As a major employer and the lead jurisdiction for implementing CTR among allatIected employers in Federal Way, it is important that we show our commitment to the spirit and to the goals of the CTR Law. Therefore, staff is recommending purchasing the proposed Area FlexPass for the 176 affected employees at City Hall. Staff proposes the FlexPass be funded by any remaining Public Works Department funds at the end of the year and/or the City Managers Contingency fund. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Committee authorize staff to enter into an agreement with King County, Pierce Transit and Sound Transit to purchase FlexPass for City Hall employees. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Forward staff recommendation to purchase FlexPass for City Hall employees to the May 17,2005 City Council Consent Agenda. ,....'w",...... ,-, . .. "'" k\lutc\lutc IDemo template - new.doc Table I - City Hall CTR Program CTR Program Element Existing Program (Old City Hall) Existing Progam (New City Hall) Proposed FW Area FlexPass Guaranteed Ride Home - Emergency ride for users of all alternative modes. Contract with Metro's Home Free Guarantee program at $2.00 per person per year for full time employees. Limit 8 rides/person/year, and 60 miles per ride. Bus. Vanpool. Ferry Subsidy - Voucher to supplement fares. Provides one mechanism to subsidize multiple transit systems. Provide "Commuter Bonus" vouchers at a recommended $30 per month per year user to supplement fares. Estimated use is 9.0% of full time employees at new City Hall. Unlimited free Rides on all King County Metro, Sound Transit, and Pierce Transit buses $250.00 $544.00 125 employees * $2 per 272 Employees * $2 per person per year person per year Included $2,880.00 $9,000.00 8 Employees at $30 per 25 Employees at $30 month per month Included Included $20 toward Vanshare fare ($50 fare for the group) Included $65 Vanpool toward fare . Included Enhance existina proaram -Increase visibility of $2,640.00 current. progra~ eleme.nts inclu.d~ng in~ernal. $200.00 $200.00 $15 CB voucher with promotions, prize drawing, participate In regIonal each flex pass promotions. purchase Est. Program Cost per Year $3,330.00 $9,544.00 $7,040.00 . $7,040 is based on 176 full time employees starting work between 6-9 AM. Additional 15% discount if purchased for all 272 employees. .. The price of the Area FlexPass will likely go up in year two and three. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: May 2nd, 2005 Land Use and Transportation Committee David H. Mos~Manager Ken Miller, P.E., Dlruty Public Works Director 23rd A venue South and South 31lh Street (Private Road) Traffic Signal Project - Project Acceptance ~ POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council accept the 23rd Avenue South and South 314th Street Traffic Signal Project constructed by Pote1co, Inc. as complete? BACKGROUND: Prior to release of retain age on a Public Works construction project, the City Council must accept the work as complete to meet State Department of Revenue and State Department of Labor and Industries requirements. The above referenced contract with Potelco, Inc. is complete. Upon City Council's acceptance of the project, and meeting certain conditions by State law, the City will release and pay in full the amounts retained during perfonnance of the contract. PROJECT SAVINGS AND CONTINGENCY: The final construction contract amount is $207,415.56, this is $6,957.62 below the $214,373.18 original bid price, and $28,394.93 below the $235,810.49 budget (including contingency) that was approved by the City Council on May 18, 2004. OPTIONS: 1. Authorize final acceptance ofthe completed 23rd Avenue South and South 314th Street (Private Road) Traffic Signal Project, constructed by Potelco, Inc., in the amount of $207,415.56 as complete. 2. Do not authorize final acceptance of the completed 23rd Avenue South and South 314th Street (Private Road) Traffic Signal Project, constructed by Potelco, Inc. as complete and provide direction to staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends forwarding Option I to the May 3, 2005 City Council Consent Agenda for Approval: Authorize final acceptance of the completed 23 rd Avenue South and South 314 th Street (Private Road) Traffic Signal Project, constructed by Pote1co, Inc., in the amount of $207,415.56 as complete. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Forward the above staff recommendation to the May 17,2005 City Council Consent Agenda. APr,RÓV AL OF C()MMI'f~liEE RE,PORT:', " " . !~~~:~::;r.., ' " ". . ", . "",,, " . ,', ,::':",' "::~,'.;~~t~~,\~f:;:}(., " ".", ". -_...::.:i.:~j~,..." .. ... ........~:.. -.-.-----'--.'. '.. JacU,'.J)o:vey, Chair"" , ," .........~")\~;:'~i.:. , .. " .,' ,," "'. ':k...."",...:";'::":'::".'_".""""""¡"""'.."""_"';"'"........:...:........ ::',... """",::'::"""""""""",,',,"'i""';"""'~:;'" "";':1\;1~~":aeleark, Me.mbe(,¡, ; .-;::""../ "Eri(."~iisöò.~I;Mérriber::'," ' ..::"...,_>j~;~i;'":\":,:,,, ..,"" .,:,:".~.,::.,."..:>:',:..:'::.:: . :,.:">:::,""'.,',"".," .. - ..._~~..... .... cc; Project File - 23rd Ave S and S 314 St Traffic Signal Project Day File K."'.U'TC"")H)S\I..2~.i)5 takm"Wdbnd f'rnje,-t Fi",¡J '\,-"opt.<lI.'O ~ CITY OF ~, Federa I Way MEMORANDUM Apri125,2005 To: Jack Dovey, Chair Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTe) VIA: David osel, anager Kathy McClun , Director of Community Development Services ~ Margaret H. Clark, AICP, Senior Planner ~ FROM: SUBJECT: Follow-up to 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Puget Center Partnership Request MEETING DATE: May 2, 2005 I. BACKGROUND The 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments includes the following three components: I. Puget Center Partnership Request - Request from the Puget Center Partnership to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 4.03 acres located north of South 31 ih Street and east of Isl Avenue South from Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business (BN) (Exhibit 1). 2. H Dusing Chapter Update - Update of "Chapter 5, Housing," of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP). 3. Kitts Corner Request - Request from Jon Potter to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 46 acres located south of South 3361h Street and west of Pacific Highway South from Business Park (BP) to Community Business (Be) and Multi-Family (RM 2400). The Puget Center Partnership Request and the I-lousing Chapter were presented to the LUTC on April 18, 2005, and the Kitts Comer request is being presented to the LUTC this evening (May 2, 2005). At the completion of the LUTC's discussion on the Puget Center Partnership request on April 18, 2005, staff offered to come back to the LUTC with a recommendation. The March 30, 2005, Memorandum to the LUTC is attached as Exhibit 2. II. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY 2/19/05 Issuance of Detemrination of Nonsignificance pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A) 3/07/05 End ofSEPA Comment Period 3/21/05 End of SEP A Appeal Period 3/23/05 Public Hearing before the Planning Commission 4/18/05 Presentation to LUTC on Puget Center Partnership Request and Chapter 5, Housing 5/2/05 Presentation to LUTC on Kitts Corner Follow-up Presentation to LUTC on Puget Center Partnership Request 5/17/05 City Council Public Meeting 6/7/05 Second City Council Public Meeting and Adoption of Ordinance III. LUTC DISCUSSION ON PUGET CENTER PARTNERSHIP REQUEST Paul Benton, on behalf of the Puget Center Partnership, is requesting a change in the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 4.03 acres located north of South 31th Street and east of I Sl A venue South from Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business (BN) (Exhibit 1). The Planning Commission held a public hearing on March 23, 2005, and recommended approval of the comprehensive plan amendment and rezone from PO to BN based on a five to one (5-1) vote, on condition that a deed restriction was placed on the property to prohibit bars, taverns, or cocktail lounges on the site, as proposed by Mr. Benton. During the April 18, 2005, LUTC meeting, the LUTC discussed the preparation of a development agreement for the site. The development agreement would prohibit certain uses on the site and an associated development plan would address light pollution, location of surface parking, and compatibility of a grocery store or drug store with the neighborhood. In addition to those prohibited uses recommended by the Planning Commission, the LUTC suggested prohibiting the following uses: Fast-food restaurants Car wash Vehicle stations Vehicle repair Bar, tavern, or cocktail lounge Group homes Multi-family Land UselTransportation Committee Follow-up to 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update Puget Center Partnership Request Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 2 IV. STAFF FOLLOW-UP Staff contacted the applicant, Mr. Paul Benton to discuss the proposed prohibited uses. Mr. Benton was agreeable, except that he would like to see restaurants and uses such as Starbucks allowed. The process for review of a development agreement requires action by the Council to approve a comprehensive plan designation ofBN, based on a development agreement with direction on uses and design of the site in order to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The applicant would then have to prepare a development plan that meets Council direction. The plan would be reviewed by staff pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act and compliance with Council direction, and presented to the Council at a future public hearing after a recommendation by the LUTe. The development review process may take up to an additional six months. Alternatively, certain uses could be prohibited and design of the site conditioned through the comprehensive plan amendment and rezone process. Conditioning the comprehensive plan amendment and rezone should achieve the same result as a development agreement. V. LAND USE/TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE OPTIONS The Committee has the following options: 1. Recommend that the full Council adopt an ordinance approving the request by the Puget Center Partnership to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 4.03 acres located north of South 31 th Street and east of I sl A venue South from Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business (BN), based on a development agreement and associated development plan. 2. Recommend that the full Council adopt an ordinance approving the request by the Puget Center Partnership to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 4.03 acres located north of South 31th Street and east of I Sl Avenue South from Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business (BN), based on a comprehensive plan amendment and rezone with specific conditions related to allowable uses and design of the site. 3. Recommend that the full Council disapprove the request by resolution, retaining the Professional Office (PO) comprehensive plan designation and zoning. VI. COUNCIL ACTION Pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 22, Article IX, "Process VI Review," any amendments to the comprehensive plan, comprehensive plan designations map, or zoning text must be approved by the City Council based on a recommendation from the Planning Commission. Per FWCC Section 22-541, after consideration of the Planning Commission report, and at its discretion holding its own public hearing, the City Council shall by majority vote of its total membership take the following action: 1. Approve the amendments by ordinance; 2. Modify and approve the amendments by ordinance; Land Use/Transportation Committee Follow-up to 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update Puget Center Partnership Request Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 3 3. Disapprove the amendments by resolution; or 4. Refer the amendments back to the Planning Commission for further proceedings. If this occurs, the City Council shall specify the time within which the Planning Commission shall report to the City Council on the amendments. . .. .. . APPRO:\' AL OF COMMITTEE~Ç!j()l# Jack,Døÿey;,tñair Eric Faison,'MeIllber . . . .... .... . .. . .. ............ ..... .. . .... .. . ..... ... . MiChâelPåt£,Mêrtiber LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit I Exhibit 2 Vicinity Map - Puget Center Partnership Request March 30, 2005, Memorandum to the LUTC 1;\2004 Comprehensive Plan\2004 Update\LUTC\050205 Puget Center Partnersip Staff Report to the LUTCdoc/4/26/2005 3;32 PM Land Usc/Transportation Committee Follow-up to 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update Puget Center Partnership Request Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 4 sw 3O8TH ST I ~st .2 I RS7.2 PO RM1800 Ii ,I I 1- ri, I ,I I I RS7.2 I 1 ? SW 312TH ST ~ ¡¡; . . j!; .. Requested Designation: ¡ Comprehensive Plan: 'I Neighborhood Business I Zoning: BN ~~ , ~~~~ \~'":;'~ c~., . .....::} ",-0',"" (1 ;> , I ' // i j I " lRS7.~, I ~ RM2400 RS7.2,j -- Note: This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only. The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. 200 200 400 600 800 Feet Å N 0 ~ I ì J City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan 2004 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES Puget Center Partnership Site Specific Request Key: Steep Slopes f{~- Wetlands - Site Requests ~ LL. 0 il :¡:w )«.:J W~ Map Printed-January 14, 2005 EXHIBIT 2. PAGE-L-OF --- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMO RAND UM March 30, 2005 To: Jack Dovey, Chair Land UselTransportation Committee (LUTe) David MO~g", Kathy McClung, Director of Community Development Services ~ Margaret H. Clark, AICP, Senior Planner {Y\.4.kc.... VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update MEETING DATE: April 18,2005 I. BACKGROUND The 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments includes the following three components: I. Puget Center Partnership Request - Request from the Puget Center Partnership to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 4.03 acres located north of South 3 12th Street and east of 151 Avenue South from Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business (BN) (Exhibit I). 2. Housing Chapter Update - Update of "Chapter 5, Housing," of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) (Exhibit 2). 3. Kitts Comer Request - Request from Jon Potter to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 46 acres trom Business Park (BP) to Community Business (Be) and Multi-Family (RM 2400) (Exhibit 3). (This request will be presented to the LUTC on May 2,2005, and a staff report will be provided to you approximately one week prior to the meeting.) Attached are the following: I. Exhibit 4 ~ March 15,2005, Staff Report to Planning Commission with Exhibits A-F .2. Exhibit 5 - March 23, 2005, Planning Commission Minutes II. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY 2/19/05 Issuance of Detennination of Nonsignificance pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) LandlUse Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update 3/07/05 End ofSEPA Comment Period EXHIBIT ~ . . PAGE 2. OF -'-- 3/21/05 End of SEP A Appeal Period 3/23/05 Public Hearing before the Planning Commission 4/18/05 Presentation to LUTC on puget Center Partnership Request and Chapter 5, Housing 5/2/05 Presentation to LUTC on Kitts Corner 5/17/05 City Council Public Meeting 617/05 Second City Council Public Meeting and Adoption of Ordinance III. SITE-SPECIFIC COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGE 1. Background - In September 2003, the City received one site-specific request for a comprehensive plan amendment and rezone. Paul Benton, on behalf of the Puget Center Partnership, submitted a request to amend the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 4.03 acres located north of South 312th Street and east of I sl Avenue South from Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business (EN) (Exhibit I). - 2. Summary - File Number: Parcel No's: Location: Size: Applicant: Owner: Request: 00-104926.00 UP 082104-9074,082104-9076 & 082104-9167 North of South 312th Street and east of 1st Avenue South (Exhibit 6) 4.03 acres Paul Benton on behalf ofPuget Center Partnership Same Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business (EN) Existing Comprehensive Plan: Existing Zoning: Requested Comprehensive Plan: Requested Zoning: Professional Office Professional Office (PO) Neighborhood Business Neighborhood Business (BN) 3. Public Comments Received Prior to Planning Commission Public Hearing - a) Telephone call from Della Giesler, the property owner at 140 South 312th. Ms. Giesler was interested in obtaining more information about the request. b) March 2, 2005, email from Greg Fewins, Deputy Director of Community Development Services, concerning telephone call from Roddy Nolton (Exhibit 7). Land/Use Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update March 30, 2005 Page 2 c) EXHI~T '" PAGE OF~ March 4,2005, letter from Robert Roper, President, Mirror Lake Residents' Association (Exhibit 8). . 4. Staff Recommendation - Staff recommends that the Puget Center Partnership request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business (BN) be granted. 5. Public Testimony Provided to Planning Commission - During the Planning Commission public hearing, Bob Roper testified on behalf of the Mirror Lake Residents' Association. He stated that the Association had a number of concerns (Exhibit 8), chief of which was the impact on Mirror Lake's water quality. 6. Planning Commission Recommendation on Puget Center Partnership Request - During the Planning Commission hearing, the owner, Paul Benton, submitted a letter (Exhibit 9) to the Planning Commission which stated that as a condition of receiving the BN comprehensive plan designation and zoning, he would deed restrict the property from being used as a bar, tavern, cocktail lounge, adult bookstore, adult video store, or other adult entertainmel1t business, and for the renting, leasing, or selling of any boat, motor vehicle, or trailer. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the comprehensive plan amendment and rezone from Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood (BN) based on a five to one (5-1) vote on condition that the deed restriction was placed on the property (Exhibit 5). As can be seen from the following table, of the restricted uses proposed by Mr. Benton, only bar, tavern, or cocktail lounge is allowed i~ the BN zone. Use Neighborhood Business Professional Office Office use . X X Retail (grocery, produce, drugs, personal care, books, liquor, hardware, garden, retail nursery stock, household goods, furnishings, clothing, X variety, home electronics, sporting goods, works of art) (40,000 SQ. ft. max) Bank & related fmancial service (40,000 sq. ft. X max) Retail providing laundry, dry cleaning, beauty/ X barber, video rental, shoe repair (40,000 SQ. ft. max) Private lodge or club (10,000 sq. ft. max) X Art gallery X Restaurant or tavern (7,500 sq. ft. max.) X Fast food restaurant (5,000 sq. ft.) X Health Club (25,000 sq. ft. max) X Retail providing entertairunent, recreational, or X cultural services & activities (25,000 SQ. ft. max) Vehicle service station or car wash X LandlUse Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update March 30, 2005 Page 3 Use Neighborhood Business Professional Office Retail providing vehicle service or repair (within an X enclosed building) School X X Day care facility (except Class II home occupation) X X Multi-unit (stacked) housing (not on the ground X floor) (18 du/acre) Group home Type II1-A2 X Group home Type II-B3 X Social services transitional housing,. Type As X Social services transitional housing, Type B6 X Government facility X X Public transit shelter X X Public utility X X Public park X X Personal wireless service facility X X Church X EXHIBIT ~ PAGE--4--°F L- 7. Land Use/Transportation Committee Options - The Committee has the following options: L Recommend that the full Council accept the Planning Commission's recommendation and adopt an ordinance approving the request by the Puget Center Partnership to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 4.03 acres located north of South 3 It" Street and east of lsl Avenue Southñom Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business (BN) based on the recording of a deed restriction. I Group home type II means housing for juveniles under the jurisdiction of the criminal justice system. Such groups include state- licensed group care homes or halfway homes for juveniles who provide residence in lieu of sentencing or incarceration, halfway houses providing residence to juveniles needing correction, or for those selected to participate in state-operated work release and pre-release programs. 2 Group homes type II-A: Maximum number of 12 residents including resident staff. 3 Group homes type II-B: Thirteen or more residents including residential staff. Maximum number determined on a case-by--case basis. 4 Social service transitional housing means facilities other than offices and group homes, operated by a nonprofit social service agency, licensed as required by the state; providing temporary and transitional housing to individuals on an as-needed basis including, but not limited to, emergency shelters, homeless shelters, and other such crisis intervention facilities. This classification includes domestic violence shelters as defined herein, except that such shelters wherein the total number of residents does not exceed the maximum number allowed under the "family" definition, may be permitted outright in all residential zones. 5 Social service transitional housing Type A: Maximum number ofresidents to be consistent with the maximum number of unrelated adults allowed under the zoning definition of family. 6 Social service transitional housing Type B: All social service transitional housing not meeting the definition of "Type A," above. Maximum number determined on a case-by-case basis. The limitation on the number of residents in social service transitional housing shall not be applied ifit prohibits the City from making reasonable accorrunodatîonstó disabled persons in order to afford such person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling as required by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, 42 USC 3604(f)(3Xb). LandlUse Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update March 30, 2005 Page 4 EXHIBIT ~ PAGE-S-:-OF -'- 2 Recommend that the full Council modify the Planning Commission's recommendation and adopt an ordinance approving the request by the Puget Center Partnership to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 4.03 acres located north of South 31th Street and east of 1 st Avenue South from Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business (BN) with no conditions. 3. Recommend that the full Council disapprove the request by resolution, retaining the Professional Office (PO) comprehensive plan designation and zoning. IV. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 5, HOUSING 1. 2. Summary of Amendments - In addition to new language, existing sections have been rearranged to improve the functioning of the chapter. The following summarizes only substantive changes: a) Page V-5. The section on Countywide Policies has been moved from page V-3 to page V-5 and revised to more clearly describe the goals of the Countywide Planning Polices relating to the provision of affordable housing. b) Pages V-6 - V-24. 5.2 Federal Way and its Housing- This section has been updated based on different sources such as the 2000 Census, the April 2004 Office of Financial Management Population Estimates, Northwest Multiple Listing, and Dupre + Scott. c) Page V-21. The Housing Capacity section has been revised to identify ways of increasing capacity to meet the City's housing targets. d) Page V-22 - V-24. Language has been added to describe how zoning and development regulations may be amended to encourage additional market housing, and affordable and special needs housing. e) Proposed changes to policies are summarized in the table on the f~llowing page. t) Pages V-38 - V39. 5.5 Implementation Actions has been deleted since it is a duplication of some of the policies. Planning Commission Recommendation - The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed changes to the Housing Chapter with the folIowing two further amendments proposed by staff during the March 23, 2005, meeting (Exhibit 2): ' a) Replace the wording of the new HPIS as follows; Mollify zofliflg and subdi'¡jsion rsgHlations to ensure that land is used effieiently, that tho regulatiOfls reflect current safety Reeds, and that they permit and encOI:lrage eonstruction of a l:Irøad nmge of housing types. - LandlUse Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update March 30, 2005 Page 5 EXHIBIT a PAGE-'--OF --8- Review zoning. subdivision. and develo1Jment regulations to ensure that they further housing policies and do not create unintended barriers. This is of particular importance for small lot and cottage housing developments. In order to facilitate small lot and cottage housing developments. it is particularly important to revise. as necessary. the subdivision and development regulations that govern their development. b) Delete Policy HP21 because it is a duplicate of HP22. !œll. ContiRHe to provide incentives, suoR as density bonuses, for providing a portiofl. of affordable RoHsiRg ifl flew developments. HP22 Continue to provide incentives such as density bonuses for multi-family housing. and expand the types of incentives offered to encourage new developments to include affordable housing. 3. Land UseITransportation Committee Options - The Committee has the following options: 1. Recommend that the full Council accept the Planning Commission's recommendation and adopt an ordinance approving the amendments to Chapter 5, Housing. 2. Recommend that the full Council modify, then adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation by ordinance. landlUse Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update March 30, 2005 Page 6 Increase Diversify Increase Encourage Provide for Address Increase Encourage Improve Delete Housing Housing Affordable Innovative Special Needs Compatibility Open Space Mixed-Use Wording Policy Capacity IJousing Housing Housing Between Diverse in Developments in Housing Developments Commercial Areas Amend Amend Amend Amend Amend new HP38 Add new HP13 Add new Amend new HP 18 New Delete existing existing new HP3 existing HP19 HP5 existing HPI HPl HPl Policy HP2 Add new Add new Add new Add new HP39 New Delete HP14 HP15 HP21 HP12 existing HPI4. Include language in new HPI7 Amend Add new Amend Amend new HP41 New Delete newHP17 HP17 new HP25 HP20 existing HP15 Add new Amend new HP43 New Delete HP26 HP24 existing HP19. Include language in new HP 21. Amend Delete existing New Delete new HP27 HP38 & HP40 HP34 existing Add language to HP38 new HP45 to address these policies Add new New Delete HP28 HP35 existing HP40 Amend new HP32 LandlUse Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update March 30,2005 Page 7 ~m g>< ~rn~ -J\ - 0 F v. " EXHIBrr~ PAGE-LOF -'- COUNCIL ACTION Pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 22, Article IX, "Process VI Review," any amendments to the comprehensive plan, comprehensive plan designations map, or zoning text must be approved by the City Council based on a recommendation from the Planning Commission. Per FWCC Section 22-541, after consideration of the Planning Commission report, and at its <:liscretion holding its own public hearing, the City Council shall by majority vote of its total membership take the following action: 1. 2. 3. 4. Approve the amendments by ordinance; Modify and approve the amendments by ordinance; Disapprove the amendments by resolution; or Refer the amendments back to the Planning Commission for further proceedings. If this occurs, the City Council shall specify the time within which the Planning Commission shall report to the City Council on the amendments. LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit I Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 P~get Center Partnership Request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone Proposed Amendments to FWCP Chapter 5, "Housing" Kitts Corner Request for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone March 15,2005, Staff Report to Planning Commission with Exhibits A-F March 23, 2005, Planning Commission Minutes Vicinity Map - Puget Center Partnership Site-Specific Request March 2, 2005, Bmail from Greg Fewins, Deputy Director of Community Development Services, Concerning Telephone Call from Roddy Noiton March 4, 2005, Letter from Robert Roper, President, Mirror Lake Residents' Association March 23, 2005, Letter from Paul Benton 1:\2004 Comprehensive Plan\2004 Update\LUTC\041805 Staff Report to the LUTc.docl3/3012005 3:51 PM Land/Use Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update March 30, Z005 Page 8 . ~ CITVOF# ' Federa I Way MEMORANDUM April 25,2005 To: Jack Dovey, Chair Land UselTransportation Committee (LUTC) { SUBJECT: David Moseley, City Manager Kathy McClung, Director of Community Development Services ~c.-- Margaret H. Clark, AICP, Senior Planner ~ Jim Hams, Senior Planner :J If - Summary of 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Corner Request VIA: FROM: MEETING DATE: May 2, 2005 This is a summary of the attached report. Please read the report for a detailed history and for a list of recommended conditions of approval. I. SUMMARY OF REQUEST The Kitts Comer Request is a request from Jon Potter to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 46 acres located south of South 336m Street and west of Pacific Highway South ITorn Business Park (BP) to Community Business (Be) and Multi-Family (RM 2400) (Exhibit 1). The applicant is requesting Community Business on the eastern portion of the site (approximately 17.7 acres located east of the southerly extension of 13th Place South) and RM 2400 (multi-family, one unit per 2,400 square feet) consisting of approximately 28.4 acres located west of the southerly extension of 13th Place South (Exhibit 2). II. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY . The Kitts Comer request was submitted originally in April 1999. It was reviewed as part of the 200 I Comprehensive Plan Amendments. ill November 2001, the LUTC gave direction that a development agreement be prepared for the site. In September 2004, the applicant submitted an application for approval of a development agreement and associated plan (Exhibit 3). ill March 2005, the City initiated a legislative comprehensive plan amendment and conditional rezone for the Kitts Comer site. ill. REASON FOR COUNCIL ACTION Since November 5,2001, staff has been working with the applicants on a development plan that meets the direction given to staff during the November 5,2001, LUTC meeting, and in subsequent briefings. However, Mr. Potter has been unable to obtain the signatures of the owners of Parcels 202104-9080 (Ralph Jones) and 202104-9086 (CCD Enterprises Inc.). Going forward with the proposal with the exclusion of these parcels would result in an island of BP zoning surrounded by BC (Exhibit 8). In a March 16,2005 correspondence, the City notified Mr. Potter that they were initiating a legislative comprehensive plan amendment and conditional rezone (Exhibit 7). This would allow the request to go forward as a comprehensive plan amendment and rezone based on specific conditions, which would achieve the same result as a development agreement. In March 27, 2003, the western portion of the site was given a comprehensive plan amendment and zoning ofMuIti-Family (RM 2400), per Ordinance No. 03-442, based on a future development agreement for the entire site. Since the request is no longer bei~ reviewed subject to a development agreement, which was intended to apply to the entire site, the wèstern portion of the site must also be reviewed along with the eastern portion ofthe site pursuant to a legislative comprehensive plan amendment and conditional rezone. IV. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) PROCESS The Kitts Comer comprehensive plan amendment and rezone was first submitted in 1999 and was considered as part of the 2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, based on the conceptual site plan shown as Exhibit 9. A Determination of Non significance (DNS) (Exhibit 5) for this non-project was issued on July 4, 2001. Although this was a non-project action, a conceptual site plan (Exhibit 9) was used to analyze potential impacts. Subsequent to the November 5, 2001, LUTC direction to prepare a development plan, and after working with City staff, the applicant submitted a development plan on September 3,2004 (Exhibit 3). As shown in Exhibit 3, the 2001 conceptual site plan (Exhibit 9) has been modified in terms of the total number of acres, the number of acres to be designated multi- family versus commercial, and the proposed uses. Pursuant to WAC 197-1 I -600(3)(b )(i), an addendum (Exhibit J 0) has been prepared to analyze whether potential impacts associated with the changed action is likely to have significant adverse impacts. This comparison identified no new or different environmental impacts beyond those evaluated in the July 4,2001, Detennination of Non significance. V. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY 2/19/05 5/2/05 5/17/05 6/7/05 Issuance of SEP A Addendum Presentation to LUTC on Kitts Comer City Council Public Meeting Second City Council Public Meeting and Adoption of Ordinance VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION '. Staff recommends that the request from Jon Potter to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 46 acres located south of South 336th Street and west of Pacific Highway South from Business Park (BP) to Community Business (Be) and Multi-Family (RM 2400) be approved based on conditions outlined on pages 9-11 of the attached full staff report. I 1:\2004 Comprehensive Plan\2004 Update\LUTC\O50205 Summary of Kitts Comer Staff Report to the LUTc.docl4/26/2oo5 I :59 PM Land Use/Transportation Committee Summary of 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Corner Request Meeting of May 2,2005 Page 2 elTYOF ~ Federal Way April 25, 2005 To: VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: MEETING DATE: MEMORANDUM Jack Dovey, Chair Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTe) David ~anager Kathy McClung, Director of Community Development Services ~ Margaret H. Clark, AICP, Sen~?r Planner ~ Jim Harris, Senior Planne~-9 1/ 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Corner Request May 2, 2005 I. BACKGROUND The 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments includes the following three components: 1. Kitts Corner Request - Request from Jon Potter to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 46 acres located south of South 3361h Street and west of Pacific Highway South from Business Park (BP) to Community Business (Be) and Multi-Family (RM 2400) (Exhibit 1). The applicant is requesting Community Business on the eastern portion of the site (approximately 17.7 acres located east of the southerly extension of 13th Place South) and RM 2400 (multi- family, one unit per 2,400 square feet) consisting of approximately 28.4 acres located west of the southerly extension of 13111 Place South (Exhibit 2). 2. Puget Center Partnership Request - Request from the Puget Center Partnership to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 4.03 acres located north of South 312th Street and east of 151 Avenue South from Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business (BN). 3. Housing Chapter Update - Update of "Chapter 5, Housing," of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP). This staff report pertains only to the Kitts Corner request. The Puget Center Partnership Request and the proposed amendments to the Housing Chapter were presented to the LUTC at their April 18, 2005, public meeting. u. KITTS CORNER SITE-SPECIFIC REQUEST I. Background - The Kitts Comer request was submitted originally in Apri 1 1999. It was reviewed as part of the 2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments. In November 2001, LUTC gave direction that a development agreement be prepared for the site. In September 2004, the applicant submitted an application for approval of a development agreement and associated plan (Exhibit 3). In March 2005, the City initiated a legislative comprehensive plan amendment and conditional rezone for the Kitts Comer site.! 2. Summary - File Number: Parcel Numbers Owners & Acreage: 05-101205-UP;05101207-SE TABLE I Number Parcel No. Owner Acres 1 202104-9069 Kitts Corner LLC 1.08 acres 2 202104-9070 Campus Gateway Associates 21.79 acres 3 202104-9001 James Merlino 8.87 acres 4 202104-9090 Curtis Nelson 0.52 acres 5 202104-9086 CCD Enterprises Inc. 0.17 acres 6 202104-9080 Ralph Jones 1.5 acres 7 202104-9072 Chase WJ Trust 7.75 acres 8 202104-9004 Andrew Slisco 4.44 acres 9 202104-9051 z Bob Wright TOT AL 46.12 acres Location: Size: Applicant: Owner: Request: South of South 33 6th Street and west of Pacific Highway South 46.12 acres Jon Potter Please refer to Table I Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 46 acres from Business Park (BP) to Community Business (BC) and Multi-Family (RM 2400) (Exhibit 1). The applicant is requesting BC on the eastern portion of the site (approximately 17.7 acres located east of the southerly extension of 13lh Place South) and RM 2400 (multi-family, one unit per 2,400 square feet) consisting of approximately 28.4 acres located west of the southerly extension of 13 Ih Place South (Exhibit 2). Existing Comprehensive Plan: Existing Zoning: Business Park Business Park (BP) I A history of the Kits Corner Request is contained in Section III of this staff report- 2 This parcel was included in the 200 I Comprehensive Plan Amendments, but is not included in the present request. Land Use/Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Corner Request Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 2 Requested Comprehensive Plan: Requested Zoning: III. HISTORY Community Business and Multi-Family Community Business (Be) and Multi-Family (RM 2400) The following summarizes the history of the Kitts Comer request from its initial submittal in 1999 to the present: April 1999 June 1999 July 25, 2000 July 4,2001 August 6, 2001 Sept 19,2001 Sept 200 I Request for a comprehensive plan amendment and rezone request from Business Park (BP) to Community Business (BC) was received on behalf of Parcel Numbers 202104-9070 (Campus Gateway Associates), 202104-900 I (Merlino), and 202104-9051 (Wright). The three requests were presented to the City's Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTe), which made a recommendation to the full council that these requests should be analyzed further and all parcels then zoned BP in this vicinity (Parcels 1-9 as shown Table I) should be included. The Council concurred with the LUTC's request. As part of the 2001 Comprehensive Plan Update, owners of Parcels 202104- 9070 (Campus Gateway Associates), 202104-9001 (Merlino), and 202104-9072 (Chase NW Trust) requested that their original request be amended to allow Multi-Family (RM 2400) uses west of the on-site wetlands (Exhibit 4). Threshold Determination on the 2001 Comprehensive Plan Update, which included the Kitts Comer request, was issued pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A) (Exhibit 5). Applicants withdrew request for a Multi-Family comprehensive plan designation and RM 2400 zoning on west side. Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended approval of the request for a change in comprehensive plan designation and zoning from BP to BC for the areas east ofthe wetlands based on a development agreement, which would be entered into between the City and the property owners. On a separate track, as part of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan Update, Dick Borsini submitted a request on behalf of the owners of Parcels 202104-9070 (Campus Gateway Associates), 2021 04~900 I (Merlino), and 202104-9072 (Chase NW Trust) for a change in comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 13.35 acres located west of the on-site wetlands from BP to Multi- Family Residential and RM 2400 (one unit per 2,400 square feet) (Exhibit 6). October I, 200 I Five of the eight site-specific requests for the 200 I Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process were presented to the LUTC (Request #3, Jackson had been withdrawn). At that time staff informed the LUTC that Requests #4 (Kitts Comer) and #6 (Christian Faith Center) would be presented to the LUTC and Land Use/Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Comer Request Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 3 Nov 5, 2001 March 27, 2003 Sept 3, 2004 March 16, 2005 City Council at a later date in order to al1ow staff to prepare development agreements related to these requests. Draft development agreements on Christian Faith Center and Kitts Comer were presented to the LUTC to get direction on whether the draft development agreements addressed all identified concerns associated with a change in the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from BP to RM3600 for Christian Faith Center and from BP to BC for Kitts Comer. The LUTC gave direction to staff to continue work on the agreements as presented. Per Ordinance No. 03-442, the City of Federal Way adopted a comprehensive plan designation and zoning of Multi-Family Residential and RM 2400 (one unit per 2,400 square feet) based on future approval of a development agreement and development plan for those portions of Parcels 202I04~9070, 202104-9001, and 202104-9072, located west of the on-site wetlands. Applicant submitted application for approval of development agreement and development plan for both the east and west side of the wetlands. Total site area consists of 46.12 acres. City infonned Jon Potter that they were initiating a legislative comprehensive plan amendment and conditional rezone for the Kitts Comer site (Exhibit 7). IV. REASON FOR COUNCIL ACTION Since November 5, 2001, staff has been working with the applicants on a development plan that meets the direction given to staff during the November 5, 2001, LUTC meeting and in subsequent briefings. However, Mr. Potter has been unable to obtain the signatures of the owners of Parcels 202104-9080 (Ralph Jones) and 202104-9086 (CCD Enterprises Inc.). Going forward with the proposal with the exclusion of these parcels would result in an island ofBP zoning surrounded by BC (Exhibit 8). In a March 16, 2005 correspondence, the City notified Mr. Potter that they were initiating a legislative comprehensive plan amendment and conditional rezone (Exhibit 7). This would allow the request to go forward as a comprehensive plan amendment and rezone based on specific conditions, which would achieve the same result as a development agreement. In March 27, 2003, the western portion ofthe site was given a comprehensive plan amendment and zoning of Multifamily (RM 2400), per Ordinance No. 03-442, based on a future development agreement for the entire site. Since the request is no longer being reviewed subject to a development agreement, which was intended to apply to the entire site, the western portion of the site must also be reviewed along with the eastern portion of the site pursuant to a legislative comprehensive plan amendment and conditional rezone. V. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) PROCESS As shown in Section III above, History, the Kitts Comer comprehensive plan amendment and rezone was first submitted in 1999 and was considered as part of the 2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments based on the conceptual site plan shown as Exhibit 9. A Detennination of Land Use/Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Comer Request Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 4 Nonsignificance (DNS) (Exhibit 5) for the non-project action to change the designation of approximately 45.85 acres located south of South 336lh Street and west of Pacific Highway from BP to BC and RM 2400 was issued on July 4, 200 I. This action was part of the 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Amendments. The 14-day comment period ended on July 18, 2001, and the 14- day appeal period ended on August 1,2001. No appeals were received. Although this was a non-project action, a conceptual site plan (Exhibit 9) was used to analyze potential impacts. Subsequent to the November 5, 2001, LUTC's direction to prepare a development plan and after working with City staff, the applicant submitted a development plan on September 3,2004 (Exhibit 3). As shown hi Exhibit 3, the 2001 conceptual site plan (Exhibit 9) has been modified in terms of the total number of acres, the number of acres to be designated multi-family versus commercial, and the proposed uses. Pursuant to WAC 197 -11-600(3)(b )(i), an addendum (Exhibit 10) has been prepared to analyze whether potential impacts associated with the changed action is likely to have significant adverse impacts. The addendum analyzed the proposed action to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning, and potential impacts associated with a development pattern that may result from these changes, based on the 2004 conceptual plan (Exhibit 3) as compared to the 2001 conceptual plan (Exhibit 9). This comparison identified no new or different environmental impacts beyond those evaluated in the July 4,2001, Detennination of Non significance. VI. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY 2/19/05 Issuance of SEP A Addendum 5/2/05 Presentation to LUTC on Kitts Comer 5/17/05 City Council Public Meeting 6/7/05 Second City Council Public Meeting and Adoption of Ordinance VII. PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED Throughout the review of the Kitts Corner request, the City has received comments from two businesses: 1. Comments from Washington Trucking Association - The Washington Trucking Association submitted a July 15, 2002, letter (Exhibit 11) stating concerns about changing the comprehensive plan amendment and zoning of the western portion of the site from BP to RM 2400 due to increased traffic. 2. Frito Lay Comments - Frito Lay submitted two letters (Exhibits 12 and 13) dated August 15,2001, and September 2, 2004, in opposition to the Kitts Corner comprehensive plan amendment and rezone. They are opposed to residential uses being located adjacent to their manufacturing business. Land Use/Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Comer Request Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 5 VIII. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS AND AVAILABILITY OF SERVICES Neighborhood Characteristics The site is presently vacant except for Parcel 202014-9086 (CCD Enterprises Inc.), on which Horan Realty, a real estate office building is located, and Parcel 202104-9090 (Nelson), on which an automotive business is operated. In addition, a City-controlled regional detention pond, Kitts Corner, is located on the western portion of Parcel 202104-9004 (Slisco). Uses to the north across South 336111 Street are a mix of retail, office, church, and restaurants. To the south is vacant land on which a mini-storage is being proposed. To the east across Pacific Highway South, moving from north to south, are small retail establishments, vacant property, bank under construction, Pacifica Park Office Building, and Canopy World. In addition, Walt's Automotive is located on the triangular piece of property between Pacific Highway South and 16th Avenue South. To the west, moving from north to south, are Mitchell House, a senior housing development, and industrial uses, including Frito Lay. Availability of Utilities Sanitary Sewer: Located within the Lakehaven Utility District. Sewer facilities will need to be extended to serve the site. There is adequate sewer capacity at this time. Public Water: Located within the Lakehaven Utility District. Water facilities will need to be extended to serve the site. There is adequate water capacity at this time. Stonn Drainage: Site is located in the West Hylebos Creek Sub-Basin Availability of Public Services Police: Provided by City of Federal Way Fire/ Emergency Medical: Provided by Federal Way Fire Department Schools: Provided by Federal Way School District IX. PROPOSED USES AS SHOWN IN 2004 CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN The uses listed in Table II are based on information shown on the submitted development plan (Exhibit 3). Any future development must comply with the conditions of approval as listed in Section XV of this staff report. TABLE II 40,000 139,000 # Employees Based on Accepted use to Em 10 ee Ratio 160 employees (one employee/ 250 s . ft 278 employees one employee/ # Residential Units Use Office Space Square Foota e Land Use/Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Corner Request Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 6 Use Center) S ace Square Foota e # Residential Units Total 179,000 438 employees 160 residential townhouses (132 townhouses on the west side of the on-site wetlands and 28 on the east side of the on-site wetlands X. SENSITIVE AREAS A Class II Wetland is located on the west central portions of Parcel 202104-9070 (Campus Gateway) and Parcel 202104-9001 (Merlino), and on the northern portion of Parcel 202 1 04-90n (Chase NW Trust). A City-controlled regional detention pond, Kitts Comer, is located on the western portion of Parcel 202104-9004 (Slisco). A smaller Class II wetland is located to the south on Parcel 202104-9004 (Slisco). This smaller wetland is presently utilized as the overflow detention area for the primary Kitts Comer detention area to the southwest. A branch ofthe Hylebos Stream flows southwards through these wetlands. Class II Wetlands have IOO-foot setbacks. The on-site stream also has a 100-foot buffer. The stream buffer is either contained within the existing wetland buffers or flows through the regional detention pond. Parcels 202104- 9070 (Campus Gateway) and 202104-900 I (Merlino) are further affected by the buffer of a Class II Wetland to the west. There are also two smaller wetlands located on the Campus Gateway and Merlino parcels. The City entered into a June 17, 1996, Settlement Agreement and Covenant with the property owners which stated that once all pennit fees were paid and the development application was in compliance with all applicable laws and codes, these smaller parcels could be filled because mitigation for their filling was already built into the mitigation plan for the overall project. If future development is proposed in the vicinity of an on-site stream or wetland, compliance with Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 22, Article XIV, "Environmentally Sensitive Areas," and the settlement agreement and covenant will be required. XI. DRAINAGE The site is located in the West Hylebos Creek Sub-Basin. Since more than 5,000 square feet of impervious surfaces would be created with development of the site, surface water runoff and treatment would be required per the 1998 King County Suiface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), the Federal Way Addendum to the KCSWD, and any conditions stipulated in the settlement agreement and covenant entered into between the City and the property owners. The site falls within a Level I Flow Control Area, thus the applicant must design the flow control facility to meet these perfonnance criteria. XII. ACCESS Proposed access to the eastern (area east of the large on-site wetland) portion of the site is from South 336th Street, a principal arterial located to the north of the site, and Pacific Highway South, also a principal arterial located to the east. Access to the western portion of the site would be from South 336th Street. The conceptual plan (Exhibit 3) shows a road connecting the western (area west of the large on-site wetlands) and eastern (area east of the large on~site wetland) areas. This Land Use/Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Corner Request Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 7 connecting roadway would provide the western portion of the site access to Pacific Highway South. Based on the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP), the planned road section for Pacific Highway South is a Type A street (four lanes plus High Occupancy Vehicle lanes), consisting of a 90-foot street with curb, gutter, six-foot planting strip with street trees, eight-foot sidewalk, and streetlights in a 124-foot right-of-way. In 2004, the City constructed two northbound left-turn lanes at 3361h Street, increasing the street and right-of-way by 12 feet. The planned road section for South 3361h Street is a Type E Street consisting of a 64-foot wide street (four lanes plus median) with curb, gutter, six-foot planting strip with street trees, eight-foot sidewalk, and streetlights in a 98-foot right-of-way. In addition, the Capital Improvement Plant (CIP) anticipates the need for a second eastbound left-turn lane and an additional eastbound through lane at Pacific Highway South, increasing the planned width of street and right-of-way by 24 feet. As part of the development of the site, 13th Place South would be extended southward from South 3361h Street through the site, and South 340th would be extended westward from Pacific Highway South through the site. An additional east/west access would also be required between South 336111 and South 340lh Streets. XIII. POTENTIAL TRAFFIC IMPACTS Based on the requested comprehensive plan designation of Community Business and Multifamily, and zoning ofBC and RM 2400 (one unit per 2,400 square feet), and the uses as shown in Table II, evening peak hour trips are estimated at 742 trips. Development of the site would require the preparation of a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) by the applicant's engineer. The TlA would identify transportation impacts associated with the development and identify appropriate mitigation measures. The applicants would be expected to construct impacted TIP projects or contribute pro-rata shares towards projects on the TIP that are impacted by more than ten peak hour trips. Additionally, on-site and off~site transportation-related improvements may be required as detennined by the TlA. XIV. PROJECTIONS FOR POPULATION AND EMPLOYMENT The site is presently vacant except for Parcel 202014-9086 (CCD Enterprises Inc.), on which Horan Realty, a real estate office building, is located, and Parcel 202104-9090 (Nelson), on which an automotive business is operated. The existing BP zoning allows both office use on small lots and automotive repair. On the other hand, BC zoning allows office use but does not allow automotive repair as a principal use. Therefore, the existing automotive business on Parcel 202014-9086 would become nonconfonning with BC zoning. The uses shown in the 2004 conceptual site plan would result in 438 jobs and 160 residential units. The overall vision of the comprehensive plan is to restrict commercial development to the downtown (City Center Core and Frame), to Pacific Highway South (generally between South 272nd Street and South 34Sth Street), and to the area around South 34Sth Street, approximately between SR-99 and 1-5. The vision ofthe comprehensive plan is also to provide an appropriate balance of services, employment, and housing. In addition, the land use concept envisions promotion of housing in the City's commercial areas close to shopping and employment. Land UselTransportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Corner Request Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 8 xv. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the rNuest from Jon Potter to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 46 acres located south of South 33 6th Street and west of Pacific Highway South from Business Park (BP) to Community Business (Be) and Multi~Family (RM 2400) be approved based on the following conditions: 1. 2. Prior to construction of any new buildings,3, a single Master Plan for the entire Multi-Family (RM 2400) and Community Business (Be) zoned site shall be submitted to and approved by the City. Application for critical area intrusions as applicable is also required in conjunction with master plan review. A project action State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A) review shall also be conducted in conjunction with master plan and critical area review. Subsequent to Master Plan approval, building design and minor modifications to the site plan shall be reviewed via a Process II, Site Plan Review. For the purposes ofthe Master Plan, the subject site is comprised of the following parcels: 202 I 04-9069, 202104-9070, 202104-900 I, 202104-9090, 202104-9086, 202104-9080, 202104-9072, and 202104-9004. The Master Plan shall be developed with a cohesive and integrated design that promotes the following: a. Pedestrian scale, and pedestrian orientation and massing of buildings. b. Site~wide pedestrian connectivity. c. Building massing shall be designed to avoid large expanses of parking areas adjacent to and/or visible from the public right-of~ways. On-site parking shall not be allowed between buildings and public right~of-ways, except the Director of Community Development Services may approve one double-loaded parking row between a building and right-of-way due to extenuating circumstances. d. The appearance of strip commercial development shall be minimized by breaking large linear buildings into numerous smaller buildings. e. The commercial portion of the site may include a maximum oftwo primary anchor buildings. The individual anchor buildings are pennitted a maximum 50,000 square feet of building footprint, and the total gross floor area of all anchors shall not exceed 100,000 square feet of gross floor area. Anchor facades shall not exceed a width to depth ratio of 1.5:1. f. Non-anchor buildings should not exceed 10,000 square feet of building footprint. The Director of Community Development Services may approve a maximum of two, non. anchor buildings in excess of 10,000 square feet, up to a maximum of 20,000 square feet each, when the applicant demonstrates the following: 3 There are two existing building on the site, the Horan building and the building housing the automotive repair business to the west of Horan. Land Use/Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Comer Request Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 9 3. (i) The additional square footage is necessary to accommodate the needs of a specific tenant. (ii) The facades of the structure include significant structural modulation equal to at least ten percent ofthe length of the subject façade. (íii) The overall design of the building is consistent with the pedestrian scale and integrated design of the overall site. (iv) Non-anchor facades shall not exceed a width to depth ratio of 2: I. g. Primary commercial building entries shall be clearly visible and recognizable from the public right-of-ways; or active building facades, including windows and pedestrian scale design amenities such as screening, plazas, or art features such as trellises, artwork, murals, landscaping or combinations thereof, shall be required fronting the right-of-way. h. OnMstreet parallel parking is encouraged where feasible. 1. A minimum of five percent of the gross land area ofthe commercial portion of the site shall be pedestrian oriented open space. There shall be one primary pedestrian gathering focal point, and additional supporting pedestrian oriented gathering locations distributed proportionally throughout the commercial portion of the site. Open space areas and plazas shall include seating, landscaping, art, ornamentation, pedestrian scale lighting, water features, and outdoor dining. J. Vehicular service stations are not pennitted. Fuel pump stations are only permitted when accessory to an anchor tenant. Any approved fuel pump station shall not be oriented to the public right-of-way, and shall not exceed two fuel islands with a total of up to eight vehicular fueling positions. Development of the site shall include design, construction, and dedication of the following public roadways in accordance with appropriate FWCC street sections: (a) 13111 Place from South 336111 Street to the south property line; (b) South 340111 Street from Pacific Highway South to the intersection of 13th Place South extended; (c) A roadway connecting from South 3361h Street through the residential area, connecting to 13 tl1 Place South extended. These public roadways are necessary to serve the proposed development and shall be constructed as outlined below. Additional conditions (on-site and off-site) intended to mitigate significant adverse environmental impacts shall be imposed through the City's SEP A process and will be applied to any specific proposed project in the future. a. Prior to occupancy of any residential building on the site, South 340lh Street from Pacific Highway South to the intersection of 13lh Place South extended, and the roadway within the residential area connecting to South 3361h Street, shall be constructed to meet all applicable standards. Traffic calming devices such as speed humps, speed tables, traffic circles, chicanes, curb extensions, signs, pavement markings, or other calming devices as approved by the Public Works Director shall be incorporated within the residential roadway. Signal modifications at Pacific Highway South and South 34ütl1 Street intersection may be required to provide safe access. Land Use/Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Corner Request Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 10 XVI. Alternatively, the developer may construct the extension of 1361 Place South trom South 336th Street to its intersection with the proposed residential road as a traffic circle. This would eliminate the need for the construction of South 340th Street trom Pacific Highway South to the intersection of 13tl1 Place South extended, and the segment of 13tl1 Place South between South 340th Street and the intersection of the residential roadway (traffic circle). b. Prior to occupancy of any commercial building, 13lh Place South from South 336111 Street to the south property line, and South 340th Street from Pacific Highway South to the intersection of 13lh Avenue South extended, shall be constructed to all applicable standards. A new traffic signal (South 336th Street & 13111 Place South) and/or signal modifications (Pacific Highway South & South 340th Street) may be required as detennined through the SEP A process. 4. All new public streets shall include traffic calming features. 5. Uses other than multi-unit housing and day care facilities that are otherwise pennitted in the RM zone are not allowed. 6. The multi-family portion of the site, west of the large on.site wetland, shall be accessed from one location along South 336111 Street and shall include a public roadway connecting through the residential area, across the existing wetland benn, and connecting to 13 Ih A venue South extended. 7. No more than one anchor building, or a maximum of 75,000 square feet of commercial building area, may receive a Certificate of Occupancy on the site without the prior construction of a minimum of 75 residential units. 8. The residential area shall be designed to minimize reception of potential noise impacts from adjacent nonresidential uses. LAND USE/TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE OPTIONS The Committee has the following options: 1. Recommend that the full Council accept the staff recommendation and adopt an ordinance approving the request by Jon Potter for a change in comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 46 acres located south of South 3361h Street and west of Pacific Highway South from Business Park (BP) to Community Business (Be) and Multi~Family (RM 2400). 2 Recommend that the full Council modify the staff recommendation and adopt an ordinance approving the request. 3. Recommend that the full Council disapprove the request by resolution, retaining the Business Park (BP) comprehensive plan designation and zoning. Land Use/Transportation Corrunittee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Corner Request Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 11 APPROVAL OF CQl\1MITTEE ACTION: .... .EÏic Faison, Méillbër MichaeIPark;:,Member Jack Dovey, Chair LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 Exhibit 6 Exhibit 7 Exhibit 8 Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Zoning Map showing existing and requested zoning Conceptual site plan showing the Kitts Corner Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 46 acres located south of South 336th Street and west of Pacific Highway South from Business Park (BP) to Community Business (Be) and Multi-Family (RM 2400) (2004 Comprehensive Plan Update) Map showing conceptual development submitted as part of the 2004 development agreement application Kitts Corner Request, 2001 Comprehensive Plan Amendments July 4,2001, Determination of Non significance (DNS) Kitts Corner Request, 2002 Comprehensive Plan Amendments March 16,2005 Correspondence from Jim Harris, Senior Planner to Jon Potter Map portraying zoning without including Parcels 202104-9080 (Ralph Jones) and 202104-9086 (CCD Enterprises Inc.) Conceptual Site Plan showing Kitts Comer Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 46 acres located south of South 326th Street and west of Pacific Highway South from Business Park (BP) to Community Business (Be) and Multi-Family (RM 2400) (2001 Comprehensive Plan Update) DNS Addendum for Kitts Comer Request July 15,2002, Letter from the Washington Trncking Association August 15, 2001, Letter from Frito Lay September 2, 2004, Letter from Frito Lay 1:\2004 Comprehensive Plan\2004 Update\LUTC\041805 Staff Report to the LUTCdoc/4/26/2005 9:54 AM Meeting of May 2, 2005 Page 12 Land Use/Transportation Committee 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update, Kitts Comer Request p tf ~ :z: t; OP I/) ,..I"; ;II. J-~". d S 336TH ST =1 : f)-~.. .'.. Mitchell : Place . .. Apartment( ~ .. II -OP OP Existing Designation: em rehensive Plan: Business Park Zenina: BP BP OP III ..I 11." E , ~ ~ ; Xi;' '0 s'c g;; ,- ,..~~r- - J 0 S 336TH ST - "'"' -- èf T 'W'--,.,. Request Botmdary .. *. .. ~ BP 202104- 9069 202104-9070 (I) >- 3=, ::r Oii ii:. Õ¡ èf~ t:; BP ~ () CI: 2021/)4-9401 ~ BP J]¡ " :;¡ tJ- Æ 202104-1. 20210"- 9b90 90861 BC BP BP """"",#' BC Requested Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Community Business and Multifamily Residential Zonina: BC and RM2400 BC BP ¡ if, BC ¡ ÆTr .i!.'Y ~...!ji (ff () l' ,till ;/ ;,"1( it if ...,# tJ "- ~ ~ f ;\ Ij!:~ "J!:I.~ -.....-..BP.. Bf' d BP City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan 2004 Site Specific Requests For Comprehensive Plan Designation Changes Kitts Corner Site Specific Request Legend 0 Site Specific Request --,~.'-' Steep Slopes 0 Wetlands EXHIBIT I PAGE LOF J ~ 0 250 500 N I I I Feet This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only. The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to Us accuracy. ~';"';f- "",,'," ".' ,.........,m,",- EXHIBIT ~ PAGE , OF I ~EJ:.W=~ U"al., I ~~~I!~__- CJJ1B2JI TTBLK --____-n ) l ) -- BOUTH :J:J6TH Sf i Z 11 ó g: ffi " :;: OJ " ;; NolO; Tho buildings. layouts ond olher site fealures shown ;... this plan and/or rendering represent an iIIuslrolivo perspective of Wo currenl siledevtlopmenl conce,t. Thi. "'NI.";,,", c" "" ..c, "O",,;;--,-- - _-p'lI nn onl '.0'.""1 .o"'¡,,~ ".""n_-=~n=al-~ -, ~.n--n-- ,",--",.",0. '. . ---------..---______n_n- L :g ('. 'ii i'; :;¡; Gi I ~ -< '" 0 C --< I ! VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCALI: DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND PARKING AREAS COI/MfRCw. TOTAl COI/MERCw. AREA: 179.000 SF PARKING REQUIRffi: 3.33 STAt.l!> PER 1.000sF ~ 596 STAlLS PROVIOOJ:830 STAlLS (4.6 STAlLS PER I.ODO SF) ~ESlP€NJ.)Al, PARKING AND lJIo//T oo.cou..TlONS RESIDENTIIIt. TOWNHOUSES; 160 UNITS PARKING REQUlRffi; 1.7 PER DU ~ 272 STAlLS PRlMOW: 272 STAlLS OPEN SPACE AND PU.Y ARrk. OPEN SPACE REQUIRED: 400 SF PER IINIT - 6!.!!ØO SF (1.46 ACRES) PROIIID£D: 718.740 SF (18.5 ACK<5 PLAY AII£A REQUIRED: 1 0:1: OF REQUIRED OPEN SPACE = 6,400 SF PR<MDED: 6.400 SF EXHIBIT 3 PAGE I OF L ~ 100' ~ ~ ã ~ ¡¡; ~ ~ I~l I/) m :; -, !t:! ~ti . g ¡::: 0 ..... . ..... CI.. .¡....if"'.."'Cl> ()oooIoog 2~8 ......z c r.Jj 1: 0 e-' f"\...3' () Õ. - þooI-o4 E c °OO-:ë U 0 CJ) u'¡) 0 ~ ii;3 J2 7r'1 0 >.. IJ.l IV 0 .¡....¡ f:-, CJ) 3: Qc-':;)- Z ~-o e ~ Q) Cl> I ~.~-g 00080 ~ I.J.... ~ I"'-'( C 0 3 1) "...¡ > 1) ~ c .2 a.. Q) +' èñ 0 ;) +' 0- IV 0 C 0 () . Incorporated 620 Kirklond "'Y Soite 100 Kirl<lond, ....Wnglon 98033 PboDe; 1425) 82~H446 FAX; 425 821~9571 Interne!: m.otak.COII 30371 Projecl No. C-3 100' O' ,..,-..-..;;, SCAt! 200' :- 3 IN fEET Sheel No. SMel 3 of g p " w ~ ~ ~ r 5 ~ ~ r Ê S.J~3I!TH ST. Existing Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Business Park Zoning: BP " w ~ ¡; .. BP ¡op ..~ i HM1t10U BC Proposed Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Community Business & Multifamily Residential Zoning: BC & RM2400 ; f-.-! Note: This map is intended for use as s graphical represer1lstion only. The City of Federal Way mskes no warrsntyss to Its accuracy. 5~~ 50 100, 150 200 Feet ~ AT' I City of Federal Way ; Comprehensive Plan 2001 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES Kitts Corner Site Specific Request #4 Key: L:~':jd;;Þ: Steep Slopes III Wetlands , "m )So I G') >< ,,;~m~ : - I .-1 0 ." 11-- #4 .. -'. ,. .. .... .~, /7 ~. t{--ú { ¡:XHIBIT S PAGE-1-0F -U- CITY HALL 33530 1 st Way South PO Box 9718 -_. - -- (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 ENVIRONMENT AL DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 2001 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Fcderal Way File No. Ol-lO2585-00-SE Description of Proposal: The proposed non-project action is to update the City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan consistent with the annual amendment process defined in the Federal Way City Code. There are eight site-specific requests to amend the existing Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations. These requests are summarized as follows: File Number Site Specific Location Parcel Size Comprehensive Plan & Request ..- Zoning Changes .- 1. CPA99-00II Goodwin Dental North of S 288111 St 0.48 acres From Multifamily & RM 1800 (I Clinic & east of Pacific unit per 1,800 sq ft) to Community HwyS. Business & Be. 2. 00-1O489I-00-UP Jolm Nguyen South of S 308111 St 0.71 acres From Professional Office & PO to & west of 14th Ave Multifamily & RM 1800 (I unit per S. J:.!?OO sq fl). -- ~- 3. CPA99-00I4 Jerry Jackson North of S 320'h St 27.19 acres Presently has King County Comp & cast of 1-5. Plan of Commercial Outside of Center & Urban Residential (4-12 dwelling units per acre) & zoning of Office and R-4 (Residential, four units per acre); requesting Federal - Way OftÏce Park and or. 4. CP A99-0008 Kitts Comer South of S 336111 St 45.85 acres From Business Park & BP to & west of Pacific Community Business & BC and HwyS. Multifamily & RM 2400 (1 unit per .--. 2,400 sq ft). 5. 00-1O4875-00-UP Chong Nam Yi North of S 344111 St 5.17 acres From Business Park & BP to & west of Pacific Community Business & BC. HwyS. 6. CP A99-0004 Weyerhaeuser South of S 336111 St 49.97 acres From ßusiness Park & BP to Company & east of Pacific Multifamily & RM 3600 (I unit per HwyS. 3,600 sq ft). 7. 00-10444I-00-UP John Smith East of33rd PI S in 3.1 acres From Single Family High Density East Campus Residential & RS 9.6 (I unit per 9,600 sq ft) to OftÏce Park & or. -- 8. 00-1O4224-00-UP Richard Hanson South of the 15.46 acres From Single Family Medium Density proposed Residential & RS 15.0 (I unit per Silverwood 15,000 sq ft) to Single Family High Subdivision, west Density Residential & RS 9.6 (I unit of 9th Ave SW per 9.600 sq ft). EXH I B IT -L- _PAGE~O~ ~. Location: The locations of the eight site-specific requests proposed are summarized above. Proponent: City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services Margaret Clark, AICP, Senior Planner, 253-61-4111 Lead Agency: City of Federal Way The responsible Official of the City of Federal Way hereby makes the following decisions based upon impacts identified in the environmental checklist, Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, final staff evaluation for this action, and other municipal policies, plans, rules, and regulations designated as a basis for exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act Rules pursuant to RCW 43.31c.O60. The lead agency for this proposal has detennined that it does not have probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Statement (ElS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.O32(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other infonnation on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-630; the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issuance, pending a public comment period. Comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on July 18,2001. Unless modified by the city, this determination will become final following the above comment deadline. Any person aggrieved of the city's final determination may file an appeal with the city within 14 days of the above comment deadline. Appeals must be filed by 5:00 p.m. on ~ugust 1,2001. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (published November 1993); Final Environmental Impact Statement City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations (July 1995); and, Environmental Impact Statement Addendum (Zoning Map Revisions) City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (September 1995) are hereby incorporated by reference for this proposal. The documents are available for review at the City of Federal Way Community Development Department, located at 33530 First Way South in the City of Federal Way, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. Responsible Official: PositionfTitle: Kathy McClung Director of Community Development Services Address: 33530 First Way South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 Date Issued: July 4,2001 S;gnalurc, K~ ~ c Document 10 #15311 Detennination of Nonsignificance (DNS) 2001 Comp Plan UpdatelOt-lO2585-00-SE UCSI)(;\DOCSIS A VE\86 I 54664. DOCLast rri ",cd 061291200 I I 1:11 AM luly4,2001 Page 2 ,-- ~_..----- ..------~- ,Þ--- ~--- / "- ,I' -' 't'.A-"----- , , " :: ' . j , ,.' " 'I., , "'\ , , " , " , , , '~3~6!h 5T , '.. , .. .. """ ffiiiiI '.Cd , .. "', " ... , , ... ... \ I \ 1 <Þ~ ~¡ l..i I I ¡ - ¡ <ð ~ ;! 0 . 1 ' 1.5 2 Miles 0.5 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan 2001 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES Composite Map Legend: /\/ City Limits' , "'. ,"', . Potential Annexation Area .. Site Requests ;'~m ;C> >< ;~m :E : m I - " jI l\ /Ç N ~,-- I Map Prlnted-June 22, 2001 . >- $ I () - ~ ~ u U3 ~') . « J ~ .. .. : Existing Designation: ILL ~ Comprehensive Plan: ! Multifamily i Zoning: RM1800 ~_.- rio' 0- }~:~~. . BCt Not": Thill map ill intended for use all a graphical representation only, The City of F7œ{way makes no WBt7'IInty as /0 its accuracy, BC u.i ~ :r: I- CO ,... RM1800 . CI) BC RM1800 9109 Proposed Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Community Business Zoning: BC (!j w ~ J: l- ce T"" 5~~ 50 100 150 200 Feet !:J.. N 2001 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES Goodwi n I Dental Clinic i Site Specific Request #1 :1,' ¡I, I' ! I I I ! I ; Key: Steep Slopes Wetlands , (f ¡~m '~>< I_IJ:~ ¡r-~ 10 II~ ; R=~I Map Prlr:"i-June 22, 20,01 ) , \ I Jerry Jackson Site Specific Request #3 RS7.2 ¡ Existing ~naf:ion: (King County) Comprehensive Plan: Commerical Outside of Center & Urban Residential i (4-12 Units per Acre) , KC Zoning: Office & R4 I II HCF' , I : )1 !!'< 01, ":¡"',,~.. cc ì Proposed Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Office Park Zoning: OP Note: This m8~'end&d 'or use as e graphIcal rapresentatJon only. The City 0' Fri6 'Vay makes no warranty as to Its accure~, 2~ - 2~ .tQO 600 800 Feet A ¡ City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan. 2001 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES Key: Steep Slopes Wetlands '~m " :þ >< Ie')... " m... I - I OJ "'" 6'~ '0 " '"1"1 , - '1-- ',~ , I I .... o'ì#3 ','" r..__~.. ."",~ HM1800 H1l City of Federal Way ç ~/I I Comprehensive Plan ~~3600 2001 r SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS J,I FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES Existing Designation: i I Comprehensive Plan: , J II Business Park Zoning: BP BC .. i i or ~ i ~ j $, ~3!TH ST. Kitts Corner Site Specific Request #4 " IÚ ~ § Key: Steep Slopes Wetlands BP I L1 ~~ f-i r-' .-1 40 ¡n ~1V1 #4 Note: This map is ir1lended for use as a graphicai representation oniy. The City of Federei Way makes no warranty as 10 its accurecy. .. -', . . ; .J IE ~' II Existing ~es¡gnatiön: .. H Comprehensive Plan: Business Park Zoning: BP City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan 2001 ' SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES v~'~- . v"-' ¡¡j I BC ill ~ ~ ... Chong Nam Vi Site Specific Request #5 Ce~!'!'"!':;'" S. 341ST S BC Key: ;¡:.; '. Steep Slopes ø Wetlands Bit i Proposed Designation:_~ 1 Comprehensive Plan: -i \ BC 1\ Community Business ! I Zoning: BC H / n I s. 344TH ST. I);m : G') >< :~mæ : m , - II ~ :0 "" iF:'\R #5 S. 344TH ST. Note: This map Is intended for use as e graphical representation only. The City of Fedel'!l Way mekes no warranty as to its accuracy. ,{ r-.¡-. Map P"""-1:I.June 22,200' I RM1800 RM3600 \1" ¡ Existing Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Business Park Zoning: BP .. I =¡~ , I¡: >: , RM36~O ,v I' J" 1 ~1.1'36~O , , I ;p I"i / I" I S. 3JGTH ST. - ----- --- ---- .. I BC ~I ~ < ~ '" ~ I - ---..-.------. ---- ---- --I" BP , Proposed Designation: ; r Comprehensive Plan: i., I Multifamily , Zoning: RM3600 BP BP Note: This mep is intended for use as 13 graphicel representetion only. The City of Federal Wey mekes no warranty es to its ec:curacy. 5~~;_n 50 100 150 200 Fee! ~ N I !City of Fedeldl Way Comprehensive Plan .. 2001 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES Weyerhaeuser Company Site Specific Request #6 Key: Steep Slopes Wetlands i CP¡ ¡ ~m ø)( :~ r!~ 0 -n.", .. - "6 Map Prlnted.June 22, 200 i I I I I ' ! I i LJ i' i! ¡ ~'P yerhaè user ¡ World, H~adquart,ers L ~v 1 51 j j , ¡ ~ + ¡ " F jii7i$J CP-1* J 0 ~-1i Existing Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Single Family High Density .- Zoning: RS9.6 uî >- ~ cr UJ (J'¡ =- w j ';é . cr ~ w $: Note: This map Is Intended for use as a grapl1Îcal raprasentatlOt1 only, The City or Ft'~1 Wey makes no warranty as to ils accuracy. 50 0 50 100 150 200 Fee! ~ John Smith RS9.' Site Specific Request #7 /i I , ( I J ! I I I ,,) \ I I I I I Key: ; . Steep Slopes - Wetlands ~m Q)( ! m:z: ~§ 1('1.-1 0 11.1. f"', ,-- ! I #7 . Map P~;~.June 22, 2QO1 I i i , ì N i 1 \ I ~ ui ~ S Proposed Designation: ,9.6\ Comprehensive Plan: \ Single Family, High Density \ Zoning: RS9.6 Richard Hanson Site Specific Request #8 8,W,3URDST, Existing Designation: Comprehensive Plan: , Single Family, Medium Density \ Zoning: RS15.0 . \\\ I ¡,mill- \ ¡I ¡ \ : ' , I \,515.0 \ Key: , Steep Slopes . Wetlands .'/';.'-. .::-~: ",,- }!; " ,~".,., ',< """,..: J" :!~"~-' --. ~~tt> .~-, /'~~,:1 ¡.::f~~}~ )?,::;(,:, \ ~m C)( m::J: - ...m ....... - r I~ ~'" ~ #8 :.,:, ?;ft'::;~) Nore: This map is itHended for use 8S a graphical representation only. The Ci/y of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. ~ Map Printed.June 22, 2001 Existing Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Business Park Zoning: BP Glenwoo Place Frito-Lay ~ ~ :s:.:um<:s:r. BP Campus Park BP vi ~ :c !.:I ..... ~ <L BC Requested Desi gnati 0 n: Comprehensive Plan: Multifamily Residential Zoning: RM2400 200 a 200 400 Feet ~ H Moœ: TIII.s tltilp Is IRIIiUirJtrJ"lfJf u.se iI.s iI gfilpl1/Çill repfeSeRIiI~R ORly. me CII/' or Fe de fill Wã'Y tltil/(e.s RO WilffilR" ã'.s iI:Ilts ¡¡ç1;/llilI;Y. City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan 2002 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES Kitts Corner Site Specific Request #4 Key: Steep Slopes - Wetlands ~m G»< m:l: \-~ 0 -rill' r #4 Mëop Printed-October 22, 2002 . .... ~ CITY OF ('~ Federal Way CITY HALL C (Q) ~ '1f 33325 8th Avenue South. PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-7000 ~ www.cityoffederalway.eam March 16, 2005 EXHIBIT? ;r- PAGE , OF Jon Potter 3611 29th Avenue West Seattle, W A 98199 via email: jpotter936@aol.com RE: Kitts Corner/Campus Gateway; Legislative Rezone; Conditions Outline Dear Me Potter: As we have discussed, the City has initiated a legislative crnditional rezone of the Kitts Corner/Campus Gateway site at Pacific Highway South and South 336th Street. At this time, the pending Stale Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) project level review (file No. 04-103594-00-SE) and Process IV Master Plan and Development Agreement (file no. 04-1 03592-00-UP) applications have been suspended. In several instances, the City Council has indicated their willingness to approve a rezone to Community Business (BC) zoning for the cast side of the site and multi-family (RM-2400) for the west side of the site, provided the site is developed with a high quality, unique, pedestrian oriented, village-like development that minimizes the appearance of strip commercial development. Therefore, in order to meet the goals of the City Council, City staff will recommend a series of conditions be attached to the legislative rezrne, in order to assure the site is developed in the manner envisioned by the City Council. These conditions will replace the need for a development agreement. An outline of the proposed conditions is enclosed for your review and comment. The conditions outline has been derived from the original November 19, 200 I, "draft outline" for the Kitts Comer Development Agreement and Rezone. City staff will use this outline as the basis for developing specific recommended conditions of approval for the legislative rezrne. We need your input on the content of the conditions outline so we can refine the outline into conditions identifying design and development parameters that meet the objectives of both the City Council and your future development. I suggest that you have a design finn assist you in reviewing and commenting on the draft conditions outline. Time is ofthe essence in order to process the legislative rezrne concurrently with processing and City Council review of the associated Comprehensive Plan redesignation request. Specifically, we will need to have the conditions of approval drafted and the staff report to the City Council completed by approximately April 15, 2005, in order to forward the proposal to the City Council Land Use and Transportation Committee on May 2,2005. Therefore, we will need your comments by March 20, 2005. Mr. Potter March 16,2005 Page 2 EXHIBIT ~ PAGE -2-0F If you would like to meet to discuss the outline and/or discuss design and development parameters, please contact me at 253-835-2641 or jim.harris@cityoffederaIway.com. Sincerely, ðÞ-~ Jim Harris Senior Planner e: ene: 05.101205 Greg Fewins, Deputy Director of Community Development Services Ken Miller, Assistant Public Works Director Margaret Clark, Senior Planner Rick Perez, Traffic Engineer . Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Len Schaadt, 1026 Bellevue Way SE, Bcllevue, WA 98004 Kitts Comer/Campus Gatcway; Conditions Outline dated March 15,2005 Doc. I.D. 30921 Kitts Corner Leeislative Rezone - Conditions Outline . t.Öffi»Y EXHIBIT~ March 15.2005 PAGE ~_OF L- . Master plan requirement (with and without outliers) Master plan to be provided for entire rezone site including all residential and commercial properties Single project level environmental review of the master plan Critical area review (wetland) in conjunction with project level SErA and master plan review . Overall design requirement for rezone area (with and without outlier parcels) Cohesive (integrated) "urban village" design concept for whole site Pedestrian scale, massing and orientation of buildings Site-wide pedestrian connectivity and pedestrian grid Public open space and plazas (seating; landscaping; fountains; ornamentation; art) Street grid per Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Policy TP21 On-street parallel parking Minimize on-site parking adjacent to streets Preservation of significant trees and natural vegetation . Construction of 13th Avenue South and South 340th Street grid streets 13th Avenue and South 340111 to be designed and constructed timing/phasing; 13th Avenue and South 340th to be constructed and completed concurrently . Residential zoning style/design density/maximum number of units maximum number of attached units public access points at 336th and wetland crossing with public through road traffic calming on public through road proximity to Frito Lay (noise mitigation) open space/recreation areas per FWCC timing in relationship to commercial eliminate certain RM uses pedestrian connectivity (inter/intra-site) . Commercial zoning minimize strip appearance, maximize "urban village" appearance maximum building size of 75,000 square feet limit certain BC uses style/theme of design relates to and compatible with residential development pedestrian connectivity (inter/intra~site) placement/location/orientation of buildings entries and windows visibility from right-of-ways encourage outdoor dining . no vehicle service stations (fuel pump operations questionable) rules of phasing timing in relationship to residential traffic calming on South 340th Street and 13th Avenue South 05-101205 00<:. I.D. 30922 Requested Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Community Business and Multifamily Residential Zonina: BC and RM2400 u L ~I II) ~ ~ If .... 11., ~I OP If .... 11.", :z: ~ ~ B S 336TH ST .. S 336TH Sf p . ~ BP 202104- 9069 " .. . Mitchell . Place. Apartment~ 202104-9070 ø ~ :r (.) ¡¡: õ ~"' 2021.Q4.9QfJI .... II) BP ~ ~ Existing Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Business Park Zonina: BP . j ~ OP è BPI BP BP =~ OP BC BP BP. BP BC / ".e~, , City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan 2004 Site Specific Requests For Comprehensive Plan Designation Changes Kitts Corner Site Specific Request {Map portraying zoning without parcels 202104-9080 (Ralph Jones) and 202104-9086 (CGO Enterprises, Inc) Legend 0 Site Specific Request "',..",==-'" Steep Slopes D Wetlands T ~m C»< m:C - m -- -I I I 0 ." 6. a to. 500 N I I I Feet This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only. The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. r~-~ I r ~, EXHIBIT J1. , PAGE---.LOF ,,-- -,-,','-'" ....,,"'------ ~'~;;r c -----, " , ~l; .. --;--n -... .... --------"" / it', ""'-', "'"-, ".. --- " .. , '.rn.."'\¡; , , ,_.~ "'---"'-""'~"-'-""--",,- --,,--'.. '--".._,- .'-'--"-"-""--"'-"'----- -,..-....-., EXHIBIT ~ PAGE-LOF -1IL DNS Addendum KITTS CORNER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE Federal Way File No's: 05-101205-UP; 05-101207-8E City of Federal Way March 15, 2005 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXHIBIT 10 PAGE ~OF J!L List of Exhibits .................................................,...."'..................................,..................................................ÎÎ Fact Sheet ....................................,.........................................................................;......................................iii L II. III. IV. V. VI. Summary of Proposed Action.................................................""""""""""""""""""""""'""""",..1 History .................................................,............................................................................................1 Reason for Addendum................................,.................."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'"......2 Neighborhood Characteristics and Availability of Services...................... """"""""""""""""" ...... 2 Environmental Analysis..................................................""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'".......3 Conclusion.......... """""" ..... .... """"""""""" .... ..... .... ..... .................. ....... .... ... ...,........... "'" .............5 LIST OF EXHIBITS* EXHIBIT ~ PAGE 1.0F ~ Exhibit 1 Vicinity Map Exhibit 1 Proposed Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Designation Exhibit 3 July 4,2001, Determination of Non significance (DNS) Exhibit 4 2001 Conceptual Site Plan for the Kitts Comer Site Exhibit 5 2004 Conceptual Site Plan for the Kitts Comer Site Exhibit 6 June 12,2001, Environmental Checklist *NOTE: Exhibits referenced are not attached to all copies of the Addendum. Exhibits are being forwarded to only those agencies that may have environmental or other concerns. Other agencies or individuals interested in reviewing copies of exhibits should contact the Department of Community Development Services, City Hall, 33325 8th Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718, (253) 835-2601. ii FACT SHEET EXHIBIT ~ PAGE--'f-OF --1JL PROPOSED ACTION: Kitts Corner Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone LOCATION: South of South 336111 Street and west of Pacific Highway (Exhibit 1) PARCEL NUMBERS OWNERS & ACREAGE: TABLE I Number Parcel No. Owner A B Acrest Acres2 1 2021 04~9069 Kitts Comer LLC 1.15 acres 1.08 acres 2 202104-9070 Campus Gateway Associates 16.75 acres 21.79 acres 3 202104-9001 James Merlino 8.9 acres 8.87 acres 4 202104-9090 Curtis Nelson 0.2 acres 0.52 acres 5 202104-9086 CCD Enterprises Inc. 4.93 acres 0.17 acres 6 202104-9080 Ralph Jones 1.5 acres 1.5 acres 7 202104-9072 Chase WJ Trust 7.75 acres 7.75 acres 8 202104-9004 Andrew Slisco 4.44 acres 4.44 acres 9 202104-9051 Bob Wright 8.28 acres TOTAL 53.9 acres 46.12 acres EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Business Park EXISTING ZONING: Business Park REQUESTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Community Business and Multi-Family REQUESTED ZONING: Community Business on the eastern portion of the site (approximately 17.7 acres located east of the southerly extension of 13111 Place South) and RM 2400 (multi. family, one unit per 2,400 square feet) consisting of approximately 28.4 acres located west of the southerly extension of 13111 Place South (Exhibit 2) I These parcels were reviewed for the SErA analysis, which was prepared for the 2001 comprehensive plan amendment and rezone. 2These parcels arc being reviewed for the 2004 SErA analysis for the comprehensive plan amendment and rezone. iii PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE: Jon Potter Stateside Investments 3611 291h Avenue West Seattle, W A 98199 (206) 579-0088 EXHIBIT ~ PAGE-s'-OF .1/L LEAD AGENCy/LoCATION OF BACKGROUND DATA: City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services 33325 81h Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way, W A 98063-9718 (253) 835-260 I CONTACT PERSON: DATE OF ISSUANCE: COMMENTS: Senior Planner Margaret H. Clark, AICP Department of Community Development Services 33325 81h Avenue South PO Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 (253) 835-2646 March 18, 2005 There is no comment period for this Addendum iv EXH I B IT --10..- PAGE--'-OF JJ:L I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION The proposed action is a request from Jon Potter to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 46.12 acres located south of South 336111 Street and west of Pacific Highway from Business Park (BP) to Community Business (Be) and Multi-Family (RM 2400) (Exhibit 2). II. HISTORY April 1999 June 1999 July 2000 July 4, 200 I July 2001 Sept 19,2001 Sept 2001 March 27, 2003 Request for a comprehensive plan amendment and rezone request from Business Park to Community Business was received on behalf of Parcel Numbers 202104- 9070 (Campus Gateway Associates), 202104-9001 (Merlino), and 202104-9051 (Wright). The three requests were presented to the City's Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTe), which made a recommendation to the full council that these requests should be analyzed further and all parcels presently zoned Business Park in this vicinity (Parcels 1-9 as shown Table I) should be included. The Council concurred with the LUTe's request. Owners of Parcels 2021 04~9070 (Campus Gateway Associates), 202104-900 I (Merlino), and 202104-9072 (Chase NW Trust) requested that their original request be amended to allow Multi-Family (RM 2400) uses west of the on-site wetlands. Threshold Detennination on the 2001 Comprehensive Plan Update, which included the Kitts Comer request, was issued pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A). Applicants withdrew request for a Multi-Family comprehensive plan designation and RM 2400 zoning on west side. Planning Commission held a public hearing on this request and recommended approval of the request for a change in comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park/BP to Community Business/BC for the areas east of the wetlands based on a Development Agreement, which would be entered into between the City and the property owners. As part of the 2002 Comprehensive Plan Update, Dick Borsini submitted a request on behalf of the owners of Parcels 202 I 04-9070 (Campus Gateway Associates), 202104-9001 (Merlino), and 202104-9072 (Chase NW Trust) for a change in comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 13.35 acres located west of the on-site wetlands from Business Park (BP) to Multi-Family Residential and RM 2400 (one unit per 2,400 square feet). Per Ordinance No. 03-442, the City of Federal Way adopted a comprehensive plan designation and zoning of Multi-Family Residential and RM 2400 (one unit per 2,400 square feet) based on future approval of a development agreement and development plan for those portions of Parcels 202104-9070, 2021O4~9001, and 202 I 04-9072, located west of the on~site wetlands. III. REASON FOR ADDENDUM EXHIBIT 10 PAGE 7-0F -LIL A Determination of Non significance (DNS) (Exhibit 3) for the non-project action to change the designation of approximately 53.9 acres located south of South 336111 Street and west of Pacific Highway from Business Park (BP) to Community Business (BC) and Multi-Family (RM 2400) was issued on July 4,2001. This action was part of the 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Amendments. The I4-day comment period ended on July 18,2001, and the 14- day appeal period ended on August 1,2001. No appeals were received. Although this was a non-project action, a conceptual site plan (Exhibit 4) was used to analyze potential impacts. The Federal Way City Council has not acted upon the comprehensive plan amendment and rezone request to date, and the applicant has modified this 2001 conceptual site plan (Exhibit 4) in terms of the total number of acres, the number of acres to be designated multi-family versus commercial, and the proposed uses (Exhibit 5). The modified comprehensive plan amendment and rezone request is being considered as part of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Update Process. Pursuant to WAC 197-11-600(3 )(b )(i), this addendum has been prepared to analyze whether potential impacts associated with the changed action is likely to have significant adverse impacts. The proposed action to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning, and potential impacts associated with a development pattern that may result from these changes, are analyzed based on the 2004 conceptual plan as compared to the 2001 conceptual plan. This comparison identifies no new or different environmental impacts beyond those evaluated in the July 4, 200 I, Detennination of Nonsignificance, and this addendum does not substantially change the analysis or conclusions of the DNS. IV. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS AND A V AILABILlTY OF SERVICES Neighborhood Characteristics The site is presently vacant except for Parcel 202014-9086 (CCD Enterprises Inc.), on which Horan Realty, a real estate office building is located, and Parcel 202104-9090 (Nelson), on which an automotive business is operated. In addition, a City-controlled regional detention pond, Kitts Comer, is located on the western portion of Parcel 202104-9004 (Slisco). Uses to the north across South 336111 Street are a mix of retail and restaurants. To the south is vacant land on which mini-storage is being proposed. To the east across Pacific Highway South, moving from north to south, are small retail establishments, vacant property, Pacifica Park Office Building, Canopy World, and the Chamber of Commerce. In addition, Walt's Automotive is located on the triangular piece of property between Pacific Highway South and 16111 Avenue South: To the west, moving from north to south, are Mitchell House, a senior housing development, and industrial uses, including Frito Lay. Availability of Utilities Sanitary Sewer: Located within the Lakehaven Utility District. Sewer facilities will need to be extended to serve the site. There is adequate sewer capacity at this time. Public Water: Located within the Lakehaven Utility District. Water facilities will need to be extended to serve thc site. There is adequate water capacity at this time. 2 EXHIBIT ~ PAGE-LOF ..J/L Storm Drainage: Site is located in the West Hylebos Creek Sub-Basin Availability of Public Services Police: Provided by City of Federal Way Fire! Emergency Medical: Provided by Federal Way Fire Department Schools: Provided by Federal Way School District V. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS On July 4,2001, the City issued a DNS for the change in comprehensive plan designation and zoning for the Kitts Corner Parcel from Business Park (BP) to a mix of Community Business (Be) and Multi-Family (RM 2400) (Exhibit 3). This DNS was based on a non-project environmental checklist dated June 12,2001 (Exhibit 6). Although the proposal was a non-project action, a conceptual site plan was utilized upon which to base potential impacts. Table II summarizes the conceptual uses associated with the 2001 site plan (Exhibit 4) and Table III summarizes the conceptual uses associated with the 2004 site plan (Exhibit 5). T ABLE II Use Square Foota e Food Market with Pum s 58,000 Retail Use 53,1 00 Office 25,800 Fitness/Health Club 58,700 Restaurant 8,000 U-Haul/Mini-Storage 65,026 Total 268,626 # Residential Units 158 multi-family units TABLE III Use Square # Employees Based on Accepted # Residential Units FootaJ!;e use to Emolovee Ratio Office Space 40,000 160 employees (1 employee/250 sq. ft) Retail (Shopping 139,000 278 employees (1 employee/500 Center) Space sq. ft.) 160 residential townhouses (132 Total 179,000 438 employees townhouses on the west side of the on-site wetlands and 28 on the east side of the on-site wetlands) 3 EXHIBIT --LlL- PAGE~OF Jt:L Sensitive Areas A Class II Wetland is located on the west central portions of Parcel 202104-9070 (Campus Gateway) and Parcel 202104-900 I (Merlino), and on the northern portion of Parcel 202104-9072 (Chase NW Trust). A City-controlled regional detention pond, Kitts Comer, is located on the western portion of Parcel 202104-9004 (Slisco). A smaller Class II wetland is located to the south on Parcel 202104- 9004 (Slisco). This smaller wetland is presently utilized as the overflow detention area for the primary Kitts Comer detention area to the southwest. A branch of the Hylebos Stream flows southwards through these wetlands. Class II Wetlands have IOO-foot setbacks. The on-site stream also has a 100- foot buffer. The stream buffer is either contained within the existing wetland buffers or flows through the regional detention pond. Parcels 202104-9070 (Campus Gateway) and 202104a9001 (Merlino) are further affected by the buffer of a Class II Wetland to the west. There are also two smaller wetlands located on the Campus Gateway and Merlino parcels. The City entered into a June 17, 1996 Settlement Agreement and Covenant with the property owners which stated that once all permit fees were paid and the development application was in compliance with all applicable laws and codes, these smaller parcels could be filled because mitigation for their filling was already built into the mitigation plan for the overall project. If under either of the two conceptual plans, development is proposed in the vicinity of an onasite stream or wetland, compliance with Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 22, Article XIV, "Environmentally Sensitive Areas," and the Settlement Agreement and Covenant will be required. Drainage The site is located in the West Hylebos Creek Sub-Basin. Since more than 5,000 square feet of impervious surfaces would be created under either of the conceptual site plan scenarios, when a land use permit is submitted, surface water runoff and treatment would be required per the King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM), and the Federal Way Addendum to the KCSWD and any conditions stipulated in the Settlement Agreement and Covenant entered into between the City and the property owners. The site falls within a Levell Flow Control Area, thus the applicant must design the flow control facility to meet these performance criteria. Access Access to the eastern (area east of the large on-site wetland) portion of the site is from South 3361h Street, a principal arterial located to the north ofthe site, and Pacific Highway South, also a principal arterial located to the east. Access to the western portion of the site would be from South 3361h Street. Both the 2001 and 2004 conceptual plans show a road connecting the western (area west ofthe large on-site wetlands) and eastern (area east of the large on-site wetland) areas. This connecting roadway would provide the western portion of the site access to Pacific Highway South. Based on the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP), the planned road section for Pacific Highway South is a Type A street (four lanes plus High Occupancy Vehicle lanes), consisting of a 90- foot street with curb, gutter, six-foot planting strip with street trees, eight-foot sidewalk, and street lights in a I 24-foot right-of-way. In 2004, the City constructed two northbound left-turn lanes at 336tJ' Street, increasing the street and right-of-way by 12 feet. The planned road section for South 336th Street is a Type E Street consisting of a 64-foot wide street (four lanes plus median) with curb, gutter, six-foot planting strip with street trees, eight-foot sidewalk, and streetlights in a 98-foot right-of-way. In addition, the Transportation Improvement Plant (TIP) anticipates the need for a second eastbound left-turn lane and an additional eastbound through lane at Pacific Highway South, increasing the planned width of street and right-of-way by 24 feet For purpose of this analysis, the City's Traffic Division assumed that 13lh Place South would be extended southward from South 3361h Street through the site, and South 340lh would be extended 4 EXHIBIT ~ PAGE-ULOF J.lL westward from Pacific Highway South through the site. An additional east/west access would also be required between South 336111 and South 340111 Streets. Potential Traftic Impacts Based on the requested comprehensive plan designation of Community Business and Multifamily, and zoning ofBC and RM 2400 (one unit per 2,400 square feet), the 2001 conceptual site plan would result in an estimated 939 evening peak hour trips. Based on the 2004 conceptual plan, evening peak hour trips are estimated as 742 trips. Development of the site under either the 2001 or the 2004 scenario, or any other scenario, would require the preparation of a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) by the applicant's engineer. The TIA would identify transportation impacts associated with the development and identify appropriate mitigation measures. The applicants would be expected to contribute pro-rata shares towards projects on the TIP that are impacted by more than ten peak hour trips. Projections for Population and Employment The site is presently vacant except for Parcel 202014-9086 (CCD Enterprises Inc.), on which Horan Realty, a real estate office building, is located and Parcel 202104-9090 (Nelson), on which an automotive business is operated. The uses shown in the 200 I conceptual site plan would result in 464 jobs and 158 residential units. On the other hand, the uses shown in the 2004 conceptual site plan would result in 438 jobs and 160 residential units. There are no significant differences between the numbers. The overall vision of the comprehensive plan is to restrict commercial development to the downtown (City Center Core and Frame), to Pacific Highway South (generally between South 272nd Street and South 348111 Street), and to the area around South 348th Street, approximately between SR-99 and 1-5. The vision of the comprehensive plan is also to provide an appropriate balance of services, employment, and housing. In addition, the land use concept envisions promotion of housing in the City's commercial areas close to shopping and employment. VI. CONCLUSION Based on the above analysis, the City, therefore, concludes that the proposed comprehensive plan designations and zoning as shown in Exhibit 2 will not create new or different environmental impacts than have been previously identified in the July 4,2001, Detennination of Nonsignificance, and this addendum does not substantially change the analysis or conclusions of that DNS. 1:\2004 Comprehensive Plan\2004 Updale\SEPA\Kitts Comer\Addendum.doc/3/16/2005 3:44 PM 5 W 0:: ~ C> G: <0 0 ~ v 0 9 September 3, 2004 "'In Dot. JBS f3 O..i<¡ned ~ Or""" < '? :it: CIIed<ed 81 Oat. EXHIBIT ---L..f. 10 PAGE-LOF --L- (fJ (f) s ~ SEATAC MALL '"" I- (f) ST S 330TH ST (/) S 333RD ST ST SAINT FRANCIS HOSPITAL . (fJ ;:;: s 348TH ~ ST PROJECT LOCATION VICINITY MAP . NOT TO SCALE =8 30371 ProJoct No. 1 Kitts Corner Vicinity Map Federal Way. Washington R.v. No. 1 of 1 wcorporated QO - '10' s.ø.. 100 iirIdmd. 'ubia&\oD 800:I:I PIIoDo: (~¡ s:¡:~ rJl: (-125 827-1157'1 Pog. Figure 1 Sheet No. 100' O' ~- SCALE 100' 100' t IN fEET I '1 I l' ~ PAR(IHG ;¡¡ (SII HOTE 1 ?< 30' !;i .. '" ~ '" "' ,.. ¡ ¡¡¡ 'û 56' ~I<11HC PRO\lOEO M£RE 5HO1\II 011 PlAN. (EJ ~~~ET A CITY OF . ~~_~~A ~.......::=~~ -~ .. ~-=.8 ~'-- ~~~ /7-L{-Ú( Ll~tll B 11'3110 PAGE ~, OF-1L ;" CITY HALL 33530 1 $t Way South PO Box 9718 (253) 661-4000 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 2001 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE Federal Way File No. 01-102585-00-SE Description of Proposal: The proposed non-project action is to update the City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan consistent with the annual amendment process defined in the Federal Way City Code. Therc are eight site-specific requests to amend the existing Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations. These requests are summarized as follows: File Number Site Specific Location Parcel Size Comprehensive Plan & Request Zoning Changes 1. CPA99-0011 Goodwin Dental North of S 288th St 0.48 acres From Multifamily & RM 1800 (I Clinic & east of Pacific unit per 1,800 sq ft) to Community HwyS. Business & BC. 2. 00-10489I-00-UP Jolm Nguyen South of S 308th St 0.71 acres From Professional Office & PO to & west of 14th Ave Multifamily & RM 1800 (1 unit per S. 1,800 sq ft). 3. CPA99-0014 Jerry Jackson North of S 320'h St 27.19 acres Presently has King County Comp & east ofI-5. Plan of Commercial Outside of Center & Urban Residential (4-12 dwelling units per acre) & zoning of Office and R-4 (Residential, four units per acre); requesting Federal Way Office Park and or. 4. CP A99-0008 Kitts Comer South of S 336th St 45.85 acres From Business Park & BP to & west of Pacific Community Business & BC and HwyS. Multifamily & RM 2400 (I unit per 2,400 sq ft). 5. 00-1O4875-00-UP Chong Nam Yi North of S 344th St 5.17 acres From Business Park & BP to & west of Pacific Community Business & Be. HwyS. 6. CP A99-0004 Weyerhaeuser South of S 336th St 49.97 acres From Business Park & BP to Company & east of Pacific Multifamily & RM 3600 (1 unit per HwyS. 3,600 sq ft). 7. 00-104441-00-UP John Smith East of 33rd PI S in 3.1 acres From Single Family High Density East Campus Residential & RS 9.6 (1 unit per 9,600 sq ft) to Office Park & OP. 8. 00-104224-00-UP Richard Hanson South of the 15.46 acres From Single Family Medium Density proposed Residential & RS 15.0 (1 unit per Silverwood 15,000 sq ft) to Single Family High Subdivision, west Density Residential & RS 9.6 (1 unit of 9th Ave SW per 9.600 sq ft). EXHIBIT 3 0 lib PAGE-LOF --L Location: The locations of the eight site-specific requests proposed arc summarized above. Proponent: City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services Margaret Clark, AICP, Senior Planner, 253-61-4111 Lead Agency: City of Federal Way The responsible Official of the City of Federal Way hereby makes the following decisions based upon impacts identified in the environmental checklist, Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, final staff evaluation for this action, and other municipal policies, plans, rules, and regulations designated as a basis for exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy Act Rules pursuant to RCW 43.31c.O60. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have probable significant adverse impact on the environment, and an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.O32(2)( c} This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other infonnation on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-630; the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date of issuance, pending a public comment period. Comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on July 18,2001. Unless modified by the city, this determination will become final following the above comment deadline. Any person aggrieved of the city's final determination may file an appeal with the city within 14 days of the above comment deadline. Appeals must be filed by 5:00 p.m. on Au$!;ust 1,2001. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (published November 1993); Final Environmental Impact Statement City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations (July 1995); and, Environmental Impact Statement Addendum (Zoning Map Revisions) City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (September 1995) are hereby incorporated by reference for this proposal. The documents are available for review at the City of Federal Way Community Development Department, located at 33530 First Way South in the City of Federal Way, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. Responsible Official: Positionffitle: Kathy McClung Director of Community Development Services Address: 33530 First Way South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, W A 98063-9718 Date Issued: July 4,2001 Sighature' K~ ~ ~ Docum...' ID #15377 Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) 200 I Comp Plan Updatc/O I-I 02585-00-SE L:\CSDClDOCSISA VE\86 I 54664.DOCL..t printed 0612912001 II: II AM July 4,2001 Page 2 ~ "" :t> 0 ~ '4- 36th_ST j" '"I ~¡ , > , ..: ;!3rd ST, E """ £/ "'J , , , , , , , ',bIRd "411 ~ , , , , , , , , , , 'I) (' .... #0' . II -,' . . I,' '.' \1 I <...1 CI) w > <C ;; N , .. , ", ",' .' ;; .1 S 356th ST ", I I I 1 L!>"~ ~I : >- I a: I ;!:: I I..' f CI) w > <C :r f- a) ("oj 0 0.5 2 Miles 1 1.5 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan 2001 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES Composite Map Legend: ,'^\/ City Limits. I , ,". " Potential Annexation Area .. Site Requests ~ N ;gm Q>< m:l: ~! 0 "TI ... --Ie , i1 Map Printed-June 22,2001 ["r-- 11 (/) ----- , RM Iill 1 WOO 0 CI) BCï Note: TlIis map is intended for usa as a graphical representation only. TlIa City ofFeg"1:<t( Way makes no warranty as 10 its accuracy. ( BC en LÙ =< .:r: 1- co .... o. RM 1800 BC S. 288TH ST. RM 1800 9109 I I [, , I I ! I i Proposed Designation: ¡1...! Comprehensive Plan: Community Business Zoning: BC 0 d .. . >- Ii".. I ---¡ > ~ ~II 5: 0--- ~ V m U ^I . 0 cr.~. .... ~!J' u: ë!5 a:: - .i:::'. n_- U ~ .. Existing Designation: ~ Comprehensive Plan: Multifamily Zoning: RM1800 C/) w ~ :r: I- 0::> ~ 50 . 0 50 100 150 200 Feet ^ ~- ' L.4 N City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan 2001 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES Goodwi n rl Dental Clinic Site Specific Request #1 Key: Steep Slopes Wetlands u Map Prfr"j-June 22, 20'p1 I c¡j u.i ~ ¡:: 0 ~ (J w ~ ê ~ ¡/ L 400 - ¡ I I I rJl i i . I ! ; I ~ I <A I I , '..yj 0821049 PO c¡j ~I R z ~ 'j J I ---_.-._------- - ----1 Existing Designation: ! Comprehensive Plan: ; Professional Office I Zoni:1o: PO , .... - _.___m c¡j L.L.i ~ Z f- ;! c¡j il... uJ ,> . « !z .f- i~ S. 313TH ST. Note: This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only. The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to ils accuracy. 50 0 ~ I iJ I I City of Federdl Way ~ Bel Comprehensive Plan .. ~ i 2001 u I SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ~I DESIGNATION CHANGES r ! Proposed Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Multifamily Zoning: RM1800 BC I I I BC I S. 312TH ST. 50 100 150 200 Feet ~ N (f) ~ ~ I U L.l.. U « CL (f) S. 312TH ST. B John Nguyen. Site Specific Request #2 Key: Steep Slopes Wetlands I Map Printed-June 22, 20( ~ Exis.ting Designation: I \ (King County) Comprehensive Plan: ; Commerical Outside 'I of Center & Urban Residential i (4-12 Units per Acre) I ; KC Zoning: Office & R4 CF ¡ .. ~ ~! ~1TH ST, ! cc '" I!! !! If! /!:! i; S. 320TH ST. .; 1;: ~ Proposed Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Office Park Zoning: OP ~T ,~~. . ,u'. " ;;fi~ p . cc ! ~ 0J>-1* NotlJ; This ma~.. 'ended forus& as a graphical represantatlon only. The City of Flil Vay makes no warranty as to Its accuracy. ~~~ 400 600 8~O Fee! A City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, 2001 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES Jerry Jackson' Site Specific Request #3 Key: Steep Slopes Wetlands 11 R'l City of Federal Way ; Comprehensive Plan 2001 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES HM180U BC " ~ ~ S. ~:!5TH ST. Existing Designation: I~y) Comprehensive Plan: l:l'd, Business Park r Zoning: BP d F oj ~ i': '" ------- ----,---.-:- .; ~ ~ BP Note: This map is intended for use as a graphicai representation only. The City of Federai Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. Kitts Corner Site Specific Request #4 Key: , Steep Slopes Wetlands ~m e»( m:l: /-.1 ~ ~ 0 f -- #4 .. -'... Detention Pond U Existing Designation: , Comprehensive Plan: Business Park Zoning: BP BC r . I .. I ¡ ! Proposed Designation: Comprehensive Plan: BC 1 Community Business Zoning: BC S. 344TH ST. B (f) u.i ~ J: !- <C ..- Note: This map is intended for use es e graphical representation only. The City of Fe~8!"'I, Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy. 5~~ 50 100 150 2?0 Feel ~ N U) w ~ J: ¡- to T"' BC S. 341ST S BI S. 344TH ST. BC City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan 2001 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES Chong Nam Vi Site Specific Request #5 Key: Steep Slopes Wetlands ~m Q)( m:¡: ~~ 0 F" #5 Map pr' .. d-June 22,200' I RM1800 Existing Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Business Park Zoning: BP .. n~ ~ RM36QO 50 ~~6T1' ST. <Ii I BC ~I W ~ ~ _I i Proposed Designation: Comprehensive Plan: i, Multifamily , Zoning: RM3600 BP S. 341ST ST. I BP BP BP (I CP-1* Note: This mep is Intended for use as a graphical representation only. The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to Its accuracy. 5~--': 50 100 150 200 Fee! t:J.. N ¡City of Federdl Way Comprehensive Plan, 2001 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES Weyerhaeuser Company. Site Specific Request #6 Key: Steep Slopes Wetlands CP¡ I ~m C)( m::c r~ 0 I;I~ --6 Map Printed-June 22, 200 ~¡(~I City of Federal Way ~ yl - ( I Comprehensive Plan 2001 SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CHANGES ~I I I I ' ~__I ~ ~ 93 :J: ;t> m c: (f> ~ \CP-1 -< VI ~:[' i~ ! I- ; i ¡¡¡ I . i RS9. ¡. Wzeyerhaeuser '1 World¡ HTadq ua Itt;rs 1, CP-1 * Existing Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Single Family High Density Zoning: RS9.6 )'w:4r ,'ò ~~. '<' Lf ~ - N Op..2* Note: Thi! map is Intended for use 8S e graphÎCal representation only. The Clry of Fr'-" Way make! no warranty as 10 its accuracy. 50 0 50 100 150 200 Feet ~ J John Smith Site Specific Request #7 ~m C»< r:_-~ ~~ 0 F #7 . Map Pr.I~Q.June 22, 2001 I - - H I H-I H-I r¡'I,-1 B' , H. \Clty of Fedeld\ Way t:D J.;1;l t:1:J lillD . ru : Comprehensive Plan - ~ \ ¡"l 'S! ,{ ! 2001 ~ s.w,~,,;:;_6 . -_:_;~ RS9.6 ¡ SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS i I RS9.S I ;~7 - - - \ FOD~~~~~~~HNE~~~~¿rsN ~ ~ "'! "! '" '" {/) (f CI:: CI:: SW...".D",. ~ Proposed Designation: ~s..9.6 Comprehensive Plan: t:J Single Family, High Density Zoning: RS9.6 Richard Hansen Site Specific Request #8 -_no -- ~ ~ ~ s ; ! Existing Designation: Comprehensive Plan: Single Family, Medium Density\;. ~O,ning: RS15.Q J, \ 'I'L ~:-..'" ~'j¿ " Key: Steep Slopes Wetlands 1,815.0 \ ;gm Q>< \:~ --- ~ ~; ~ #8 i -::,'-'- ; ¡:',- --,¡t' '. '-. - No/e: This map is in/ended for use as a graphical representation only, The City of Federal Way makeS no warranty as 10 its accuracy. Map Printed-June 22, 2001 ......_~ I J.J J 10 EXHIBIT ~ PAGE-LOF '.-"."7".-"'. ._.......:.m..~..-.~-_.---~..-",........ .~'"....._. ~.",~ r--~" J-. ---------u_-.... - _............m....'._.~.- EXHIBIT ~O PAGE-LOF J - ----,--p '_W_-"""'- ) l -,----,--- '" """,,-- ",,-- --,-----"-,--~-~ ) L --) --.--,,-,,-.--.,-,..-.--- EXHIBIT " 01., 0 PAGE I OF ~ 't ENVIRONMENT AL CHECKLIST Purpose of Checklist: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.~lC RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. Instructions for Applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts, If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "docs not apply." Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period oftime or on different parcels ofland. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional infonnation reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Use of Checklist for Non-Project Proposals: Complete this checklist for non-project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." In addition, complete the Supplemental Sheet for Non-Project Actions (part D). For non-project actions, the references in the checklist to the words "project," applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. TO BE COMPLETED BY THE APPLICANT EXHIBIT -' .1.. PAGE~OF 4- EV ALVA TION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of the proposed project: 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update 2. Name of applicant: City of Federal Way 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Margaret I-I. Clark, AICP City of Federal Way 33530 First Way South PO Box 9718 Federal Way, Washington 98063-9718 253-661-4111 4. Date checklist prepared: June 12,2001 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services. 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The proposed amendments to the City's comprehensive plan are scheduled for a public hearing before the Planning Commission on July 18,2001. At the completion of the Planning Commission process, the Commission's recommended amendments will be forwarded to the City Council's Land Use and Transportation Committee (LUTC) for review and recommendation to the full Council. This is anticipated to occur in September/October 2001. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes explain. The City's comprehensive plan is updated on a yearly basis. The Growth Management Act (GMA) limits plan updates to no more than once per year unless an emergency plan amendment is warranted. Individual parcel requests for changes to the Comprehensive Plan Map are incorporated into the comprehensive plan update. If any requests were granted, appropriate zoning changes would be made concurrently. Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page 2 EXHIBIT ~O PAGE--LÒ-FÄ. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A number of environmental documcnts were prepared for the adoption of the City's comprehensive plan. These documents include the following: Draft Environmental Impact Statement, November 1993; Environmental Impact Statement Addendum, June 1995; Final Environmental Impact Statement, July 1995; and Environmental Impact Statement Addendum, September 1995. Individual parcel requests that lead to a comprehensive plan map change and zoning change may have specific development proposals which will require site specific SEP A analysis at the time an application for a development permit is submitted to the City. Note: The November 1993 Draft Environmental Impact Statement; June 1995 Environmental Impact Statement Addendum; July 1995 Final Environmental Impact Statement; and September 1995 Environmental Impact Statement Addendum have not been included as exhibits to this checklist. These documents are available for review during normal working hours at the City of Federal Way. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Site Specific Request No.6 is from the Weyerhaeuser Company for a change in comprehensive plan designation and zoning of approximately 50 acres located south of South 3361h Street and east of Pacific Highway South from Business Park to Community Business. The Christian Faith Center is interested in purchasing the property in order to construct a church with accessory offices and a K -12 school on that site. The Christian Faith Center has also submitted another application to fill a wetland in the middle of the site (File No's. 00- I 03548-000-00-UP and 00-1 03549-000-00-S£). 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. The Federal Way City Council must adopt the final amendments to the comprehensive plan pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC), Article IX, "Process VI Review." Specific development proposals related to individual parcels will require approval of development and building penn its. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checkIistthat ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Federal Way adopted its comprehensive plan in November of 1995 and updated it in December 1998 and December 2000. As part of this present update (the 200 I Amendment Process), there are eight site-specific requests for amendment to the existing comprehensive plan designations. These site-specific requests are described in É'xhibit A. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range Or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page 3 EXHIBIT ~/ð PAGE--'l-°F .4 map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The locations of the eight site-specific requests are shown in Exhibit A. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, roiling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other. The topography of the City varies depending on location. In general, steep slopes are found along Puget Sound in the northern portion of the City. Please refer to Exhibit A, Description of Site Specific Requests, for topography of the site-specific requests. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Within the City's boundaries, slopes vary from greater than 40 percent in areas adjacent to Puget Sound to less than two percent in other areas. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, mulch)? !fyou know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Soil types vary throughout the Federal Way area depending on location. Generally, soil types vary from loam in the lowlands to sand, gravel, and till in the uplands. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. The proposed non-project action will not affect or be affected by unstable soils in the area. Surface indications or history of unstable soils will be evaluated on a project-by- project basis. Available information on geologic hazards, which include possible landslide, erosion, or seismic hazards, are shown on Map IX-3 (Geologic Hazards) of the comprehensive plan and are included as Exhibit B of this checklist. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. This is not applicable for a no-project action. Any future development associated with the site-specific requests will be subject to their own review pursuant to SEP A. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? Ifso, generally describe. No clearing, construction, or new use will result directly from this non-project proposal. Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page 4 EXHIBIT~ PAGE-LOF ~ About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? g. Not applicable. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any. No development is proposed in conjunction with this non-project action. Future project specific actions will be subject to environmental review as required by the SErA Rules, and will be evaluated in accoTdance with all plans, policies, rules, and regulations adopted as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under SEP A to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions. In addition, when future projects are submitted, any erosion- related impacts created during clearing and construction activities will be mitigated in compliance with the King County Surface Water Manual (KCSWM), which the City has adopted. This requires any erosion-related impacts created during clearing and construction activities to be addressed according to a City approved grading and erosion control plan, which is a standard part of engineering review and approval. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completcd? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. None. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? Ifso, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any. No measures are proposed in conjunction with this non~project action. Future project specific actions will be subject to environmental review as required by the SErA Rules, and will be evaluated in accordance with all plans, policies, rules, and regulations adopted as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under SEP A to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions. 3. WATER a. Surface. 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page 5 b. EXHIBIT --'u!1Þ PAGE----'--.OF U- There are several surface water bodies within the City limits. Known locations of existing streams, lakes, and wetlands are shown on Map IX-2 (Surface Water Resources) of the comprehensive plan and are included as Exhibit C of this checklist. No development is proposed as part of this non-project action. If future development is proposed in the vicinity of any streams, lakes, or wetlands, compliance with FWCC, Chapter 22, Article XIV, "Environmentally Sensitive Areas," will be required and such compliance will result in mitigation of any potential adverse impacts. Six of the eight site-specific requests (requests no. 3,4,5,6, 7, and 8) for comprehensive plan changes (Exhibit A) have on-site wetlands. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Impacts to surface water resources will be evaluated on a project-by-project basis for future construction projects. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not applicable. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. There are no FEMA delineated floodplains within the City of Federal Way. Coastal floodplains exist where the City abuts Puget Sound. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. Ground. 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size ofthe system, Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page 6 EXHIBIT ~. PAGE-1-°F A¥- the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. c. Water runoff (including stormwater). 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Not applicable. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. Any future development would be required to comply with all City codes and regulations. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any. Development is not proposed in conjunction with this non-project action. Future project specific actions will be subject to environmental review as required by the SEP A Rules, and will be evaluated in accordance with all plans, policies, rules, and regulations adopted as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under SEP A to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions. In addition, when future projects are submitted, any water-related impacts will be mitigated in compliance with the City-adopted KCSWDM. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site. ~ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ~evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs ~grass ~pasture ~ crop or grain ~ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage, other ~water plant: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ~ other types of vegetation This is a non-project action that applies citywide. The specific type of vegetation found in different parts of the City vary depends on a number off actors including soil and whether the area has been cleared in the past. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None. Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page 7 EXHIBIT --'-.tllÞ PAGE-.LOF -Mf- c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. Not applicable. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed On or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: A variety of birds, mammals and fish native to the Pacific Northwest are found within the City of Federal Way. Species vary depending on whether the area is in a natural versus developed state. In addition, Federal Way is located within the Pacific Flyway migration route. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Federal Way is located within the Pacific Flyway migration route utilized by waterfowl migrating north into Alaska and northern Canada. d. Proposed measures to presefV'e or enhance wildlife, if any. None. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Not applicable. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page 8 EXHIBIT ~ PAGE --!-OF 4- c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any. None. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could OCcur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Not applicable. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any. None. b. Noise. 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? Not applicable. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. None. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any. None. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The City of Fecleral Way has a mix of commercial, industrial, residential, recreational, and office uses. Land use is shown on Map 11-2 (Generalized Existing Land Use) of the comprehensive plan and is included as Exhibit D of this checklist. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page 9 EX H I B IT --'--...t!..,. PAGE -LA-OF ö-- There has been limited agriculture use of areas within the City limits within the last 10 to 20 years. c. Describe any structures on the site. The majority of the City is already developed. As part offuture project-specific environmental review processes, an analysis of any affected structure(s) would be done. Existing structures within the specific properties where comprehensive plan designation changes are proposed are described in Exhibit A. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Not applicable. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The City of Federal Way has a variety of zoning designations including residential, commercial, office, and industrial. Please refer to Exhibit E for a chart listing all zoning designations within the City. The existing zoning designations for the individual parcel requests are described in Exhibit A. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The existing comprehensive plan designations for the City of Federal Way are shown on Map II-I (Comprehensive Plan Designations) and are included as Exhibit F of this checklist. The existing comprehensive plan map designations for individual parcel requests are contained in Exhibit A. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Shoreline master plan designations, where applicable, would be identified as part of any future project-specific environmental review process. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.060 and WAC 197-11-908, the following areas of the environment are designated as environmentally sensitive areas: aquifer recharge areas; fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas; frequently flooded areas; geologically hazardous areas; wetlands; and streams. In addition, the City of Federal Way regulates wellheads and certain lakes as environmentally sensitive areas. Except for wetlands, the City has not conducted an area wide inventory of environmentally sensitive areas. At the time that projects arc proposed, any environmentally sensitive areas that may be impacted must be identified and any impacts mitigated as part of the project-specific environmental review process. As described in Exhibit A, there are wetlands on six ofthe eight site- specific requests. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page 10 EXHIBIT ~ PAGEJ' OF -4- Federal Way has traditionally been a bedroom community with more households than jobs. The April I, 2001, population of the City of Federal Way as determined by the State of Washington OffÏce of Financial Management was 83,890. The 1999 Central Puget Sound Regional Economic Report Employment Patterns and Trends, 1995-1998 reports that in 1998, there were 27,820 covered jobs in the City. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? This is a non-project action; therefore, in general, this question is not applicable. However, there are eight site-specific requests for changes to comprehensive plan designations and zoning. Site Specific Requests Numbers I and 2 are for already developed sites, and therefore, will not result in major impacts to population. Please see Exhibit A for a discussion on how the requests, if approved, would impact numbers of people expected to reside on the sites. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any. This is a non-project action; therefore, no measures are proposed. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with surroundingland uses and plans, if any. None. This is a non-project action. Any proposals that may result from decisions on site- specific requests will be subject to future review for compliance with all codes. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Please refer to response under B. 8 G) and (k), above. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Please refer to response under B. 8 (j) and (k), above. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any. No mitigation is proposed in conjunction with this non-project action. Future project specific actions will be subject to environmental review as required by the SEP A Rules, and will be evaluated in accordance with all plans, policies, rules, and regulations adopted as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under SEP A to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions. Please refer to response under 8.8 G) and (k), above. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height ofany proposed structure(s), not including antennae; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page 11 EXHIBIT ~ PAGE , 2. OF ~ Not applicable. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Not applicable. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any. None. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal prod uce? What time of day would it mainly occur? . None. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any. No mitigation is proposed in conjunction with this non-project action. Future project specific actions will be subject to environmental review as required by the SEP A Rules, and will be evaluated in accordance with all plans, policies, rules, and regulations adopted as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under SEP A to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions. 12. RECREA nON a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? There are a wide variety of recreational opportunities in the Federal Way area. These opportunities range from Dash Point State Park, a large state park on the west side of the City, and Celebration Park, an 84-acre urban park located approximately in the middle of the City with ballfields and walking trails, to recreation trails in the Bonneville Power Administration right-of-way. City codes require provision of parks or a fee-in-lieu of parks when land is subdivided and on-site open space with multifamily development. b. Would the proposed displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page 12 EXHIBIT -'ultL PAGE-1LOF~ c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any. No mitigation is proposed in conjunction with this non-project action. Future project specific actions will be subject to environmental review as required by the SErA Rules, and will be evaluated in accordance with all plans, policies, rules, and regulations adopted as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under SEP A to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions. In addition, please see response under B.12 (a), above. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, nation, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. Potential impacts on historical sites would be conducted as part of future project-specific environmental review. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Impact on landmarks or sites of importance will be assessed through future project- specific environmental analysis. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any. No mitigation is proposed in conjunction with this non-project action. Future project specific actions will be subject to environmental review as required by the SEP A Rules, and will be evaluated in accordance with all plans, policies, rules, and regulations adopted as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under SEP A to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Existing streets and highways serving the City of Federal Way are shown on Map III-2 (Existing Significant Streets and Highways) of the comprehensive plan and are included as Exhibit F ofthis checklist. Please refer to Exhibit A, Description of Site Specific Requests, for discussion of access as they relate to these requests. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? !fnot, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The greater Federal Way area is served by transit. This includes several bus routes, dial-a- ride-transit (DART) service, as well as park and ride facilities. All Day Transit Service and Peak Hour Transit Service are shown on Maps IIJ-20 and III-21 of the comprehensive plan and are included as Exhibits G and H of this checklist. Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page 13 EXHIBIT -'-.a£.! 0 , PAGEJ-¥-OF -A!I- ~ c. How many parking spaccs would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Not applicable. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicatewhether public or private). When any ofthe parcels for which changes to the comprehensive plan designation are being requested are developed, traffic mitigation (including specific street improvements), would be assessed after the applicant completes a traffic study. Please refer to Exhibit A. Description of Site Specific Requests, for discussion of access and required improvements as they relate to these requests. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Please refer to Exhibit A, Description of Site Specific Requests, for discussion of vehicular trips per day that could be generated if the requests were approved and the sites were developed. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any. No mitigation is proposed in conjunction with this non-project action. Future project specific actions will be subject to environmental review as required by the SEPA Rules, and will be evaluated in accordance with all plans, policies, rules, and regulations adopted as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under SEPA to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, iCany. No mitigation is proposed in conjunction with this non-project action. Future project specific actions will be subject to environmental review as required by the SEP A Rules, and will be evaluated in accordance with all plans, policies, rules, and regulations adopted Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page 14 EXHIBIT ~ of '. PAGE..-1.LOF ~ as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority under SEP A to approve, condition, or deny proposed actions. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. In general, all public utilities are available to property within the City, or will become available through extension of services as development occurs. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. There are no utilities proposed for this nonproject action; however, the City's comprehensive plan includes a Private Utilities Element. As part of the annual comprehensive plan update, the City requests utility companies to provide information to update this chapter. c. SIGNATURE The above anSwers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. Signature. ~ o¡ .JI-- J¡t Qo.rJ-. Date Submitted: June 12,2001 LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F. Exhibit G Exhibit H Description of Site Specific Requests Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Map IX-3, Geologic Hazards Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Map IX-2, Surface Water Resources Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Map II-2, Generalized Existing Land Use Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Table II-5, Land Use Classifications Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Map II-I, Comprehensive Plan Designations Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Map III-2O, All Day Transit Service Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Map III-21, Peak Hour Transit Service 1:\OICOMPPlAN\SEPAISEPA Ch«klistdocl07/0312001 10:35 AM June 12,2001 Page 15 Environmental Checklist 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update EXHIBIT --'uú.- PAGE~OF -4 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the clements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the proposal,ofthe types ofaetivitieslikclyto result from the proposal, which would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage or release of toxic of hazardous substances; or production of noise? The proposed action is a non-project action. As such, no specific construction projects are associated with this environmental checklist. Any future development will be subject to City of Federal Way requirements for drainage; air emissions; production, storage, and release of toxic or hazardous substances; and noise. Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Article XIII, "Supplementary District Regulations," provides specific regulations related to air quality, noise, and water quality. Individual zones within the FWCC regulate storage and treatment of hazardous substances. In addition, FWCC Section 22-330 requires immediate compliance of nonconfonnance for each of these potential impact areas. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: None necessary. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Given that the proposcd action is non-project in nature, there will be no impact On the natural environment, including plants, animals, fish, and marine life. Any impacts associated with this action are related to policy and service issues, rather than issues regarding elements of the natural environment. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: None necessary. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? This proposal will not deplete energy or natural resources. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: None necessary. Environmental Checklist Supplemental Sheet 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12,2001 Page I EXHIBIT' J '0 PAGE ,"I OF .4 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivcrs, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? This proposal will not directly use or affect any environmentally sensitive areas. If any project is subsequently proposed in an environmentally sensitive area, compliance with applicable City code and SEP A requirements will be required. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: None necessary. s. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow Or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans. This proposal will not directly affect land or shoreline use. Any future development will conform to applicable City code and SEP A requirements, if necessary. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: None necessary. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public service and utilities? This proposal will not increase demands on transportation, public service, or utilities. Proposed measures to reduce of respond to such demands are: None necessary. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for thc protection of the environment. Future project specific development actions will be subject to City of Federal Way environmental review and requirements at the time of application. This proposal does not conflict with any local, state, or federal laws relating to the protection ofthe environment. 1:\0IÇOMPPLANlS\:I'A\SEI'ASUPEÇL.docl071O3/2001 10:51 AM Environmental Checklist Supplemental Sheet 2001 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan Update June 12, 2001 Page 2 EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT .JuL- PAGE -'-'-OF A9- DESCRIPTION OF SITE SPECIFIC REQUESTS 200 1 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS June 12,2001 Please refer to Exhibit A, Page 26 of 49 for a Composite Map showing all eight site-specific requests. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #1 - GOODWIN DENTAL CLINIC REQUEST File No.: Parcel: Location: Size: Applicant: CP A99-00 11 332204-9109 North of2881h Street and east of Pacific Highway (Exhibit A, Page 27 of 49) 0.48 acres DMB Consulting Engineers on behalf of the owners of the Goodwin Dental Clinic Thomas Goodwin & Carl Jacobsen (Goodwin Dental Clinic) Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Multifamily and RM 1800 (one unit per 1,800 square feet) to Community Business and BC zoning Owner: Request: Existing Comprehensive Plan: Existing Zoning: Proposed Comprehensive Plan: Proposed Zoning: Multifamily RM 1800 (I unit per 1,800 square feet) Community Business BC (Community Business) Availability of Utilities: Sanitary Sewer: Public Water: Storm Drainage: Provided by Lakehaven Utility District Provided by Lakehaven Utility District Site is located within the Central Lower Puget Sound Sub-Basin Availability of Public Services: Police: Provided by City of Federal Way Fire/Emergency Medical: Provided by Federal Way Fire Department Schools: Not applicable for a business use Page I of25 ,,"~,.~ 11 E'{. ~ï1 ,', <..-, "1--. -..-.- PAGE '_OF"'" EXHIBIT ~ PAGE--L!-UF ~. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies: Goal or Policy Comments LUP 26 Provide employment and The recent draft City of Federal Way Markel Analysis, prepared for business opportunities by allocating the City by ECONorthwest states that the finance, insurance, real adequate land for commercial, office, and estate, and services (FIRES) sector has the greatest demand for business park development. future built space. Designating this site as Office Park (OP) will provide additional land for these types of uses. PAAPIO Simultaneous adoption of Through this process, the City will adopt a comprehensive plan proposed zoning regulations should be designation and zoning for this site at the same time that it is required of all annexations. annexed to the City. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #4 -- KITTS CORNER REQUEST File No,: Parcel: CP A99~0008 202104-9069, 202104-9070, 202104-9001, 202104-9090, 202104-9086, 202104-9080,202104-9072,202104-9004,202104-9051,202104-9100 South of South 336th Street and west of Pacific Highway South (Exhibit A, Page 33 of 49) 45.85 acres Various Property Owners (see following table) Please refer to the following table Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Number Parcel No. Owner Acres 1 202104-9069 Johal Rajhinder; Kulwinder 1.15 acres 2 202104-9070 Campus Gateway Associates 16.75 acres 3 202104-9001 Gene Merlino 8.9 acres 4 202104-9090 Richard Lyons 0.2 acres 5 202104-9086 Richard Carson 4.93 acres 6 202104-9080 Ralph Jones 1.5 acres 7 202104-9072 Chase WN Trust 7.75 acres 8 202104-9004 SliscolKnightJDagmar 4.44 acres 9 202104-9051 Bob Wright 8.28 acres 10 202104-9100 Orville & Victoria Cohen 0.85 acres Total 45.85 acres Req uest: Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park to Community Business for the areas east of the wetlands and Multifamily for the northern three parcels west of the wetlands (numbers 2,3, and 7 in the above table) Existing Comprehensive Plan: Existing Zoning: Proposed Comprehensive Plan: Business Park Business Park Community Business for the areas east of the wetlands and Multifamily for the northern three parcels west ofthe wetlands (numbers 2, 3, and 7 in the above table) Page 8 of 25 EXH~B~T___~.. . . PAGE---'-~ EXHIBITJ. 6110 PAGE 2.0 OF -4 Proposed Zoning: Community Business (BC) for the areas east of the wetlands and Multifamily (RM 2400 [one unit per 2,400 square feet]) for the northern three parcels west of the wetlands (numbers 2, 3, and 7 in the abovc table). Availability of Utilities: Sanitary Sewer: Located within the Lakehaven Utility District. Sewer facilities will need to be extended to serve the site. There is adequate sewer capacity at this time. Located within the Lakehaven Utility District. Water tàcilities will need to be extended to serve the site. There is adequate water capacity at this time. Site is located in the West Hylebos Creek Sub-Basin Public Water: Storm Drainage: Availability of Public Services: Police: FirelEmergency Medical: Schools: Provided by City of Federal Way Provided by Federal Way Fire Department Provided by City of Federal Way Analysis: Background This request was originally received in April 1999. At that time, only Parcel Numbers 202104..9070 (Campus Gateway Associates), 202104-9001 (Merlino), and 202104-9051 (Wright) had requested a comprehensive plan and zoning designation change from Business Park to Community Business. In June 1999, the requests were presented to the City's Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC), which made a recommendation to the full council that this request should be analyzed further and should incorporate all parcels presently zoned Business Park in this vicinity (Parcels 1-10 as shown in the above chart). The Council concurred. The owners of Parcels 202104-9070 (Campus Gateway Associates), 202104-9001 (Merlino), and 202104-9072 (Chase NW Trust) have recently requested that their original request be amended to allow Multifamily uses west of the on-site wetlands. This is one of three different requests from Business Park comprehensive plan designation and zoning to another designation. The other two are Site Specific Requests NO.5 - Chong Nam Yi and Number 6 - Weyerhaeuser. Neighborhood Characteristics The site is presently vacant except for Parcel 202014-9086 (Carson Parcel) on wh ich Horan Realty is located. In addition, a City-controlled regional detention pond, Kitts Corner, is located on the western portions of Parcels 202104-9004 (Slisco/KnightJDagmar), 202104-9051 (Wright) and on the entire area of Parcel No. 202014-0100 (Cohen). Uses to the north across South 3361h Street are a mix ofretail and restaurants. To the south is vacant land then Lumberman '5 a retail establishment selling building materials. To the east across Pacific Highway South, moving from north to south are small retail establishments, vacant property, Pacifica Park Office Building, Canopy World and the Chamber of Commerce. In addition, Walt's Automotive is located on the triangular piece of property between Pacific Highway South and 161h Avenue South. To the west, moving from north to south, is vacant land, industrial uses including Frito Lay, and the City of Federal Way Public Safety Building and Municipal Court. Page 9 0[25 EXH~~nT A PAGE~Oj~S ... Environmental Analysis: EXHIBIT-'r .1 It P,AGE ~8 .OF.4 Sensitive Areas A Class II Wetland is locatcd on the west central portions of Parcels 202104-9070, the Campus Gateway parcel and Parccl 202104-900 I, the Merlino Parccl, and on the northern portion of Parcel No. 202104- 9072 (Chase NW Trust). A smaller Class 11 wetland is located to the south on Parcels No. 202104-9004 (Sisco/Knight/Dagmar) and 202104-9051 (Wright). This smaller wetland is presently utilized as the overflow detention area for the primary detention area to the southwest. A branch of the Hylebos Stream flows southwards through these wetlands. Class II Wetlands have 100-foot setbacks. The on-site stream also has a 100-foot buffer. The stream buffer is either contained within the existing wetland buffers or flows through the regional detention pond. Parcels 202104-9070 (Campus Gateway) and 202104-9001 (Merlino) are further affected by the buffer of the Class II Wetland to the west. There are two smaller wetlands located on the Campus Gateway and Merlino parcels. When the City was negotiating with these property owners to obtain easements for the Kitts Corner Regional Detention Pond, it was agreed that these smaller parcels could be filled when the parcels developed because mitigation for their filling was already built into the mitigation plan for the overall project. Drainage The site is located in the West Hylebos Creek Sub-Basin. The applicant submitted a conceptual proposal for approximately 270,000 square feet of office, retail, grocery store, fitness/health club, restaurant and mini-storage in eight separate buildings for the area east between the wetlands and Pacific Highway and approximately 153 multi-family units for the area west of the wetlands. Since more than 5,000 square feet of impervious surfaces would be created, when a land use permit is submitted, surface water runoff and treatment would be required per the 1998 KCSWDM, Hylcbos Basin Plan, and the City's adopted SEPA policies. The site falls within a Level I Flow Control Area, thus the applicant must design the flow control facility to meet this performance criteria. Access Access to eastern (area east of the on-site wetlands) portion of the site is from South 336\11 Street, a principal arterial located to the north of the site and Pacific Highway South, also a principal arterial located to the east. Assess to the western portion of the site would be from South 336111 Street. The conceptual plan shows a road connecting the western (area west of the on-site wetlands) and eastern (area east of the on-site wetlands) areas. Construction of a roadway would not be feasible in the location shown because this is under City control; however, there is an already constructed dam further to the north on Parcel No. 202014-9072, the Chase property. This dam was intended to provide vehicular access between the eastern and western portions of the Chase and Merlino properties. If a connecting roadway were constructed, the western portion of the site would also have access from Pacific Highway South. Based on existing information, it appears that access to the westcrn portion of the site from South 336(11 Street may require encroachment into the wetland buffers. Based on the City's Comprehensive Plan, the planned road section for Pacific Highway South is a Type A street (four lanes plus High Occupancy Vehicle lanes), consisting of a 90-foot street with curb, gutter, six- foot planting strip with street trees, eight-foot sidewalk, and street lights in a I 24-foot right-of-way. In addition, the City's CIP anticipates the need for two northbound left-turn lanes at 336111 Street, increasing the planned width of street and right-of-way by 12 feet. Assuming a symmetrical cross-section, an additional 18 feet of right-of-way would need to be dedicated. The planned road section for South 336111 Street is a Type E Street consisting of a 64-foot wide street (four lanes plus median) with curb, gutter, six- foot planting strip with street trees, eight-foot sidewalk and streetlights in a 98-foot right-of-way. In addition, the CIP anticipates the need for a second eastbound left-turn lane and an additional eastbound through lane at Pacific Highway south, increasing the planned width of street and right-of-way by 24 feet. Page 10 of 25 EXHgBg1r~ PAGEllLOF2S EXHIBIT ~. PAGE -.U.-OF ~ FWCP Policy TP21 requires collector streets every quarter-mile, block perimeter 0[2,640 feet, and pedestrian block perimeters of 1,320 feet. For purpose ofthis analysis, the City's Traffic Division assumed that 131h Place South would be extended southward from South 336\11 Street through the site, and South 340111 would be extended westward from Pacific Highway South through the site. An additional east/west street would also be required between South 3361h and South 340lh Streets. Potential Traffic Impacts Based on the requested comprehensive plan designation of Community Business and Multifamily and zoning ofBC and RM 2400 (one unit per 2,400 square feet), and the conceptual site plan submitted with the request, evening peak hour trips are estimated as 939 trips. This would require the preparation of a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) by the applicant's engineer. Under existing zoning, the site is estimated to generate 40 evening peak hour trips by 2005, and 74 evening peak hour trips by 2020. These estimates are based on the July 2000 Market Analysis prepared for the City by ECONorthwest, which forecasted a 13 percent absorption of Business Park zoned land between 2000 and 2020. The TIA would identify transportation impacts associated with the development and identify appropriate mitigation measures. The applicants would be expected to contribute pro-rata shares towards projects on the TIP that are impacted by more than ten peak hour trips. Based on the conceptual site plan submitted, staff conducted a limited analysis to determine the adequacy of the six-year and 20-year TIP and CIP in meeting concurrency if the comprehensive plan amendment request was approved. The following improvements and their associated planning-level cost estimates were identified as necessary to meet the adopted level-or-service standards within six years: 1. 13lh PI S at S 3361h 8t: install new traffic signal ($180,000) 2. Pacific Hwy $ at $ 340lh $t: modify existing signal ($120,000) 3. Pacific Hwy S at 8 3361h $t: add second eastbound left-turn lane (currently listed in the ClP) ($360,000) 4. Pacific Hwy $ at $ 3481h $t: add westbound right-turn lane (currently listed in the CIP) ($216,000) 5. 23rd Ave S at $ 320lh $t: add second northbound right-turn lane (currently listed in the CIP) ($360,000) The following improvements and their associated planning-level cost estimates were identified as necessary to meet the adopted level-of-service standards within 20years: 1. ¡SI Way $ at 3361h $t: add second southbound left lane ($360,000) 2. Pacific Hwy $ at $ 3481h $t: add second eastbound left-turn lane ($360,000) 3. Pacific Hwy 8 at 8 336\h St: add third eastbound left~tum lane ($360,000) The applicant would be required to pay a pro rata share based on the transportation impacts of the project to the affected TIP and CIP projects. Please refer to Exhibit A, Pages 34-36 of 49 - June 6, 200 I, Memorandum from the Rick Perez, City Traffic Engineer. In addition, based on the TIA, mitigation measures necessary beyond those identified in the TIP to meet the adopted level-of-service standard would be expected to be provided by the applicant. Projections for Population and Employment The site is presently vacant except for Parcel 202014-9086 (Carson Parcel) on which Horan Realty is located. The July 2000 Market Analysis prepared for the City by ECONorthwest, projects that under existing zoning, between 2000 and 2020, there would be demand for 11 to 13 percent of all vacant BP- EXIHnen!!" ~ PAGE ."C5F~ Page II of 25 EXH I B IT JuL.,. PAGEÛOF ~ zoned land. For this site, this can be extrapolated to 80 employees by 2005 and 148 employees by 2020. The conceptual site plan submitted by the applicant, shows the following uses: Use Square Footage # Employees based on accepted use to employee ratio Food Market with Pumps 58,000 sq ft 116 employees (1 employee/500 sq. ft.) Retail Use 53,100 sq ft 106 employees (1 employee/500 sq. ft.) Office 25,800 sq ft 103 employees (1 employee/250 sq. ft.) Fitness/Health Club 58,700 sq ft 117 employees (1 employee/500 sq. ft.) Restaurant 8,000 sq ft 16 employees (1 employee/SOO sq. ft.) U-Flaul/Mini-Storage 65,026 sq ft 6 employees (Based on information provided by U-Haul International, Inc.) Total 268,626 sq ft 464 employees The uses shown in the conceptual site plan would result in 464 jobs and 158 residential units, an increase of approximately 350 jobs and 384 people (based on the 2000 Census number of 2.43 people per household) than if the site remained Business Park. The July 2000 Market Analysis concluded that, there is a shortage of land zoned outright for residential development in tenus of meeting regional forecasts, based on historical development. It also identifies that the City has enough capacity designated for different uses to accommodate the 20-year employment forecast; therefore, there is not a demand for additional commercially zoned land. The Market Study found that under existing zoning, between 2000 and 2020, there would be demand for only 11 to 13 percent of available BP zoned land. This might appear to indicate that there is an adequate supply to meet community needs within the planning horizon. However, in the year since the base data was collected, the City has experienced increased development activity in the BP zone. Between 1996 and 2001, approximately five percent of the vacant BP-zoned land as of 1996 was developed, and presently 14.8 percent of the vacant BP-zoned land as of 1996 is in pending projects. Future development trends, and thus the absorption rate of BP land, are difficult to predict given the current economic climate. The overall vision of the comprehensive plan is to restrict commercial development to the downtown (Cit~ Center Core and Frame), to Pacific Highway South, generally between South 272nd Street and South 3481 Street, and to the areas found around South 3481h Street, approximately between SR-99 and 1-5. The vision of the comprehensive plan is also to provide an appropriate balance of services, employment, and housing. In addition, the land use concept envisions promotion of housing in the City's commercial areas close to shopping and employment. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies: Goal or Policy Comments LUP9 Designate and zone land to provide for The July 2000 Market Analysis concluded that there is a Federal Way's share of regionally adopted shortage of land zoned outright for residential development in demand forecasts for residential, commercial, terms of meeting regional forecasts, based on historical and industrial uses for the next 20 years. development. LUPIO Support a diverse community comprised The requested comprehensive plan and zoning designation of of neighborhoods which provide a range of Community Business and Multiple Family for this site would housing options; a vibrant City Center; well promote a community where residence and commercial co~ designed and functioning commercial areas; and existed within close proximity of each other while providing distinctive retail areas. privacy and protection of the residences from the commercial uses by the on-site wetland and buffers. Page 12 of25 EXH~B~lr A i.. PAGE-ilOF ~'$ EXHIBIT ~. ~ u . PAGE~OF ~ Goal or Policy Comments LUPI2 Evaluate household and employment None of the BP-zoned properties in this immediate area have forecasts on a periodic basis to ensure that land developed since incorporation. This process allows the use policies based on previous assumptions are Planning Commission, City Council and citizens to evaluate current. previous assumptions about the location and quantity of land zoned as Business Park and Community Business. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #5 - CHONG NAM VI Location: 00-104875-00 UP 202104-9121;202014-9170;202104-9171;202104-9172;202104-9167; 202104-9168; 202104-9125 & 202104-9169 North of South 3441h Street and west of Pacific Highway South (Exhibit A, Page 37 of 49) 5.17 acres Chong Nam Yi Harry Horan Please refer to the following table File Number: Parcel: Size: Applicant: Agent: Owners: ParCel # Owner Acres 202104-9121 Chong Nam Yi 1.43 202104-9170 James Mackmer 0.68 202104-9171 Abl Towing 0.34 202104-9172 Abt Towing 0.34 202104-9167 James Maekmer 0.76 202104-9168 Safe.T-Grale Inc. 0.38 202104-9125 Richard L. Degrout 0.38 202104-9 I 69 H.L. Frease 0.86 Total 5.17 Request: Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park (BP) to Community Business (Be) Existing Comprehensive Plan: Existing Zoning: Proposed Comprehensive Plan: Proposed Zoning: Business Park Business Park (BP) Community Business Community Business (Be) Availability of Utilities: Sanitary Sewer: Provided by Lakehaven Utility District. Sewer facilities will need to be extended to serve the site. There is adequate sewer capacity at this time. Provided by Lakehaven Utility District. Water facilities will need to be extended to serve the site. There is adequate water capacity at this time. Site is located within the West Branch Hylebos Creek Sub-Basin. Public Water: Storm Drainage: Page 13 of 25 E'rH~B~T ~ PAGE ,~ OF-V- KITTS CORNER ADDENDUM PARTIES OF RECORD Jacki Silvergleit, Real Estate Coordinator Frito-Lay, Inc. P.O. Box 660634 Dallas, Texas 75266-6034 Michael J. Rowan Stutzman, Bromberg, Essennan & Plifka, Attorneys and Counselors 2323 Bryan Street, Suite 2200 Dallas, Texas 75201-2689 Larry Pursley, Executive Vice President Washington Trucking Associations 930 S. 336th Street, Suite B Federal Way, W A 98003 Jon Potter Stateside Investments 3611 29th Avenue West Seattle, W A 98199 Richard Borsini Westlake Associates 2810 EastIake Ave East Seattle, W A 98102-3087 Leonard Schaadt Campus Gateway Assoc. 1026 Bellevue Way SE Bellevue, W A 98004 1:\2004 Comprehensive Plan\2004 Update\SEPA\Kitts Corner\Parties ofRecord.doc/3/I7/2005 5:07 PM ~ WTA \XIASHINGTON TRUCKING ASSOCIATIONS FIECEIVED BY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT .~IJ¡ ~~) 2001 EXEClfT1\/E \/lCE PRESIDENT lany Pursley OFFICERS: PRESIDEN' Ed V'lnder Pol Date: July 15,2002 rlf~Sl \/lCE PRESIDENT SCalI Creek SECOND \/leE PRESIDENT Dan Galct1el rHIRD \/lCE pm'SIDENT f'Ji,'nt Ulriu, To: Federal Way City Council TRI'ASURER Craig IsKr3 From: Larry Pursley, Executive Vice Pœsident Washington Trucking Associations Re: Comments on Notice of DNS, Impending Projects, File No. CPA99-0008 The Washington Trucking Associations (WTA) is a small business located at 930 S. 3361h St. in Federal Way. We own the building in which we operate, and lease surplus space within our office to other businesses. ) We support responsible development of the property located south of 336th street and west of Pacific Highway S., but are concerned about the impacts of changing the zoning in this area from Business Park (BP) to Multiple Family and RM 2400. As this area is historically commercial, the BP zoning designation is fitting with both the available road infrastmcture and character of the area. We are concerned that additional traffic generated by multiple family housing will overwhelm an already somewhat congested 3361J¡ street with additional traffic backups and more congested rush hours, as well as decreased safety. I urge you to consider these significant impacts as you move toward a final determination regarding the area's future. PJease call me if I can answer any questions or be of assistance. Sincerely, cz;7 Larry Pursley Executive Vice President EXHIBIT ,. PAGE \ or~ (2531838-1650 - 1-800-732-9019 - Fax (253 838-1715 -930S,33MhStrcct.Suiteß" fcdcrafWðy,WA'}8003 ~. ~ '-{or...,..oI~' Frito-Lay, Inc. 15 August 2001 City of Federal Way Planning Commission City Hall 33530 1 $1 Way South P.O. Box 9718 Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 RE: Letter of Opposition in regards to Comprehensive Plan and Zoning changes from Business Park & BP to Community Business & BC and Multifamily & RM 2400 (1 unit per 2400 sf) CPA99-0008, Kitts Corner, South of S 336th St., and west of Pacific Hwy. S 45.85 acres To Whom It May Concern: It is our understanding the above mentioned zoning change request has been voluntarily withdrawn by Kitts Corner. The Frito-Lay Company would like to go on record as formally protesting the proposed zoning change of the property. It is our desire to have the neighborhood zoning remain business/industrial in nature. Frito-Lay strives very hard to be considered a good corporate citizen. We operate a distribution center adjacent to the subject property. In addition to standard business hours, our facility typically operates early morning hours. It has been our experience that like zoning, rather than non-like zoning, make for better neighbor relations. The current Business Park & BP zoning is not conducive to multifamily zoning of adjacent property. It is for these reasons Frito-Lay respectfully requests that the Planning Commission consider our position and deny zoning changes to multifamily. We would like to be notified of all developments. Sincerely, Jacki Silvergleit Real Estate Coordinator EXHIBIT' a. PAGE I OF~ xc: Ron Sorenson, via e-mail P.O. BOX 660634 . DALLAS, TEXAS 75266-6034 . (972) 334-7000 ~ ""'.- . - COMMUNITY gfv~EJ~~r BY STUTZMAN, BROMBERG, ESSERMAN & PLlFKA Sf NT DEPARTMENT A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION P 0 3 2004 ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS 2323 BRYAN STREET SUITE 2200 DALLAS, TEXAS 75201-2689 TELEPHONE: (214) 969-4900 FACSIMILE: (214) 969-4999 E-MAIL: rowan@sbep~law.com MICHAEL J. ROWAN September 2, 2004 VIA FEDEX EXHIBIT 13 PAGE-LOF Ms. Kathy McClung Director, Community Development City of Federal Way 3325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, W A 98003 Re: Proposed Development Adjacent to 33930 Ninth Avenue South, Federal Way, W A Dear Ms. McClung: This firm represents Frito-Lay, Inc. ("F-L"), a Delaware corporation having its headquarters in PIano, Texas. F-L is cucrently operating a distribution center ("DC") in Federal Way, Washington ("City"), located at 33930 Ninth Avenue South. This facility is operated on a 24-hour per day, 7 -day per week basis in full compliance with applicable zoning and other laws. F-L has learned that the City is culTently considering a mixed-use development near the DC. We understand that a portion of this development is comprised of townhomes and that such townhomes are proposed to be located directly adjacent to the DC with minimal setback from the property line. F - L has no intention of entertaining any future restrictions on the operation of its DC, neighbor complaints, buffer requirements and other issues that would inevitably result from locating this new development adjacent to the DC. This letter shall constitute formal notice to you ofF-L's strong objections to the proposM development as currently designed and located. It makes absolutely no sense to locate any such residential development immediately adjacent to existing commercial operations such as the DC, and we urge your careful reconsideration of this development in light of this, and your ultimate rejection of same. Very truly yours, 7£. ." ~ ~?tJ. ~ Michael J. Rowan G:\RR\FROI4\FrOI4-074\McClung S2 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: VIA: FROM: SUBJECT: May 2, 2005 Land Use and Transportation Committee David H. MOS~ager Rick Perez, P.E., City Traffic Engineer tfi? SR 99 Phase II Northbound Left Turn Lane at S 332nd Street POLICY QUESTION: Shall the median on SR 99 Phase 2 be revised to permit a northbound left-turn from SR 99 to westbound S 332nd Street'? BACKGROUND: Raised medians are installed primarily for their safety benefits, by reducing conflict points at intersections and driveways. Both regional and national studies suggest that the installation of a raised medians on a multi-lane urban arterial can reduce vehicle collision rates by up to 49%, with an average reduction in the 25% range. In addition, pedestrian safety is improved by using the raised median as a refuge for those pedestrians choosing mid block crossings of a multilane urban arteriaL The use of raised medians on urban arterials is generally considered when: a, The street cross section includes five lanes or more b. The arterial carries high volumes of traffic c. The arterial experiences significant traffic congestion d. The arterial has high collision rates e. The arterial has significant left turn movements into and out of side streets and driveways f. The arterial services numerous driveways with little or no driveway access control ill addition to the technical reasons discussed above, studies also suggest that aesthetic and economic benefits often result from the installation of a raised median on urban arterials. Phase II ofSR 99 (between S 3241h Street and S 340th Street) was originally designed with no median breaks between signalized intersections. Mr. Kim, a business owner on SR 99 at S 333rd Street, requested a similar median break at S 333rd Street, and submitted a traffic analysis in January 2004 to support it. Subsequent Council action resulted in the median break being provided until such time that any more pressing needs developed to provide access at S 332nd Street. In particular, Federal Way School District was considering relocating its bus barn and other district facilities to a site on S 332nd Street between SR 99 and Celebration Park. Attached is a design developed at that time that could implement the left-turn lane. Complicating this issue is the subject ofright-of-way negotiations. Staff must negotiate with each property owner on SR 99 to acquire right of way. Each owner did not wanted to lose left-turn access but were told that it was necessary. In the case of Ernie's Truck Stop, one of the highest generators of trips on Phase II, a study was submitted by Ernie's, during right-of.way acquisition, to justify left-turn access at S 332nd Street. Staff determined that this proposal did not adequately justify the left-turn access because it could not function safely without a traffic signal. (Note that the location of the new City Hall, Community Center, and School District bus barn had not yet been determined.) In lieu of this access, the City committed to construct S 332nd Street and S 330th Street to imrrove truck access to Ernie's, and Ernie's committed to constructing its frontage on ISlh Avenue S between S 330t Street and S 332nd Street. To now make an exception after a project has already been designed and right of way purchased could potentially suggest the City did not bargain in good faith. Furthermore, it could also set a precedent that will make future right of way negotiations more protracted and expensive. Several City Council members have expressed an interest in revising the median on SR 99 to permit a left turn from northboundSR 99 to westbound S 332"d Street. A lefHurn lane at S 332"d Street in addition to one now existing at S 333"d Street would require a deviation from WSDOT standards, which would have to be approved by WSDOT. In any case, the maximum storage length for at least one ofthe left-turn lanes would be 100 feet, which could fit up to 4 passenger vehicles, but as little as one truck, depending on its length. Given S 332nd Street provides access to both Pacific Coast Ford and Ernie's, it will be difficult to provide adequate storage for any number of trucks that may attempt to use this lefHurn lane. Another concern is that the acceleration time needed for a truck to make a left-turn across three opposing lanes of traffic would likely exceed any available gaps in traffic during most of the day, reducing the safety of such a movement. Providing a left-turn lane from northbound SR 99 to S 332"d Street is estimated to cost roughly $75,000 - 100,000, which is not currently budgeted. OPTIONS: 1. 2. A short northbound left-turn lane could be provided to improve business access. A full-standard lefHurn lane would provide more storage for trucks using S 332nd Street and would not require a deviation from WSDOT standards, but it would require the elimination of the southbound left- turn lane at S 333rd Street, would still require WSDOT approval, and would not address the adequacy of gaps in opposing traffic for trucks to complete the left-turn safely. No action. 3. Staff Recommendation: For information only. Staff seeks Council direction. Committee Recommendation: For information only, no recommendation has been forwarded by staff. I' m "'AI)~)'~OVAL ()~:"~;~)~lM~~~r. R.:P(~~~~I:: I ' ~ ' ,I ,~m .. ~ ,I '! --..... ,........ , " "..... -1 I :'. ,,',";' , , ....,........---.." , m..m_,____.." ,'" .......................--....--- :vtichllel Park, Mcmbcr --,....,..,_.... ",.. , ',.. Eric Faison. Member, ~ack: nOVC)" Chllir ...--." n., " , ", "', .m,,~,..._. _.~1 K;\LU'rC\2,"')5',S..O2,lI5 i)9S332,DOC (f) w <» '" Z 0 r- m ïl -I -I C ~ 1 I,,~""~ I¡V/ ¡t-Æ ~... """""....". . ....:'¡ ,..' '" i. ,.<-.---- ~-. 1" I ¡ I f i I I I I : 1 I'll ¡ I I Ii : m"n! i '--j" ,\ : ..-1 -¡I : , -I' ¡ ¡ ; 1:1 ¡ I, : " I I i~ IrQ " í I rQ f r ¡ I ..:l.' i i , .,' I : , I I I ¡ : I I ¡ I ¡ : , I ¡ I I I ¡~~ l;¡Iö I ?! : ~ I I I I I ~i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I J I I I I , I m." .. ;,'.."u , m- -.----.... -"-"--~",,-- ,~- [J ~ 8 [] m......_.......__..........~) (-,~........._----...._......"/ ,__m._~~-\ (",......--.,.........--,----...-j I I I I I I I I I I ;:;;!i:1 ,,".., !~~I ¡¡¡ ,, l~!g: l' -<~I I , i I ' J [J , , n D ['] u u '\. 00'" "-,---- Memorandum DATE: Federal Way Land Use and Transportation Committee Kathy McClung, Director of Community Development Services I:1f{ C~ David MOS~ager April 26, 2005 " TO: FROM: VIA: RE: Federal Way Tree Regulations I. Background Chair Dovey asked staff to briefthe LUTC regarding the Federal Way tree regulations. The Code regulates trees in order to enhance a natural resource, preserve existing growth of vegetation and safeguard the ecological and aesthetic environment ofthe community. There are five situations when staff applies tree regulations: 1) When a property is subdivided in residential lots. 2) When a property is being developed for a non-residential use. 3) When a property owner has cleared a vacant lot illegally. 4) When a property owner has taken a tree down on a residential lot after it has developed. 5) When a property owner wants to take down a dead or dangerous tree. II. The Regulations Significant Trees- The Landscape Chapter addresses the retention of significant trees under Section 22-1568. Significant trees are defined as trees 12 inches in diameter or 37 inches in circumference, measured four and one-half feet above ground; and in good health; and not detrimental to the community (sick or falling over or blocking site distance). Red alder, cottonwood, poplar or big leaf maple are not significant trees. If a proposed development must remove more than 75% of significant trees on the property, then an amount equal to 25% ofthe original number shall be replaced with deciduous trees that are three-inch caliper or coniferous trees that are 10 feet in height. Land Surface Modification- The Federal Way City Code regulates any type of vegetation removal under the land surface modification requirements. Section 22-1093 of the Federal Way City Code (FWCC) (Exhibit 1) provides land surface modification outright for a number of situations including: removal of blackberry vines or dead, dangerous or diseased trees when authorized by the Building Official. Under number 13 of this section, a land surface modification can be approved outright if ALL the following apply: a. the property contains an active use b. the change will not alter the drainage points c. it is outside of sensitive areas or sensitive area buffers d. not more than 100 cubic yards are deposited or removed from the property in a one year period e. no significant trees are removed or trees required by a development approval f the property is over 2 acres in size and 20% of the property is covered in trees and no more than 20% of that amount is being removed AND g. the modification will result in no more than a 2 foot increase or 1 foot decrease in the average elevation of the propeIif. If the request cannot meet the criteria above, then it can be approved through a process 3 with additional information and criteria contained in Section 22-1094 (Exhibit 1 attached). The most difficult criteria to meet are under (c 3) of this section. " It meets at least one of the following criteria: . a. It is necessary to con-ect an erosion or drainage problem on an undeveloped site. b. It is necessary to create new utility or access conidors. c. Other unusual circumstances exist which make it reasonable to permit land surface modification in advance of the issuance of a development permit, subdivision or short subdivision approval or shoreline substantial development permit. " These requirements prevent the wholesale clearing of land unless there is a development permit that is also being granted for the land. Ifthe property is cleared without a Land Surface Modification approval, then it is considered a City Code Violation, subject to a citation and procedures of code compliance. Section 22-1095 (Exhibit 1) addresses tree restoration and requires that trees be replaced that are 5 inches in diameter measured 6-inches above the root ball ifthey are deciduous or 17 feet high if they are coniferous. Subdivision Code Vegetation Retention- FWCC Section 20-179 (Subdivision Code) (Exhibit 2) states that existing mature vegetation shall be retained to the maximum extent possible. All natural vegetation shall be retained on the site except the portions needed for improvements. State Environmental Protection Act (SEP A)- Occasionally, staff may apply a stricter development standard through the SEP A regulations when a large area is being cleared and wildlife habitat is being impacted. Sometimes this comes in the form of a recommendation from the Department ofFish and Wildlife or from a Consultant's Habitat Report. III. Tree Removal Scenarios With the above sets of regulations for a framework, the initial scenarios outlined will be described: A. The property is being subdivided into residential lots Generally, the city policies encourage residential development using natural contours and preserving as much natural vegetation as possible. Staff applies all of the regulations above to residential plats. Early in city hood, developers were limited to grading and~emoving trees from the street portions of plats prior to the Final Plat stage. Then, as individual lots developed, staff approved tree removal on a lot-by-lot basis. As the properties with no environmental constraints and flat grades become rare, the city finds itself receiving more requests for clearing entire sites early in the development. When reviewing plat requests for grading and tree removal, staff reviews the topography, drainage, scope of request and existing vegetation (type and condition). Staff recommendations have been to limit the amount of broad-based clearing unless there are topographical reasons that make it beneficial to the neighborhood in the long run to have it done all at once. Mass grading can significantly reduce the amount oftruck traffic going through the area or later damage to the infrastructure. If there are not topographical reasons to approve the mass grading there is not usually justification to mass clear the site and tree removal will be according to the tree plan on a lot by lot basis. Subdivisions are required to maintain a minimum of 25% of significant trees or replace 25% in number with trees that meet Section 22-1568 requirements. B. The property is being developed for non-residential purposes Many of the non-residential sites have been cleared at some time and do not have significant trees. If there are significant trees, they are to be retained at 25% of the total on the property. Again, it is the city's goal to use natural contours as much as possible and retain as many trees as possible, however, many developers prefer to mass grade the sites and do not take retaining trees into consideration. C. The owner has cleared the lot illegally In 2004, the City received 23 calls reporting a property owner clearing or grading property without any city approval. Of these nine ofthem specifically had trees that had been removed. These are difficult cases to resolve because once the trees are gone; it is sometimes hard to prove what was there before and they can't really be replaced anyway. If staff can catch someone in the act, then a "Stop Work" order is issued and the owner will be required to submit plans for replanting. Replanting is required under Section 22- 1095. These replacement trees can be hard to find and are expensive but will not really replace a mature tree. D. A property owner removes a tree on a develoved residential lot A single family developed lot is exempt from the provisions Of the Land Surface Modification requirements under Section 22- 1093. However, if the property owner removes more than 75% of any significant trees, then 25% of them must be replaced. The enforcement of this provision is difficult at best. E. A property owner wants to take down a dead or dangerous tree The City receives numerous requests from property owners to remove dead or dangerous trees. The Building Official does an inspection of the tree. Ifit is not readily apparent that the tree is dead Qr dangerous, then an opinion from an arbqpst must be submitted. Many times these trees may be in a sensitive area or sensitive area setback. Conditions in these areas must be retained natural to the extend possible. If the tree qualifies for removal and is a threat to life or property, then the tree may be felled but the tree will be left in place to provide wildlife habitat. There is no city cost to the owner for this service. The tree regulations were on the original 2005 Planning Commission work program presented to the LUTC for prioritization, but was dropped for higher priorities. Should the Council want to make changes to the tree regulations, it will need to be prioritized with the existing work program or added to next year's list. Federal Way City Code EXHIBIT~ PAGE-LOE d ""~" § 22-1093 22-1071 Domestic animals. FWCC 22-981 et seq., regarding animals in res- idential zones, shall be the regulations for keeping animals in residential zones permitting home occu- pations. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(115.65(4»,2-27-90) 22-1072 - 22.1090 Reserved. Division 7. Land Modifications 22-1091 General provisions. (a) General. The applicant shall comply with this section with respect to all land surface modifi., cations. (b) Nature offill materials. All materials used as fill must be nondissolving and nondecomposing. Fill materials must not contain organic or inorganic material that would be detrimental to water quality or existing habitat or create any other significant adverse impacts to the environment. (Ord. No. 90- 43, § 2(115.75(1), (2», 2-27-90; Ord. No. 90-77, § 3(115.75(1), (2»,12-11-90) 22-1092 Bonds. The city may require the following bonds for any land surface modification approved by or under this division: (1 ) A performance bond to guarantee that the land surface modification will conform to city stan- dards and requirements. (2) A maintenance bond for the stability of the work and the preservation of vegetation. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(115.75(5»,2-27-90; Ord. No. 90-77, § 3(115.75(5», 12-11-90) 22-1093 Permitted outright. A land surface modification is permitted only if it: (1) Has been approved as part of a valid devel- opment permit (except grading permits issued under chapter 70 of the city's building code), sub- division, or substantial development permit; (2) Is for cemetery graves; (3) Is in a right-of-way and authorized in writ- ing by the director of the department of public works; (4) Is for mining, quarrying, excavating, pro- cessing, stockpiling of rock, sand, gravel, aggre- gate or clay where a permit has been issued by the state department of natural resources; (5) Is for exploratory excavations under the direction of a professional engineer licensed in the state, provided that the extent of the land surface modification does not exceed the minimum neces- sary to obtain the desired information; (6) Is for normal maintenance and repair of the facilities of a common carrier by rail in inter- state commerce within its existing right-of-way; (7) Is for excavations for utility service con- nections to serve existing and/or new structures and is outside any area that is within the jurisdic- tion of FWCC 22-1221 et seq.; (8) Is for actions which must be undertaken immediately, or within a time too short to allow for compliance with the permit requirements of FWCC 22-1094, to avoid an imminent threat to public health or safety; to prevent an imminent danger to public or private property; or to prevent an imminent threat of serious environmental degra- dation. This determination will be made by the director of community development; (9) Is for the removal of overhanging vegeta- tion and fire hazards or for removal of blackben-y vines or dead, dangerous or diseased trees when authorized by the building official; (10) Is for placement of fill on land owned or controlled by the city; (II) Is an integral part of an ongoing agricul- tural or horticultural use on the subject property; (12) Is conducted on property which contains a detached dwelling unit and which, because of the size of the property or the location of the dwelling unit, cannot be further subdivided or divided; or (13) Complies with all of the following crite- ria: a. The subject property contains a perma- nent building or an active use. b. The land surface modification will not change the points where the stormwater or ground- water enters or exits the subject property; and will not change the quality, quantity, or velocity of storm water or groundwater. c. The land surface modification is out- side any area that is within the jurisdiction of FWCC 22-1221 et seq. d. In anyone-year period, not more than 100 cubic yards of fill material is deposited on, excavated and removed from or moved from place to place on the subject property. If the subject prop- erty is larger than one acre, the limit is 100 cubic yards within each acre. 22-259 (Revised 3/01) EXHIBIT { PAGE a OF.. ~ ' § 22-1094 e. No trees defined as significant trees will be removed and no vegetation will be removed if that vegetation was required to be retained by or through any development pennit issued under this chapter or any prior zoning code. f. If the subject property is two acres or larger and has 20 percent or more of its area cov- ered with native vegetation, the land surface modi- fication will not remove more than 20 percent of that native vegetation. The limitations of this sub- section apply to all land surface modification on the subject property over time. g. The land surface modification will not result in more than a two-foot increase or one-foot decrease in the average. elevation of the subject property, computed using the elevation of the mid- point of each property line. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(115.75(3», 2-27-90; Ord. No. 90-77, § 3(115.75(3», 12-11-90) 22-1094 Discretionary approval. (a) Generally. A land surface modification that does not meet the requirements of FWCC 22-1093 may be approved through process III. (b) Required information. In addition to the application material required in process III, FWCC 22-386 et seq., the applicant must submit the fol- lowing: (1) A recent survey of the subject property. (2) A map showing the limits of the proposed land surface modification; the location of utilities, easements, right-of-way improvements and any area regulated under FWCC 22-1221 et seq. that is on or within 400 feet of any area to be disturbed by the proposed land surface modification. (3) A tree retention plan. (4) An erosion control/construction phase stonnwater control plan. (5) A soils report which contains sufficient infonnation to detennine the potential impacts of the proposed land surface modification, as well as proposed measures to reduce or eliminate these impacts, all as detennined by the city. (c) Decisional criteria. The city may approve the proposed land surface modification if it com- plies with the following criteria: (1) Except as allowed under this chapter, it will not alter or adversely affect streams, lakes, wetlands or significant trees, either on or off the subject property. (Revised 3/01) - (2) It will not violate any express policy of the city. (3) It meets at least one ofthe following crite- ria: a. It is. necessary to correct an erosion or drainage problem on an undeveloped site. b. It is necessary to create new utility or access corridors. c. Other unusual circumstances exist which make it reasonable to penn it land surface modification in advance of the issuance of a devel- opment penn it, subdivision or short subdivision approval or shoreline substantial development per- mit. (Ord. No. 90.43, § 2(115.75(4»), 2-27-90; Ord. No. 90-77, § 3(115.75(4», 12-11-90; Ord. No. 00- 375, § 23, 10-3-00) 22-1095 Tree and plant restoration. If, during the land surface modification, any tree required to be retained or planted is damaged or destroyed, the applicant shall plant a tree of the same species at least five inches in diameter, as measured six inches about the top of the root ball if deciduous and at least 17 feet high if coniferous, in the immediate vicinity of the damaged or destroyed tree. The city may require the applicant to remove the damaged or destroyed tree. In addition, if the land surface modification destroys groundcover or shrubbery, the applicant shall hydroseed the bare soil and plant shrubs at least 24 inches in height in the immediate vicinity of the damaged or destroyed vegetation. (Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(115.75(5»,2-27- 90; Ord. No. 90.77, § 3(115.75(5», 12-11-90) 22-1096 - 22-1110 Reserved. Division 8. Outdoor Activities and Storage 22-1111 Application of division. This division establishes regulations applicable to outdoor use, storage and activity. (Ord. No. 90- 43, § 2(1 15.105(1»,2-27-90) 22-1112 Residential uses. The purpose of this chapter is to establish stan- dards for outdoor residential uses, storage and activities related to motor vehicles and nonmotor- ized vehicles. These standards are intended to pro- tect property values by reducing visual blight, aid in emergency access and fire safety, guard against 22-260 EXH'Bfl. a , § 20-180 PAGE-LOF.. \ strip shall be provided in a separate tract to be owned and maintained by the homeowners' associ- ation. (I) Buffer Type 2 when adjacent to nonresi- dential or nonagricultural uses; (2) Buffer Type 3 when adjacent to multifam- ily or professional office uses; (3) Buffer Type 3 when the density of the pro- posed subdivision exceeds the allowed density of adjacent platted, single-family properties. (b) Existing mature vegetation shall be retained for buffering purposes as provided in FWCC 22- 1573 regarding use of significant natural vegeta- tion. (c) Perimeter fencing in subdivisions shall be located on the interior side of landscape strips planted àlong arterial streets. (Ord. No. 90-41, § 1(16.280.10 - 16.280.30),2-27-90; Ord. No. 97- 291, § 3,4-1-97; Ord. No. 98-330, § 3, 12-15-98) Federal Way City Code Article IV. IMPROVEMENTS Sections: 20-176 Improvements required. 20- 177 Density regulations. 20~ 178 Buffers. 20-179 Retention of vegetation. 20-180 Streets and rights-of~way. 20-181 Water. 20-182 Sewage disposal. 20- I 83 Stonn drainage. 20-184 Other utilities. 20-185 Street lighting. 20-186 Landscaping protection and enhance- ment. 20- I 87 Monuments. 20-188 - 20-205 Reserved. 20-176 Improvements required. .. Street improvements, and the dedlcatlOn of rights-of-way and/or easements, shall berequire~ in accordance with FWCC 22~1471 et seq., regardmg required improvements to rights-of-way and vehic- ular access easements. If a plat is subject to a ded- ication, dedication language shall be included on the face of the plat. Roads not dedicated to the pub- lic must be clearly marked on the face of the plat. Any dedication, donation, or grant as shown on the face of the plat shall be considered, to all intents and purposes, as a quitclaim deed to the said donee or donees, grantee or grantees for his, her, or their use for the purpose intended by the donor or grantors as aforesaid. (Ord. No. 90-41, § 1(16.440.20), 2-27- 90; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3,4-1-97; Ord. No. 98-330, § 3, 12-15-98) 20-177 Density regulations. Density or parcel size, setbacks and buffers shall be in accordance with Chapter 22 FWCC, Zoning. (Ord. No. 90-41, § 1(16.440.10),2-27-90; Ord. No. 98-330, § 3, 12-15-98) 20-178 ButTers. (a) Subdivision design should provide a 10- foot-wide Type III landscape strip along all arterial streets to shield new residences from arterial streets. See FWCC 22-1565( c). Said landscape 20.39 ,....-"- 20.179 Retention of vegetation. (a) All natural vegetation shall be retained on the site to be subdivided except that which will be removed for improvements or grading as shown on approved engineering plans. A preliminary clear- ing and grading plan shall be submitted as part of preliminary plat application. (b) Existing mature vegetations shall be retained to the maximum extent possible. Preserva- tion of significant trees pursuant to FWCC 22- 1568 shall apply solely to the development of each sin- gle-family lot at the time a building pennit is applied for. (Ord. No. 90-41, § 1(16.290),2-27-90; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3,4-1-97; Ord. No. 98-330, § 3. 12-15-98) 20-180 Streets and rights-or.way. - (a) All streets within an approved subdivision shall be within a dedicated public right-of-way. Private tracts may be used in short subdivisions and cluster subdivisions using cross-section type "Y", as described in FWCC 22-1528. (b) All streets within the public rights-of-way shall be improved to the standards specified in FWCC 22-1471 et seq., regarding required im- provements to rights-of-way and vehicular access easements and tracts. (c) All streets abutting the subdivision or short subdivision shall be improved in accordance with FWCC 22~1471 et seq., regarding required im-