Planning Comm PKT 01-07-2009
City of Federal Way
PLANNING COMMISSION
,
Jan~ry 7,2009
7:00ip.m.
City Hall
Council Chambers
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
November 19,2008
4. AUDIENCE COMMENT
5. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
6. COMMISSION BUSINESS
. PUBLIC HEARING - Continued
Clearing, Grading, & Tree Retention Code Amendments
. PUBLIC HEARING
Churches, Fa~ade Modulation, Multi-Family in Commercial Areas
Density Code Amendments
. PUBLIC HEARING
Adult Family Homes, Social Service Transitional Housing, Day
Care, and Home Occupation Code Amendments
. STUDY SESSION
Parks Impact Fee
7. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
8. AUDIENCE COMMENT
9. ADJOURN
Comnj1issioners
Merle IPfeifer, Chair
Lawsd,n Bronson
Tom Nfedhurst
Tim 0 'Neil
Hope Elder, Vice-Chair
Wayne Carlson
Sarady Long
Kevin King (Alternate)
City Staff
Greg Fewins, CDS Director
Margaret Clark, Senior Planner
E. Tina Piety, Administrative Assistant
253-835-2601
WJol'W. citvoffederalwav. com
K:\PIannij1g Connnission\2009lAgenda 01-07 -09.doc
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 19, 2008
~.m.
City Hall
Council Chambers
MEETING MINUTES
Commissioners present: Merle Pfeifer, Hope Elder, Lawson Bronson, Wayne Carlson, Sarady Long, Tom
Medhurst, and Tim O'Neil. Commissioners absent: none. Alternate Commissioner present: Kevin King.
Alternate Commissioners absent: none. Staff present: Community Development Services Director Greg
Fewims, Planning Manager Isaac Conlen, Senior Planner Margaret Clark, City Traffic Engineer Rick Perez,
Assistant City Attorney Peter Beckwith, and Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety. Also in attendance:
City Council Member Dini Duclos.
Chain Pfeifer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
App!tOV AL OF MINUTES
The r)1inutes of November 5, 2008, were approved.
AUDlENCE COMMENT
None
ADM.NISTRATIVE REpORT
Mr. Fewins announced that former City Manager Ken Nyberg passed away last night. He also announced
that the City Council has reached a consensus on the 2009 - 2010 budget and it will go to the December 2,
2008; City Council meeting for final approval.
COMlMISSION BUSINESS
STUDY SESSION - Traffic Impact Fees
Mr. Irerez delivered the staff presentation. The city is considering a traffic impact fee in order to provide a
fairev and more consistent manner of mitigating the impacts of new development. The traffic impact fee
woul~ be based upon the amount of weekday PM peak trips. Currently, the city uses a concurrency system
with ~ode authority to collect transportation mitigation pro-rata shares. Under this system, fees assessed on
new development are calculated on a case-by-case basis, which means some development pay no fee while
other~ pay over $5,000 per trip. The proposal is to retain concurrency provisions to ensure developments
meet iadopted Level of Service (LOS) standards and replace concurrency mitigation with a new
Transportation Impact Fee Program. The city uses and would continue to utilize the State Environmental
Polic~ Act (SEP A) as a tool for development-specific impacts on safety, access, neighborhoods, non-peak
hour~, etc. In addition, the City Center Planned Action area is subject to a Planned Action SEP A fee.
The ~dvantages of a traffic impact fee is that it provides predictability whereby developers can estimate
pot~tial traffic mitigation early in the process and consistency/fairness in that all development would pay
the s~me impact fees at a per trip cost. In addition, they bring about "system improvements" rather than
K:\Plann~g Commission\2008lMeeting Summary 11-19-08.doc
Planniing Commission Minutes
Page 2
November 19,2008
"proHct improvements" because impact fees may be "pooled" to complete priority projects within six
years~ Currently, transportation mitigation fees may only be used for specific projects within five years.
Impa4t fees may not be used for existing deficiencies; operating or maintenance expenses; non-capacity
imprQvements (i.e., pavement preservation); stand-alone multi-modal projects such as transit, park & ride,
bike llme/trail, and pedestrian path; and development 'site-specific' impacts (SEPA will be used for site-
specific impacts).
Co~issioner Long recused himself because he is the project manager for the traffic impact fee program.
Commissioner Bronson noted that the concurrency system assumes at least one pm trip. What development
would not have at least one pm trip? Mr. Perez replied that a development could be a restaurant that serves
only ~reakfast or lunch. In addition, Personal Wireless Service Facilities and similar developments likely
would not have a pm trip. Commissioner Elder expressed concern that a majority of people in a
development may use another form of transportation. Mr. Perez replied that if a developer informs the city,
the ci~ will take into consideration unique circumstances. Commissioner O'Neil asked for residential
developments, would the fee be assessed per lot or the development as a whole. Mr. Perez responded that
currently fees are assessed to the developer at the time of final plat, so the traffic impact fee would also be
collected at that time from the developer and would be based on the size of the entire development.
Commissioner Carlson asked what about lots on current final plats that have not yet been developed.
Would they have to pay this fee at the time of development? Mr. Perez replied that ifthe final plat went
through SEP A, they have been vested and would not have to pay the traffic impact fee. Commissioner
Carlson asked what about development that generate trips at times other than pm (churches for example).
Mr. Perez replied the city would use the SEP A process to mitigate such developments.
Since this was a study session, no motion was made. Chair Pfeifer closed the study session.
Chair Pfeifer welcomed the Boy Scouts.
PUBtIC HEARING Continued - Clearing, Grading, and Tree Retention Code Amendments
Ms. Clark delivered that staff presentation that consisted of answers and responses to questions and
c01Tll11ents raised by citizens, developers, and Commissioners, which may be found in the November 19,
2008; memorandum. She noted that staff misunderstood the frrst question regarding invasive species raised
by Dave Kaplan. He would like the city to provide incentives to remove invasive species. She commented
that s~aff will research this issue.
Chairt Pfeifer opened the hearing to public comment.
Dave Kaplan - He commented that staff's response to his question was opposite of what he
intended. He suggested that developers be required to remove invasive species.
Garrett Huffman, Master Builders Association - He commented that the Master Builders
A-ssociation leadership would like to defeat these proposed amendments as currently written. He
provided the Commissioners with a two page list of concerns from a professional engineer
(~ttached). The process is not what he was led to expect 10 months ago. He expected a
stakeholders group of those with knowledge on the issues to together develop workable
amendments. He went over some of the issues raised in the engineer's list. He stated that: it is
problematic to survey trees on adjacent properties; measuring slopes at 2: 1 is standard in other
jl1risdictions; and cluster subdivisions are not always workable.
K:\Plannijlg Commission\2008\Meeting Summary l1-19-08.doc
Planni(ng Commission Minutes
Page 3
November 19,2008
Connhissioner Long asked if other city departments were involved with the development of the proposed
amen~ments. Ms. Clark replied that the Public Works and Law Departments were involved. Commissioner
Long !asked if the Master Builders Association is a part of the city's Permit Stakeholders group. Mr.
Fewiqs replied that they are members ofthe city's Permit Stakeholders group. That group has an annual
meeting and that meeting was held recently (Mr. Huffinan was at that meeting). The proposed amendments
were mentioned, but were not discussed in detail. Commissioner Long suggested that staff meet with the
Mast~ Builders Association. Mr. Fewins replied that staff has a meeting scheduled with them the fIrst
week pfDecember. The Commission discussed attending the meeting with the Master Builders and
decided that Chair Pfeiffer and Commissioners Elder and O'Neil would attend.
Commissioner Carlson stated that he is under the impression that a stakeholders group was assembled for
the prbposed amendments. Some attended and participated in a study session on the proposed
amendments. He does share Mr. Huffinan's concerns regarding surveying trees on adjacent properties and
meas1.j.ring slopes at 2: 1. He is more inclined to accept the staff's recommendation for four-foot retaining
walls.! Retaining walls not only protect from slides, but also have an aesthetic component. Tall walls can be
unappealing. He has had time to review the handout Mr. Norris provided at the last meeting on the
Northlake Rim plat and the number and placement of tree units. He wondered if Mr. Norris understood the
propo$al because Commissioner Carlson felt his handout was inaccurate.
Commissioner O'Neil commented that it is his understanding that trees in common areas can apply to the
total required tree units. Ms. Clark replied that is correct and Mr. Norris' handout did not take into account
the T~act A common area. Commissioner Carlson commented it appears that a developer could meet the
required tree units in a common area and would not have to plant more trees. Ms. Clark responded that is
correot. Commissioner O'Neil commented that the calculation for the urban canopy depends on the size of
the tr~es and so a development would need fewer large trees.
The pi,lblic hearing on the Clearing, Grading, and Tree Retention Code Amendments was continued to the
Planning Commission meeting on Wednesday, January 7,2009, in the City Hall Council Chambers.
ADDItIONAL BUSINESS
The next regular Planning Commission meeting is December 17,2008.
AumtNcE COMMENT
None.
ADJOURN
The IIleeting was adjourned at 8:40 p.m.
K:\P1anninli Conunission\2008lMeeting Summary 11-19-08.doc
I~
CITY OF ~
Fedleral Way
MEMORANDUM
Decerpber 31, 2008
TO: Merle Pfeifer, Chair, Federal Way Planning Commission
FROM: Greg Fewins, Director of Community Development Services
Janet Shull, AICP, Senior Planner
Margaret H. Clark, AICP, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Continuation of Public Hearing - Clearing, Grading and Tree and Vegetation Retention
Code Amendments
MEETING DATE: January 7,2009
I. J;lACKGROUND
The Planning Commission conducted study sessions on this topic September 19 and November 7,
4007, and January 16, 2008. Following these study sessions, staff conducted a workshop with the
City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTe) to provide a briefmg on the topic and
receive direction prior to beginning development of proposed code amendments.
~ the months following these initial study sessions, staff conducted additional research and prepared
~raft code language. Development of the proposed code amendment took into consideration
discussion at the Planning Commission and LUTC meetings, as well as input from "Interested
farties" who were invited to participate in these meetings.
the Planning Commission opened the public hearing on proposed code amendments for Clearing,
Grading and Tree and Vegetation Retention at their November 5, 2008, meeting and continued the
~earing to November 19,2008.
ll. $UMMARY OF THE NOVEMBER 19, 2008 CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
$taff made a presentation to provide an overview of questions and comments received to date and
$taffresponses. Following the staff presentation, there was additional public testimony from two
<;:itizens. Following the public testimony, Planning Commissioners continued the public hearing to
.tanuary 7,2009.
llI. fUBLIC COMMENT RECEIVED SINCE THE NOVEMBER 19,2008 PUBLIC HEARING
On December 2, 2008, staff met with representatives of the South King County division of the Master
Builders Association. Planning Commissioners Vice-Chair Elder, Commissioner O'Neil, and
Cleari g, Grading and Tree and Vegetation Retention Proposed Code Amendment
Planni g Commission Memorandum
Meeting Date: November 19,2008
Page 1
ouncilmember Duclos were also in attendance. During this meeting, the Master Builders handed out
memorandum (enclosed) with specific comments on the draft code and also led a discussion related
o these comments and some of the concerns they have with the first draft of the proposed code
mendments. Some of these concerns include: development standards for properties with slopes
eater than 15%; limitations on engineered slope, retaining wall heights, and bonding requirement of
ee years for tree maintenance. There were some aspects of the proposed code amendments that the
aster Builders did support. For example, the removal of prohibition of mass grading and the option
or fee-in lieu payment for required replacement trees.
<Pn December 17, 2008, staff received a memorandum (enclosed) from Mike Behn and Paul Lymberis
qf Quadrant Homes. The memorandum echoes many of the comments provided in the Master
uilders memorandum along with some additional observations. Staff is reviewing these comments as
e prepare the second draft of proposed code amendments.
IV.
taffhas distributed a second draft of the code amendments to interested parties for further review
d comment. Any comments received on the second draft will be considered for possible further
finements of the draft code amendments prior to distribution to the Planning Commission January
1,2009, continuation of the public hearing. Interested parties have been advised of the January 7,
4009, hearing date as well as the recommended continuation of the hearing to January 21 st to allow
tpr consideration of comments received on the second draft.
!
I
I
!
*EXT STEPS .
~ince staff is working on revisions to the proposed the code amendments and has distributed a second
qraft for review and comment by interested parties, staff recommends that the public hearing be
cpntinued to January 21, 2009 to allow for consideration of comments received on the second draft
for possible further refinements to the draft code.
sures
ovember 18, 2008, memorandum from Jon Nelson of David Evans and Associates on behalf of the
aster Builders Association (talking points for December 2nd meeting with the Master Builders).
2. ~emorandum from Mike Behn and Paul Lymberis of Quadrant Homes received December 17,2008.
K:\2008 ode Amendments\Trees, Vegetation, & Grading\Planning Commission\OI0709 Public Hearing\OI0709 memorandum to Planning
Commis ion.doc
Clearin , Grading and Tree and Vegetation Retention Proposed Code Amendment
Plannin Commission Memorandum
Meeting Date: November 19, 2008
Page 2
.
,
I
Pro)sed Federal Way Grading ordinance -thoughts Nov. 18, 2008
I . Jon Nelson
. ,
4a.1 ~b.2 - 14: Requires trees be "surveyed" on adjoining property. Surveyed can mean
locati g by a survey crew with instrumenta. tion or a visual accounting. This section should make
.allow. nces for those occasions where entry to adjoining property is not possible.
6.b.1 i. - 15: Rediness to proceed with construction. Obtaining permits for elements outside the
City' jurisdiction (e.g. Lakehaven) SHOULD NOT be a prerequisite to allowing construction to
proc ed. I think this is also contrary to case law. Bob Johns would know. .
8.b -16: Nature of fill materials: This definition would seem to preclude the use topsoil in non-
struc~ural areas ofa site. Should be amended. It's more eco-friendly to disp<?se of materials on- '
site r,ther than truck them off to some distant site. ,
,
10.a 16: Aesthetics: This section seems overly broad and potentially reaches to include all
vege ation into the "aesthetic character" of the city and therefore require preservation "to the
maxi um extent possible". This last phrase seems impossible to measure and enforce in a
predi table and uniform manner across the city.
17: Maximum slopes: Nearly every jurisdiction allows 2:1 slopes based on years and
of experience. What is the unique feature that makes 3: 1 slopes necessary in the city?
7: Exemptions: Man-made slopes should be exempted from the requirements of this
secti n. The most obvious example would be road cutlfill slopes that may encroach onto a
prop rty. In addition to exempting minimum areas of slopes over 15%, there should also be an
exe ption for height. E.g. areas with a vertical relief less than 10' should be exempt.
16.d. - 17 & 18: Lot size averaging: . Although the text allows for smaller lots on flatter
porti ns of the site, chances are good that an entire' site will be over 15% slope and subject to
thes rules. Since Table 16.1 requires minimum lot sizes 1.5 times the minimum allowed,
wher will the "smaller lots" actually be allowed? Seems to me that this will result in a density
redu tion throughout the city that may result in inadequate stock to meet GMA requirements.
16.d. -18: Cluster development: The text encourages the use of cluster provisions;"however,
it do sn't seem practical given the minimum lot sizes imposed by Table 16.1. Again, assuming
an e tire site is over 15%.
17 - 8: Rockeries: The maximum heights of 4' for residential and 6' for commercial and
multi mily are too low. I would suggest a maximum of 8' in both instances with higher walls
allow d at the discretion of the city with some guidelines. My reasoning here is if you consider a
60' w de lot fronting a 15% road, the grade change from the uphill to the downhill side of the lot
is 9'. In some cases, we could split the difference with rockeries of 4.5-5' tall, but in others, one
rOCklry would be required. .
17.a. - 19: Retaining wall materials: If the restrictions apply to city projects, they may find
incre sed costs by limiting the palette of options. Have they considered?
18 - 9: Tree retention: In general, costs for replanting to meet the numerical requirements will
add 1000+ per lot. Perhaps an ordinance that retains a percentage of existing trees would be
bette than a strict 25 trees or 30 tree credits per acre.
,
.
Tabl 19.2 - 20: I would suggest that the city adds a minimum size for replacement material at
the ti e of planting. As written, I think I can plant a seed as long as it meets the "at maturity"
requi ements. They should also give more credits to evergreen trees to avoid too many
repla ement deciduous trees. Deciduous have larger canopies at maturity, therefore the natural
tend ncy will be to plant more deciduous than evergreen..
I
21.-~1: Tree protection: No disturbance zones should be specified by an arborist, they are
often Inot symmetrical. Other items in .this section should be subject to modification based on an
arbor st's report/recommendation.
24 - 2: Forest Practices: This section should exempt tree cutting less than some minimal
amount (1000 board feet say) AND clearing done in conjunction with another permit. There are
c1eari g restrictions in this section that conflict with other sections of the proposed code.
33b 27: Bonding requirements: Performance and maintenance bonds are required for 3 years
altho gh the text does not specify the starting date. Since both bonds are in force for 3 years
and t e same amount, it seems one would suffice. There also needs to be a mechanism to
pass n the maintenance responsibility to the homeowner. I can't see a builder/developer
wishi g to have responsibility over someone's private property since most trees will be on lots.
This ould get into rights of entry, liability issues, etc.
36 - 28: Table 41.1: Suggests marketable value be determined by an arborist. My arborist tells
me h and most arborists are not qualified to assess "marketable value". A logger or timber
cruis r would be a better source of this information.
F deral Way City Code
C earing/Grading and Tree Retention Code Amendments - Comments
ike Behn and Paul Lymberis/Quadrant Homes
1 /17/08
S c 22-XXX3(b)(1)(ii) - Should clarify the definition of "site development work." It's
n t clear exactly what needs to be completed within 12 months. Does site development
i clude homebuilding? Landscaping of home sites? We recommend that the definition not
i clude homebuilding and the landscaping of home sites, but only relate to land
d~velopment activities Twelve months is tight to complete a project through
h~mebuilding for any project requiring a full subdivision. This is particularly true for
bf' ilders who only pre-sell homes. Also, the 12 month timeframe doesn't provide
fl xibility for planting in the wet season, which would maximize survival rates.
S c 22-XXX3(b)(l)(iii) - Related to the comment above, ifnot completing homebuilding
~ithin 12 months triggers interim landscaping measures, that could be problematic.
IItterim landscaping on vacant lots, aside from basic erosion control, is wasteful. We
~ould also recommend flexibility in the timing of street tree planting. The street trees can
tfe a real beating during homebuilding, especially in small lot developments.
I
1c 22-XXX5(a)(4) - For greater flexibility, it would be better to have a clause that said
" he proposed activity meets or exceeds the intent of the code" rather than the narrower
t . eshold of "no reasonable use with less impacts." Just because one alternative has
m-eater impacts than another, it does not necessarily mean that the higher impact
a'ternative does not meet the standards or intent of the code.
S c 22-XXX9(a) - The phrase "minimizing disturbance/compaction of native soils
e cept as needed for building purposes" seems open to overly-narrow interpretation. The
b nefits of a balanced site should not be underrepresented in the code, including less
c nstruction traffic, less dirt tracked offsite into storm systems, and less energy used in
h uling and disposing of soil. In the code, there explicitly should be the ability to weigh
t ese benefits against a larger disturbance footprint for the purposes of soil management.
S ils management should be included within the term "building purpose" such that this is
c nsistently interpreted in future years.
I
SFc 22- XX 1 O( a) - It should be made clearer that landscape characteristics are to be
preserved to the maximum extent possible within the context of the development
ptoposal. Otherwise "maximum extent possible" could imply these features to be de facto
cptical areas that can not be touched. Perhaps this could be addressed by changing
"fhall" to "should."
I
SI c 22-XX10(a)(3) - In order to balance earthwork quantities in most cases projects are
p ased to reduce construction costs. Forcing developers to segment clearing and grading
a tivities between phases will not help achieve the City's intent to create a harmonious
p oject and reduce walls. One way to achieve both the City's and developers goals here
ould be to insert a provision within the code that states all landscaping and tree
r~tentionlmitigation requirements must be met in all phases where clearing and grading
e to occur in addition to seeding the site. This in turn will indirectly force developers to
1
I
~deral Way City Code
learing/Grading and Tree Retention Code Amendments - Comments
ike Behn and Paul LymberislQuadrant Homes
Ifl17108
!
I
rqvegetate a cleared site thus maintaining its aesthetics until it can be built upon at a later
d~te and time.
i:c 22-XX10(a)(5) - This statement is confusing. What is the connection between mass
ading and flat lots? The purpose of any grading exercise is to produce flat lots. Mass
ading has more to do with efficient use of labor and resources, as well as balancing the
ciIt and fill quantities of a site, which shouldn't be precluded.
i
I
S~c 22-XXlO(a)(6) - Delete "sites with" so it just says "development on slopes of 15%
of greater...." The way it is written, it sounds as though if your site has a 15% slope on it
sfmewhere, then your entire site is subject to FWCC 22-XX16.
,
2~- XX15(b) - A portion of the new code seeks to reduce the use of walls. Limiting
gfaded slopes to 3: 1 will actually increase the use of walls. Provisions to code should be
a~ded that still allow 2: 1 graded slopes if approved by a geotech. Limiting 2: 1 slopes to
t~e interior of a property may also help mitigate aesthetic effects on neighboring
properties.
Jec 22-XX16(a) - Same comment as above; it needs to be clear you only mean
~evelopment on the actual slopes themselves.
~ec 22-XX16(d)(3)(iv) - It's unclear what benefit increasing the rear yards to 20'
*comPlishes. This is four times the typical rear yard setback and only increases the
otprint of development. If flat rear yard areas need to be preserved, then it should only
e the amount provided for by the rear yard setback.
f,c 22-XX16(d)(4) - Maintaining a 20' setback for garages while reducing front yards
s tbacks up to 10' does not help with the intent of this provision, especially on small lot
rojects that have narrower homes. (Narrow homes with garages setback result in a
'ihowling alley" effect, with a long strip of awkward living area adjacent to the garage).
I}evising this item to reducing the garage setback to 5' more than the approved front yard
s tback would meet the intent of this provision and aid in home design.
able 22-XX16.1 - This table does not seem to take into account small lot development
rojects if the minimum lot size allowed is 5,000 sf for 0 - 15% slopes. How will those
rojects be treated? Also, for 15% - 40% slopes, would the minimum lot size for small lot
evelopments be 150% as allowed under the small lot development code or as dictated by
t e underlying zone? We recommend that the small lot development code should rule,
therwise extremely large lots would be created that would be out of context with the rest
f the development.
2-XX17(a)(1)(i) - Walls greater than 4' should be allowed if the wall can properly be
creened from public R/W or neighboring properties.
2
F deral Way City Code
learing/Grading and Tree Retention Code Amendments - Comments
ike Behn and Paul LymberislQuadrant Homes
1 117108
S~c 22-XX17(a)(l)(iii) - A standard 10 foot setback between the rear ofa building and a
r~taining wall seems arbitrary. If safety is the concern, no more than l' in setback for
eyery l' in height of a cut wall is needed. Setbacks for a fill wall should be determined by
t~e angle of influence for the footings. If the intent is to preserve minimum rear yard
s~ace for homeowners, then 5' should be the standard, just like the typical rear yard
s~tback.
!
~!ec 22-XX18(a)(2) and (3) - It seems unusual that a new development could be required
t plant more trees on a site than were there naturally. The environmental conditions may
t be suitable for substantial tree growth for that site if few are currently there. Perhaps
t . e minimum tree density requirements could have some flexibility in them that take into
a~count the number or density of existing trees. Sites with naturally fewer trees would
~ave lower density requirements than forested sites.
~ec 22-XX18(d) - It would be nice ifthe Minimum Tree Density Table included
~rovisions stating larger caliper trees planted would count as more credits. This would
~ssist with tight sites where there is not a lot of room to plant trees. In return the City
~ould be benefited by receiving a mature tree canopy sooner.
i
$ec 22-1563(b) - Irrigation should not be required. This works against the intent of
$couraging native and drought-tolerant plants (22-1561(10)) and is not appropriate from
a water conservation perspective. The developer is already required to bond for a certain
Eival rate, so the developer should be allowed to achieve that rate in their own manner.
lanting native and drought-tolerant plants in the wet season can often give vegetation
t e start needed to survive a summer without irrigation. Hand watering is another option.
lthough irrigation can improve the survival rate of some species planted during certain
t mes ofthe year, it should be an optional element.
3
Adult Family Homes, Social Service Transitional Housing, Day
Care, and Home Occupation Code Amendments
Exhibit G
Minor Corrections To
. Exhibit A, Definitions
Exhibit B, Supplementary Regulations
Exhibit F, Section 22-810 (CC-F)
EXHIBIT A
Ad It Family Homes, Family Day Care, Commercial Day Care, Social Service
ransitional Housing, Home Occupations, and Other Text Amendments
(City File Nos. 08-105196-00-UP & 08-1 051 97-00-SE)
(Draft Date 12-8-08, Amended 12-17-08)
I
I. Proposed Amendments to FWCC Chapter 22, Article I, "Definitions"
,
,
I Adult family home means a residential home for which a person is licensed to provide personal
c . re s ecial care, room, and board to more than one, but not more than six, adults who are not related
b blood or mania e to the erson or ersons rovidin J the services. The number of residents in an
a ult famil home ma be no more than the total of the residents bein rovided services lus a
f ..jJ.yJbat i:Q..911.!g_~_~at least one seryice nrovider. AllY ~imitation on the number of residents resulting
ftpm this definition shall not be applied to the extent it would prevent the city from making
rqasonable accommodations to disabled persons in order to afford such persons equal opportunity to
u~e and enioy a dwelling as required by the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, 42 USC
.l~04(f)(3)(b). This definition shall not be applied to the extent that would cause a residential structure
o . cu ied b ersons with handica s as defined in the Federal Fair Housin Amendments Act of
1. 88, to be treated differently than a similar residential structure occupied by other related or
ul1related individuals. See FWCC 22-984 05.
I
i Class! heme eeouptltie1'l meaflS those heme businesses that qualify as heme eeeupatioos l:lfl.der
t~s zoning ehapter, exeef>t family eaild eare homes.
l CItls. II hame 800"1"'1;" me... 1Il.,. family .hild.... Ii_ that 'I\lllliry 1lIIdcr FWCC 22
I
! Day care facility, commercial means the temporary, nonresidential care of persons in a resideaee
o~ other struetui'e on a recurring basis. See FWCC Article XI. District Regulations.
!
i Demcstic ','iokncc shchcrs meaflS housiRg for adult women or men afla their dependent ehilaren,
I
if~y, who are vietims of domestie vieleaee pClfletrated by the spouse, domcstic partBer or
Essential public facility is any facility or conveyance that whieh has the folle',ving attributes:
(1) It-is Is typically difficult to site due to unusual site requirements and/or significant public
otoSitiOn;
(2) It-is Is a necessary component of a system, network., or program which provides a public
se . ce or good;
! (3) It-is Is owned or operated by a unit of local or state government, ~ private or nonprofit
or anization under contract with a unit of government or receiving government funding, or private
fi s subject to a public service obligation; and
(4) It meets a general andler specifie category for faeility types or individual faeilities listed
Meets the following definitions of either a Class I aH6 or a Class II essential public faeilities
fdilitv:
i
,
I
I
I
Draft T xt Amendments to Adult Family Homes, Family Day Care, Commercial Day Care, and others
Draft D te ] 2/08/08
Page 1
a. Class I facilities are those facilities: Faeilities of a county, regional or state-wide
n ture. Those essential publio facilities intended to serve a population base that extends significantly
I
b~yond the boundaries of the city. Class I facilities, and whioh may include several local jurisdictions
ota significant share of the Puget Sound regional population. SMeh faeilities and may include, but are
n t limited to, the following:
I
i 1. State or regional education facilities (except minor branch facilities). including:,:,
i-:~RresearCh facilitiest~ fh Yyniversity branch campusest~ Hi-: and bfommunity colleges,:,;
2. State or regional transportation facilities~. including:.,.+. blight and/or standard rail
li est~ fh GQommuter terminalst~ Hi-: +!ransit centerst.>-Ph and PQark-and ride lots in residential zones,:,;
i 3. State or regional correctional facilities,:,; .
i 4. Solid waste handling facilities (large scale). including:. i-: +!ransfer stations and t
iff Rrecycling center~,:,;
5. Sewage treatment plants,:,;
6. Power plants;
b. Class II facilities are those facilities: Faeilities of a local nature. Those esseffiial
pjJblie faeilities that are intended to meet the service needs ofthe local community. In many eases
qlass I1leeal facilities are typically characterized by providing some type of in-patient care,
a~sistance, or monitoring. Suoh faeilities and may include, but are not limited to, the following:
! 1. Substance abuse facilities,:,,;,
2. Mental health facilities,:,,;,
3. Group homes/special needs housing,:,,;,
4. Local schools. including:.,.+. :g~lementary schoolg~ fh Mmiddle schoolg. and Hi-:
~igh school~,:,;
I 5. Social service transitional housing. including:.,.+. I;>gomestic violence shelterg~ fh
1homeless shelterg. and Hi-: Wwork-release.
I Family ehiki day care heme means a business regularly providing care during part ofthe 24 hour
d~y to 12 or fewer ehilcken persons, including children and/or adults. and the children. if applicable.
:!l~:.~ay care provider, in the family abode of the person or persons under whose direct care the
. those receiving care are placed. Family day care includes family day care homes for children
a~ defined by RCW 35.63.170 and in home day care for adults. See FWCC 22-980.
i
i
I Group homes type II means housing for juveniles under the jurisdiction of the criminal justice
s;' stem. Sueh groups inelude This definition includes housing for state-licensed group care homes or
h lfway homes for juveniles which provide residence in lieu of sentencing or incarceration, halfway
h uses providing residence to juveniles needing correction, or halfway homes for those selected to
p rticipate in state-operated work release and pre-release programs: but excludes full-time detention
f: cilities. An limitation on the number of residents resultin from this definition shall not be a lied
t the extent it would revent the ci from makin reasonable accommodations to disabled ersons in
o der to afford such ersons e ualo ortuni to use and en'o a dwellin as re uired b the Fair
ousin Amendments Act of 1988 42 USC 3604 3 . This definition shall not be a lied to the
e tent that would cause a residential structure occu ied b ersons with handica s as defined in the
:tI deral fair housin amendments act of 1988 to be treated differentl than a similar residential
s cture occu ied b other related or unrelated individuals. Group homes are divided inte the
: See FWCC 22-978 and FWCC Article XI. District Regulations.
The direotor of oommunity develo13meFlt serv4ees shall have the diseretion to olassify a group
. ... . .
Group homes type II .^..: Maximum number of 12 residents inoll:lding residoot staff.
Draft ext Amendments to Adult Family Homes, Family Day Care, Commercial Day Care, and others
Draft ate 12/08/08
Page 2
Gi-oup homes t)'fJe II B: Thirteen or mere resiGems iRelading residemial staff. Maximum
. .
The limitation on the ffilfFlber of residents iR a greup home type II shall not be applied if it
" ...
. Group homes type III means housing for adults that have been convicted of a violent crime
a. ainst a person or property, ef have been convicted of a crime against a person with a sexual
otivation, or have been convicted or charged as a sexual or assaultive violent predator. +hese This
c te 0 includes housin for individuals are under the jurisdiction of the criminal justice system~~
i dividuals who have entered a pre- or post-charging diversion program, or . Suoh groaps involve
i dividuals selected to participate in state-operated work/training release and pre-release programs or
s~ilar programs; but excludes. SueR eategery does not inelude full-time detention facilities.
I
i Social service transitional housing means facilities other than offiees and group homes as aefiRea
iq. this ehapter, operatea by a nonprofit soeial serv-iee agefley, lieensed as required by the state,
ptoviding temporary and transitional housing to individuals on an as-needed basis, operated by a
nbnprofit social service agency, licensed as required by the state, including, but not limited to,
I
e~ergency shelters, homeless shelters, domestic violence shelters, and other such crisis intervention
f~cilities; but excluding offices and group homes as defined in this chapter. Any limitation on the
~fmber of residents in social service transitional housing shall not be applied if it prohibits the city
ITpm making reasonable accommodations to disabled persons in order to afford such persons equal
o ortuni to use and en' 0 a dwellin as re uired b the federal fair housin amendments act of 1988
4 USC 3604 3 b. This definition shall not be a lied to the extent that would cause a residential
s cture occu ied b ersons with handica s as defined in the federal fair housin amendments act of
1 88 to be treated differentl than a similar residential structure occu ied b other related or unrelated
i dividuals. This elassifieation ineludes do:mestie ',ioleFlee shekel'S as defined herein, exeept that sueR
. . .
" "
(1) T)lle .^..: Maximum Ramber ef residents to be oonsistent witR the maxiHHHTl Rl:HBber of
(2) T)lle B: All soeial servioe transitional housing not meeting the definition of "T)lle .\,"
. . .
~~ents Aet of 1988, 12 USC 3601(f)(3)(b). See FWCC 22-979 and FWCC Article XI. District
R latIOns.
i Special needs housing means housing not specifically defined by this chapter, and which will be
p~ocessed under the classification most closely related to the proposed use, as determined by the
dtector of eommunity aevelopment serviees.
K:12008 Code Amendments\Home Oc & Adult FamilylPlanning Commission\121708 Public Hearing\Exhibit A Definitions.doc
Draft xt Amendments to Adult Family Homes, Family Day Care, Commercial Day Care, and others
Draft ate 12/08/08
Page 3
EXHIBIT B
Ad
It Family Homes, Family Day Care, Commercial Day Care, Social Service
ransitional Housing, Home Occupations, and Other Text Amendments
(City File Nos. 08-105196-00-UP & 08-105197-00-SE)
(Draft Date l2~8-08, amended 12-17-08)
I
pro~sed Amendments to FWCC Chapter 22, Article XIll, "Snpplementary"
2.t-978 Group homes.
I A group home type II proposing to serve iuveniles convicted of the offenses listed under grOUp
h9me type III must be approved under process I to be treated as a group home type II and not a grOUP
h9me type III. The maximum number of residents permitted in a group home will be determined on a
9.fse by case basis through the applicable review process.
!
Only those interior alterations customary to residential use shall be made.
Draft cxt Amendments to Adult Family Homes, Family Day Care, Commercial Day Care, and others
Draft ate 12/08/08
Page 1
2 -980.5 Adult famil homes.
! Adult family homes are residential uses that are permitted in any zoning district where residential
!!fes are permitted provided that they meet all of the following criteria:
i (1) The use must be operated as part of a principal residential use.
i (2) The use must be licensed by the state. if required.
(3) All city licensing. zoning. building. housing. and fire regulations applicable to the
derl in e ofhousin in which the use exists i.e. sin le famil residence multifamil residence
e c. must be met.
. (4) Lot size. building size. setbacks. and lot coverage must conform to those applicable to the
z{ming district of the subiect property. If the lot or structure is legally nonconforming. the adult family
hbme may be approved through process III review.
i (5) No more than two persons who are not residents of the dwelling unit may be employed or
ork in the adult famil home at an one time.
, (6) One off-street parking space must be provided for each nonresident employee or worker
TIjl addition to the spa~es reQuir~d by the zoning district for the residential use.. .,
! (7) No extenor alteratIOns are allowed to accommodate the adult farmly home. mcludmg
~
! (8) Only those interior alterations customary to residential use shall be made.
I
!
.1.
I
I
I
I
2~-1 068 Glass-! hHome occupation.
I ~ ill A Glass-! home occupation is permitted if it meets all of the following requirements:
i tB W The dwelling unit in which the business is located must be the primary residence of the
~siness owner.
i (Q}1t The business is must be carried on exelusively by a family memberW who
r sides in the dwelling unitt~
~ W It-has The use must have no outside storage, exterior indication.. or outside activityt~
W @ It uses no The use must not involve those heavy equipment, power tools.. or power
s urces which are not common to a resiclenee; residential use.
(41 W It has no piekup 0f delivery by eommereial 'lehieles. The use must not involve any
icku s or deliveries b commercial vehicles over 26 000 ounds oss vehicle wei ht ratin GVWR
a defined in RCW 46.25.010.
I t$) illlkiees The use must not include more than four persons per day coming to the subject
~! operty for goods or serviceg.~~
tat {g} It ereates no The use must not create any noise, dust, glare, vibration, odor, smoke.. or
ther impact adverse to a residential area.
I (b) .^~ Class I (2) A home occupation which does not meet the requirements of subsection W ill
9f this section may be approved using process Ill, if:
i tB W It will not harm the character of the surrounding neighborhood;
I
Draft ext Amendments to Adult Family Homes, Family Day Care, Commercial Day Care, and others
Draft ate 12/08/08
Page 2
~ill It will not include outdoor storage aaafor operation ofbuiIaiRg materials, machinery,
c mmercial vehicles, building materials. or tools tflat which will be visible or audible from or have an
e fect on other properties; and
~ W It does not create a condition which injures or endangers the comfort, repose, health..
o safety of persons.
i
~~ 1069 Class II hame occupatic'JR. This section is rescinded and relocated with amendments to
n w FWCC Section 22-980 "Famil Da Care."
"^.. family child eare home, an in home ehild care hame oeelipatiaR, is permitted if it meets aU af
. .
(1) The use must be aperated as part of a principal residential lise afthe slibject preperty by a
r~sident of the subject preperty.
! (2) This use must be lieensed by the State Department of Seeial and Health Serviees
! (3) Lot size, bllildffig size, setbacks, and let co';erage cORferm to those applicable to the zooing
tl;l==~==e:::g~=:;:.=m:~~:=~~ IlholRc
i (5) ORe off street parking space is previded fer each BafH'esident employee iR additien ta the
~aces required by the zaRing district fer the residential lise. The residential drive'lt'ay is aeeeptaele
f,r this plil'pose.
=E;;~~~~E:!=~-=.~~=:=:-
I (7) :m. residential zones, Be e~(terior alterations are allO'.ved to aceemmedate the Class II home
o~cupation, ineluding signage. Only those interier alterati01'is customary te residential \:lse shall be
~
i (8) The applicant shall provide documentatien that r-esideBts living immediately adjaceat to the
~~oposal have been ~otifie~ o.f th~ prap~sal or th~ applicaBt may provide stamp~d aB~ ader-essed
(9) In addition ta satisfying cooditioos (1) threugh (8) afthis sectiaH, a family child care home
. .
a. HetH' of operatioo and maximum number of attefldees may be limited by the eity ta reduee
b. A si" foot sight obseuring fence er vegetatien may be required by the city if it is
:F=~~:~~:'::::'::-::tfte,,;~=;:e.=~
i
!
!
I
I
K:\200~ Code Amendments\Home Oc & Adult Family\Planning Commission\121708 Public Hearing\Exhibit B Supplementary Regulations.doc
!
I
Draft text Amendments to Adult Family Homes, Family Day Care, Commercial Day Care, and others
Draft rate 12/08/08
Page 3
-
00
=
I
r-
....
I
N
....
"Cl
II)
"Cl
=
II)
8
-<
'-"
f>;.o
Eo<
....
=
~
r..:l
-
.c;;
..s::
V}
V}
11)
V}
;::l
g
.~
o
-
~
= 11)
ac:E5
I
N
N
r,l
II)
8
Q
..s::
c..
;::l
Q
l.
C
i:i
.9
-
()
11)
V}
i.~
loS
.S
'€
..a
-
11)
V}
,V}
11)
8
"t:l
=
cu
V}
=
o
..0
cu
I~
i 11)
oS
.9
-
()
.g,
.g
V}
11)
id
.0
I~
10
'U
1--
S
cu
<!:::
.....
11)
~
11)
()
.€
()
.s
oS
"t:l
11)
:t::
.~
8
11)
..c
Eo<
~
==
U
r..:l
Z
~
r..:l en
rJ:J 5
;:;;J 1==
j
::::>
o
~
~~
Z.
oU
NU
...
<8
"'
"'
o
...
g
~
::c
f-;
S~OOS liUl'!llld
p:u !nb~'M
II)
"'
::I
'0
<=
t;:::
"'
.sE~
~ E ~
0._ '0
~.5 ~
al ::E .S
~ ~
~
:unplUlS
}O lqli!~H
(q:l1l~) ~P!S
~
en
~
ti::
en
Z
o
1==
u
~
Q
~Z!S Wl
SS~:)Qld A\~!M'M
p:u!nb~'M
S!l.lOUV'1I1~:nI
rJ:J
r..:l
Eo<
o
Z
~
~
rJ:J
Z
o
....
~
~
~
~
....
U
~
~
rJ:J
S r== 1S ~ ~_Q)
~ ~ 6 '5] ~ ~ ~~ ~j
[:: . .~ .s €' .., ~ ~ 6 ~.~.s 12 ~ ~ S
~ _.~ ~~ .2'3 ~ ~ e !~.g~ o~
~ fi3 lj 5 a b g" ::s a 'S ~.s 50 B ~ ~-
::s e~ ;o~ ~~ ~ fr g Q)JQ)'~
~ E ~":': 0;6 q '" ... -5i3~t 1f~
o ~ .s .. - -:p - ~ 6"" E <= .c: .-..,
"'0 :> ..... .. ~ 'g .~ 0 ':p .,LJ t .. '0 i> <=
..,0 t! "''' - U ..e'O..;.... ~~
~ ;.,~ ~Q) sfr e ~ a~~fr~~ ~~
'5 ~... 8 -5 '" tIJ >< lU p. "i) 'S ~ - "0 .~ ";
; tlJd Q)...~ =cu '~.5 ~~g8B~ u.-
~ ~ 5 ... 0 - ..s (:l..... Q) t... _ s ._ ~ ~
] ~Jj ~ ~.s ~~.~ ~ ~]~8.~~~"E"5
~!i6 ~0.g8....,"8 '0 e 0~-a..,g"'vi8.~
~ ~o t..._ 8-5 tIJ "0 "OQ)>..s~"OQ)~u
"0"'0 Q) otIJ 00) tIJ "5 Q)~O~=Q)'.t:%bOO
~ .5 ~ ~ '" e ..e e .2 0 ~ ~ ti.t).~.o;s ~ ...
... 00'"0 ~ '0 '"0] ~ ~ eo 12 "Elbll ~ .0 '" Q.. "'C ;::: 0 '-5 ~
II)"~'" ::1<=8- -.. ..,-5....,b~. ~
,LJC ~~o..o .., "'~...iit-. ..
e'~::s ~tlJo.o~~a~~ ~ a ::S~oQ)=db~=
::I oj:; ..8 l! .., i' - .... - Q.. .., ~ .c: ~ .;; ..s e '" bIl!:!
~oQ)~ ~~!~e~-~~ ~ ~ ~.2;e~~~~~
.., ':! ,LJ '0 0 i: 5 '::.8 .., ~ .... "'..... Q..::O '" "'.c: ~ ..,,LJ 2
~ .~ ~: <>.., o.c: "';,,LJ co,LJ :.s 0 [:: ::I 1il;; :; ~ g ~ ;:::::
<= ,g <;: .8_ > -5;=: ~ g'o s .., ~ .., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;g ~ 6"~
~-_ ~,O~a~_$5~ > ~ '" .c:__a::l U
~~~~ _- - 0 ~ ~~~~~~~~~o
<= ~ ~~~;g 1il..8 ~ ....... .......-5-.c: <= bIl".c:
11)"''''6 ",c-~ ::I .., ~..~ ~o.eo;c.>..~<=.....iit
"0 ~ I:: 0 .a -5 a.E ~ g. e = '{:: _ ~ ~ :s r:::E ~ '+:i 's. 0 '0
.~ 5 ~ E g a1 ,>'" Q.. bO ~ 0 ~ tA'.~ ~ ,~r:: - 'a ~'~..o ~ 0 r::
... .., 0 l:: "" o.....::.S 0 6h .. '" 1:._ - <= 0 i3"" ..-.. ~'I: ..
.....o~~E :j,,:,:oo<=Q..o"''Oa 8~~i3-5i~~8~8~..8~
.., - - 11).., 0~.c:~'~"~5-~~"'=-P_
~ .... ........ .:fi ';: ..0. ~ ?- ~ ~ .. l-o - (l. $:; --"'4 ~ ~ !:::! .." ~
..,i~6 -- -~-- Q..'~...Q.. S<= ::I.c:~="~
~_'O<= 'o~,LJ",_..,Ot iitooS1il..,8~~c.>~0..,0
5 i3 a E '" t ",I ?i'.s -5 ?i' p. .., == .... ~ ::I.::: '" ~.!! 1ill! C'o -5 ~
<=~~~ ~-5o~:S~:~ i<8~~~1ie]~~.ste
50<=0 ~ .c:s'O.c:s .....,~,o~~"'::I>""~~'O..,
::I ~ !l!... ." '0 !a- <I:l a ~ <l::'~ '0 -5 ~ .., Q.. - 8.. ~ .=; .;g ~ a 3 a
e~50 ~~~ bOe -5 ~6Q..~8~o=~~~~~~
~~~~ ~~~d~od.... ~'Os~~'oag~'O$~81~
E '0 0 s:: '-.i>!" 8 ::I <I:l 0 ,LJ e. 1ill! a -5 0 l! 5 i3 ~ l:'n!::i ~ ~ ~
~~~~ ~'~~q~~~~ ~~~~ '-~eE~~~Q..~u
~~~a~~~.--~._-~ ~~~-5~]~dtB~..oo~~
;6~aB~B~~:S~~~ ~~'-~o~'-~=S>i~~~
<=!:: ..,.::;.. .-._ .. .~ .... .. '0 bIl 1; -s: <=;=:.; -s: 0 is' '" 0 .~,LJ 0-5
'a~e~~~~=~~~~~ .5..o~~~>~~Q~~~~~
c~a~l-or::~~====d ~~o~._~o ~O~~~S
B~$~063~~~0~d~ ",~~~~~~~~~-eeg~
"'<=-->!j -"''0- '0<= .... <=-- <=,,-"5 .~..,<=
'O~~~~~~~8'~8~d~~8,5~8b5og~~~~
~ ..,._ 0 0 ...<;: ,:; .!:l c.> <= ::1._ l:: . >< - 0 .. ><.- 0'- .. .- 5h _os
'~~g~e~~aB~ES~Gb+~~~~:~~~'~~Oet
l~e~.~~~~~~"~~0;.c:~iF:iF:F:F:.6.Ei3a~Q..
~~l!l!~l!l!w~~"'~6~l!6h~<=~~~l!i~05l!~a
~ CIJ E-o E-o ~ E-o E-o cU C'~ ~ t:!-:-2 ~ E-o ~ C g t:!, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z .g ~ ~ i)
F:..g oi..ci ~ u ~ ",I ,g ~ ~ ~..ci Q.. ~ ...;J'I: ~ ~I 6- oriI i3 g
I""; 1il -5 .;; <8 .!l! ~ ~ .S 2 rli ~ a~ e..f gp 8
'0>'
~"b .~
.- ~ '"
Eu$
8 .. ..,
06~
.., bIl6
bO.5 '':=
e~ ~
~~~
.. ,LJ ..,
...,
<::: >
o
lI),LJ
"'..
8
o
~ ~I
Jl:l:
Jll~'M
d]
o ~I
<::::::1:
o ~
'0
d ~~I
~Jl~
lUUli/
..,
5
z
)$
'"
~ i:dl
~EIl
lf~
..,
~
f;;;J
rJ)
;;J
Q..'"
5121
0]=
c:r
'"
'"
'"
'"
r-
~
N
N
<00
'"
1;l
li
~
bO
oS
~
Q.
]
bO
oS
~
Q.
g .g
c
o
.~
e
<S
.s
..
'"
-s
o
6
L1
c:r
1;l
-
'"
'"
~
Nc:r
N 1;l
<00 _
'" '"
~..E
.~ '7
~~
~':
:.8 ~
.~~
-S [;J
'0>>
8~
~.g.
~e
~ ~
J:l:.a
~gj,
~ 12
'" '"
'Iii 'B
~~
.. ..
00
~~
.S
'0 ,:,
.8 ~
.1: .",
~ ~
~ ~
e e
~~g::g
'0 ":''':''f'f
~~~~~
I:l I I I I
---\Q-
...Ln \0 oot""\
=~~<<'?,.
~NNNM
UlINNNN
I~
i:i
0
.~
u
(1) 00
en
en ~
:s Eo-<
0
I:: Z
.....
"€ Q
cE ~
-
(1) 00
en Z
en
(1) r-:l~ 0
-
8 z' ....
] oU ~
NU S
en
I:: c.?
0 ~
.~
<<l
1 Eo-< ~
(1) ~
I-< ....
.s = U
~
U ~
0 ~ 00
-
- z
u
.g, S
.g ~ en
en Z
8 00 0
0 ;l E=:
N :s
~
~ ::J
I "
U ~
8 ...
8 <S
'"
'"
<<l 2
<t:: '"
I-< ~
(1) ~
1:: s:lolldS 2iuPIJlld
(1) ::c
u f-o p:lJ!nb:l'M
.€
u
(1) 1;l :llnlOlUlS
oS ::> }O lqil!:lH
"0
oS l'::
<;:;
"'0 .9 Jll:l'M
~ '"
~ E 'E
'il .~ ~
"0 ::> >-
II g "0 !: "0 (qOll:l) :lp!S
~ '8 J~
~ .- :::s
(1) f-o^::;E g
.0
..... ~ ~ lUOJd
UI .....
<<l
j ..<:: i:i:
en
en en
(1) :z :lZ!S lO'l
en 0
;::3 E=:
~ ~ u SS:loOJd M:l!A:l'M
~
.~ i5 p:lJ!nb:l'M
""I ..9
c.?! .....
~I cE SNOI.L V'Iflmrn
II
Eo-< '""
rJJ
~i ~
"'" "'0
~ 00 6N vr...
g .5 .~ 5 ~ ~ ~
~ ~ rIi "'gt.g ~
E ~.~ .~~~ ~ ~.r ~ ~
o .. ~ vi ..... .r:J Q) c:: . ...... $:: Q,) d ~
...... ~ . aJ ...... "0 1) ~ ;>-. [)..... s:: 4). .....
"0 .g ~8;g C~bI) ~ 13"O~~ g~E
a ~ "'l'::0Il 1>",.= ~ p.=0l':: ._00
.f!3 ~ ~.g .S 8".9 :9 (; e ::l bO d t)/)..g u
l':: P. ,J::>._"O l:: l'::'::;"O p. "8.s l':: .S ~^ 5
ilJ rn I tf} s::= - (1) - ..... > .......- "0 0
~ ~ ~eg ~~~ ~ .gea~ Z~~
~ .t::' C,) ~ t: .....;;> bl): ;B 0.. ..;a ~. .c
o Ued~:::S eSt Q) ~~~~ Q);~
t ~o~~~ o~ ~ Otf}~:::S ~ Q)
,.0 .g8"os::=o .4::d~ 0 .ccn..o..c t:.B'Cd
'" p...."Ol'::...s .>~>> ...,201> ~O-""
S .P.~oBg';:,2>,J::> .9l'::~p. p.z~~
~ ; ~'S 6 e E ~ ~~ ~ ~ 3 ~ c::: ~.g:g ~
..c '" "'" I:: '" ~ ~ "'" =. p. ""' a' ... l'::.,.. '"
..... uOB8.c.~O~~ ~ ~'U~ ~:::s~~
.9 8 ~ Q.)"S: U 50 e :-;: 0 lii. g" ;::s 0 .~ """ e ...
~ ~ ="0 I> ~ ~ ;:l,g"<t ... 2 1:;' '" .P 0 .g S p..S
~ ~~]tf}""""""E "0 ~Q) E~tf}q tf}U~"O
.~ .~'r;;:= "0 :5 ~:s ~ ~ (I.) ~. t 6h t - d .g ~ ~
2 g e'~ a ~ '; S I> ~ ::: :~ ~. a 0 g"8 6 "0 ~ ._~
0.. >Q)cntf}~OOd>Q) ~~~= dO~8 ~~ ~
p. 6-5~~~"O~~'" ~'a~> ~q~M ~"'~I
: uE~~oag~8 ~~u~ ~~~2 gE~~
~ ~ ~.~.~ g bB::..8 ~ ~ ~.€..2 ~:S ~ ~ g ~"3 ~ ~
'" ..cd Q,) ~ U t).5 Q,) ~..s::: Q,) d -< .;! = ~ d ~ - ~ >:a; ~
.. N !:.- "0 '" . '" ~ ~ ~ 1:: > 0 ~ l':: t; .. 0 ::>
~ ]So:gg]~;'8 :g8~<><~a.g~ 6o.]~
d ~ =' e Po ~ ~ :::: ~ Cd :-;:: t! 'rl' 3 ..2.g t5:.a ";;' ..0 ~ ~ .9-
~ B~6~d~~~~~]~Q,)~.;!.~o~~ g~~g
C E 2 S ~~ ~ 3;.5;.5 Q,) ~.["ri' 1:: ~ c 6.0 b 5 =It:'6-
'E 'Ej 50 'g Ii !;- oS 8 ~ e c ~ g? ~'S ~ 6. g oS ;g g ;g ~ ~
~ .-Q,)d~Q,)-N~Q,)b~.-~~Q,)~oE~ t)~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ 0 oS ~ _ 0 0.. 0.. d go +-> 0.. ~..s::: 6b 1- d >. d ~ .5
~ ~~~~~..s:::~~eeB~B~uo_~~ S-t5oa
"0 ~e"'l'::~l'::~p.p.~"O>>...~...g...::> "'l':::Zl'::
~ ~~d~t~~~~~..s:::-6~o'S~oo~ ~.Eo8
0'- bL) 'wM.I d ~ ~ V t) ...... 0.. ~ ~ > - - - Q,) ~ -
g ~~.5._.g~.~~6~~=db~~d~! ~~~~
._ l':: P.~~P....eN"'..c~...~..c~"O_'" .Sl'::~~
"~ ._"'0 (L)-~ Cd Pod =' ~~.~ bL)~ ft+->.5 ~"O"O CI) ~:.s.+->
~ ~~..2~PodCl)U_O~~~ oEt)Q,)~ ~~~-
~ BdCl)~~~~~~~S~CI)~+->b~~'- Q,)~CI)~
Q. d ~ e 0 Q.).'E.o t:J.,p . CI) M ~ ~ ~ _ 4.l ~ > s:: ~ ~ 0
;:l a"';:l~~~~"'=';:~I.-;a~s,J::>e ""'Ng~
~ .Vi.E E e ~ Q) d ro ~ g.~ ~ Q) ~ go 0 s:: ~ c: ~ M Q) ~
bL) Q,)Q.)"8s::~g~~.~-Q,)~~Q,)-~~~~ ~~~o
l':: ,J::> "'.- ::> 0 ~..c..c ~ OIl ~ ::> !: ~ . \9 0 ~ "'" 0
S 1;; b eBB;':: +-> .~ = ~ b ~ bL) e o:S g- C: I- 2 . go ~ ~c
! ~~~~!fi'~~d~!lllitll]8j~~
~ ~~~o~O~~~i~.g~e~~~5~~~.~.5~
~ odo~d.5~~ds::~~c~I-~~~"E~-e~~
:::: ~~.~=~.~s::=Q)o8g-"-"-.5N~~.~-s::~~.
.~ ... il 5o.~ ..c >.. 0 0 -5 ~ ::> ... S !;- 0' N i:' 0;- '" 6 11 ~ S 0'
~ p."O ~ ~ >.. +.0. '" N '" ~!: . ~ '" ~ 000 N"O '" ... -5 '" '"
c ~.~~cg~e~~o'~~ ~~oiNa~e~b~
.- (l) 0 "- .- U ~..o """ .0 E.- s:: b.O - I e,o, N 0 0 ~ 0
:;::: .",... e:;::: '" ~ ... '" "'" "0 ,;; 0 ~.- ...,2 "'" ,;; ~ ","O.~ .....
o -(:l.doC;S 00,,)"4) ....U-~~bL)O~lU~C.:::OD
~ . 1il e ... ~ ~ Jl E :s .;: t; 0 g 5 5 5 B.S '" 0.::: 0 ::l ~ ~
~6~~g~~~en~~"'Z!:~~~~en6"O~Z"8~~
~i~~~~dl~~~'g~~I~~~~~~'~~~~~~
\01 ~ Nt; 001~1.- d;..l.: -5 ~ ~..Ii O'..I;.J: "" u!; rt 0 >>l':: 01; P.d;"~
.,f; g.""'~tJ:oIicl;.:f.+ Sd~;.j< e;.j<++.:f.;..j.. 6.,g 8~ !;-~~
&
1;l
"
'"
r-
::l
M
N
""
"
1;l
i
~
~
~
""
'0
a
OIl
.5
~
""
:;
.g
=
o
"~
E
<2
.5
]
'0
U
.5
'0 :>,
" "il
.c >
'5: .""
~ ~
-8 ~
e e
~~g:::g
~t"'iMoq-~
i~~~~
=~~~~
..",\DOOM
='?'?'?'1"
_"'("'.I M N M
l'J')NNNN
"'''''
"""
~
&
1;l
"
'"
...
~
NO-
N1;l
""-
" "
,,-
rA",~
:~~
-N
-i':
.u ~
-= .
~~
'0>>
8~
".!:l
"5-
~e
SOIl
1U.S
~1
'Se
.!!l.!!l
'B'S
~-8
... ...
o 0
~~
co
9
r-
N
""
000
.n
.-
trl
...0
0
0
:z
'E
0
<:;
";l
s::
cJ.,
""
000
..;
N
,.
N
0
0
:z
~ '"
0
"0
r.: ....;
q- P;<
~ U
..;. 8.
"" ~
000 00
~ N
~ N
N '"
~ ~
en
~ 1;
0
:z ..c
-0 U
~
0 ...
..0 Ji
0;- i
";l
r-
.n =
'1::
000 ~
~
0 ::c
r- oS:!
N
...0 :<5
~ ::>
0 p.,
00
:z 0
'E r-
N
0 ~
--
'" 6
~ Ow
0 '"
";l .~
"<t
$ 0
u
~ OIl
l'::
E3- '2
r- a
000 ~
0
r- .~
.-
I
'"
~ ~
0 ...
'3
:z "0
'E <(
c(l
0 '"
g- o
~ E
";l 0
N ;;;
,..::, '"
trl ~
trl
d
trl "0
(::l l'::
000 ]
""
,. ~
0 "8
~
0 u
00
:z 0
~ 0
~
~
CITY OF
Fe1eral Way
I
DAT9:
To: I
I
I
December 31, 2008
Merle Pfeifer, Chair, ad City of Federal Way Planning Commission
FROi:
I
SUBJ~CT:
Greg F ewins, Director of Community Development Services
Margaret H. Clark, AICP, Senior Planner
Study Session - Open Space Set-Aside and Park Impact Fees
!
M!ili..tING DATE: January 7,2009
I
I. BACKGROUND
The City is in the process of studying whether a Park Impact Fee system should be adopted. This
memorandum is intended to brief the Planning Commission on the existing open space set aside
requirements of the City, introduce them to park impact fees, and solicit input on the following
policy question.
II. POLICY QUESTION
What effect will the adoption of a park impact fee have on the City's present codes related to park
dedication and open space set aside?
(i) Should all open space requirements be replaced by a park impact fee? If not, then;
(ii) How much and what type of open space should be retained on site?
III. PARK IMP ACT FEE
A park impact fee would be paid by new development to reimburse the City for the capital cost of
park-related facilities that are needed to serve new development and the people who occupy the
new development. A park impact fee cannot exceed the development's proportionate share of
"system improvements" that are reasonably related to the new development. The impact fee
amount shall be based on a formula (or other method of calculating the fee) that determines the
proportionate share. Henderson, Young, and Company has been hired by the Parks Department to
prepare a park impact fee ordinance.
Park impact fees can be used for park planning, design, and engineering, and for park land
acquisition and site improvements. These are considered "system improvements,." which are
typically outside the development and designed to provide service to service areas within the
community at large, as opposed to "project improvements," which are typically provided by the
developer on-site or adjacent to the development and designed to provide service for a particular
development project and that are necessary for the use and convenience of the occupants or users
ofthe project. Park impact fees may be collected and spent only for public facilities that are
addressed by a capital facilities plan element of an adopted comprehensive plan.
Study Session - Open Space Set-Aside, and Park Impact Fees
Page 1
IV. TYPES OF OPEN SPACE
Based on the Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Chapter 22, Article I, open space means land not
covered by buildings, roadways, parking areas, or other surfaces through which water cannot
percolate into the underlying soils. Open space can either be private or public open space and is
defined as follows:
· Private open space is open space that is normally limited to use by the occupants of a single
dwelling, building, or property.
· Public open space is open space owned by a public agency and maintained by it for the use
and enjoyment of the general public.
v. TYPES OF PARKS
Based on the City of Federal Way Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Plan, public park means a
natural or landscaped area, provided by a unit of government, to meet the active or passive
recreational needs of people. The Parks Plan includes the following five categories of parks and
open space:
· Community Parks are the primary active recreation facilities in the City, providing active
and structured recreation opportunities. Community parks have a large service area, ranging
from a two-mile radius out to the entire City if there is a unique attraction.
· Neighborhood Parks are designed primarily for non-supervised, non-organized recreation
activities. They generally range in size from two to ten acres and are intended to serve an
area of approximately one-half mile radius.
· Linear Parks and Trails are routes for non-motorized traffic (walking and biking) that
generally follow a utility or stream corridor, ravine, or some elongated feature such as public
rights-of-way.
· Community Facilities are public recreation facilities or park land owned by the City, such as
community centers, public plazas, landscaped medians, or sign areas, and the City's
maintenance yard.
· Open Spaces are public lands that are in a near natural condition, or designated for future
park or open space use. Open spaces include natural systems of forests, wetlands, and
riparian corridors.
VI. SUMMARY OF OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBDIVISIONS
· All conventional residential subdivisions (short plats and long plats) and cluster subdivisions
are required to provide open space in the amount of 15 percent of the gross land area of the
subdivision site.
· For conventional subdivisions, any combination of open space types may be used to
accomplish the total area required to be reserved as follows:!
I Open Space Category % of Gross Land Area
Us~bl~ - Are~ which have appropriate topography, soils, drainage and size to be considered for development as 10% minimum
active recreatIOn areas.
Study sfssion - Open Space Set-Aside, and Park Impact Fees Page 2
I
I
Open Space Category
Usable
Conservation
Buffer
Constrained
% of Gross Land Area
10% minimum
No maximum or minimum
2% maximum
2% maximum
· An administrative alteration of the open space category percentage requirements within the
above categories may be made by the parks director on a case-by-case basis, but in no case
shall the combination of categories total less than 15 percent.
· The parks director has the discretion to accept a fee-in-lieu payment to satisfy open space
requirements for conventional subdivisions only after consideration of the City's overall park
plan, quality, location, and service area of the open space that would otherwise be provided
within the project. The payment shall be expended in all cases within five years of collection,
unless otherwise agreed to by the developer.
· The fee- in-lieu of open space is calculated on 15 percent of the most recent assessed or
appraised value of the property.
· Any fees collected shall be utilized within the park comprehensive plan planning area that the
subject property falls within, unless the applicant by voluntary agreement directs the
expenditures of such fees in a different planning area.
· Cluster subdivisions must provide open space on site and it must be all usable, except up to
five percent can be buffer. There are no provisions for a fee-in-lieu of payment.
· Zero lot line townhouse development, cottage housing, and small lot detached subdivisions
have their own requirements and must provide the open space on site.
VII. SUMMARY OF OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR NON-SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT
1. Multi-Family Zones - A multi-family development must contain at least 400 square feet per
dwelling unit of common recreational open space usable for many activities. At least lO
percent of this required open space must be developed and maintained with children's play
equipment. There is no fee-in-lieu of open space set aside option.
aDen Space Categorv
Conse ation - Areas containing special natural or physical amenities or environmentally sensitive features, the
conse ation of which would benefit surrounding properties or the community as a whole. Such areas may include,
but ar not limited to, stands of large trees, view corridors or view points, creeks and streams, wetlands and
marsh s, ponds and lakes or areas of historical or archaeological importance. Conservation open space and usable
open s ace may be, but are not always, mutually inclusive.
Buffe - Areas which are primarily intended to provide separation between properties or between properties and
streets Buffer open space may, but does not always, contain usable open space or conservation open space.
FWC , Section 20-178 states that land divisions, except for commercial binding site plans, should provide a 10-
foot-w de Type III landscape strip along all arterial streets to shield new residences from arterial streets. See FWCC
22-15 5(c). Said landscape strip shall be provided in a separate tract to be owned and maintained by the
home ers' association and shall be credited to the buffer requirements of FWCC 20-156. Open Space and
Recre~tion.
conslined - Areas not included in any of the above categories which, due to physical characteristics, are
impra tical or unsafe for development. Such areas may include but are not limited to steep rock escarpments or
areas f unstable soils.
I
!
Study Siession - Open Space Set-Aside, and Park Impact Fees
% of Gross Land Area
No maximum or
minimum
2% maximum
2% maximum
Page 3
2. Manufactured Home Parks - Manufactured home parks in a Single-Family Residential (RS)
zone (only allowed in the RS 5.0, one unit per 5,000 square feet) and those in a Multi-Family
Residential (RM) zone must contain at least 400 square feet per dwelling unit of common
recreational open space usable for many activities. In the RM zones, at least 10 percent ofthis
required open space must be developed and maintained with children's play equipment. There
is no fee-in-lieu of open space set aside option.
3. Senior Housing - There are no open space set-aside requirements for senior housing in the RS
or RM zones and only on a case-by-case basis in the Community Business (Be), City Center-
Core (CC-C), and City Center-Frame (CC-F) zones.
4. Mixed-Use Residentia/- There are no open space set aside requirements in the Neighborhood
Business (BN) zone. In the BC and the Commercial Enterprise (CE) zones, the development
must contain at least 300 square feet per dwelling unit of common recreational open space
usable for many activities. In the CC-C and CC-F zones, the requirement is 200 square feet per
dwelling unit. Credit may be given for private spaces such as yards, patios, and balconies, as
well as common areas such as playgrounds, recreation rooms, rooftop terraces, pools, active
lobbies, and atriums in all of the commercial zones where open space must be provided.
I
I
VIIlj COMMUNITY DESIGN GUIDELINES
I
I
The Community Design Guidelines also has requirements for public on-site open space and
plazas for all development except single-family residential. However, these requirements are
related to maintaining and protecting property values and enhancing the general appearance of the
City rather than providing land for active recreational activity. No credit is given towards open
space requirements for these community design-related amenities.
IX. QUESTIONS
The following questions must be answered in order to determine how adoption of a park impact
fee would affect the City's existing open space set-aside requirements.
I. Should all open space requirements be replaced by a park impact fee?
2. If not? What type of on-site open space should be provided?
(a) Active recreation open space.
(b) Environmentally sensitive areas/conservation open space.
(c) Tot lots and/or playgrounds only for residents of the development.
(d) Private open space only-either part of a lot, balcony, patio, pool, atrium, or roof top terrace.
(e) Landscape buffers.
3. What type of credit should be given for on-site open space towards a park impact fee?
K:\2008 Code Amendments\Parks Impact Fee\Planning Commission\010709 Briefing\Discussion Staff Report. doc
Study Session - Open Space Set-Aside, and Park Impact Fees
Page 4