LUTC PKT 09-14-2009
City of Federal Way
City Council
Land Use/Transportation Committee
September 14, 2009
5:30 D.m.
City Hall
Council Chambers
MEETING AGENDA
(Electronic Version Only)
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PUBLIC COMMENT (3 minutes)
3. COMMmEE BUSINESS
Action Council
Topic Titlel Description Presenter Page or Info Date Time
A. Approval of Minutes: August 3,2009 LeMaster 2 Action N/A 5 min.
B. Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Perez 4 Action 10/6/09 30 min.
Ordinance
C. Emergency Equipment Purchase Update Roe 74 Action 10/6/09 5 min.
Consent
D. Approval to Apply for 2010-2011 Phase II Appleton 76 Action 10/6/09 5 min.
Stormwater Pass-Through Grant Consent
E. Multi-Gas Detector Purchase using Appleton 98 Action 10/6/09 5 min.
Replacement Reserves Consent
F. 2009-2011 Commute Trip Reduction Perez 100 Action 10/6/09 5 min.
Implementation Agreement with WSDOT Consent
G. Commute Trip Reduction Service Contract Perez 104 Action 10/6/09 5 min.
with King County (7/1/09 to 6/30/11) Consent
H. Sherwood Forest 2009 NTS Project (27th Perez 110 Action 10/6/09 5 min.
Ave SW; SW 344 to SW 351 st) Consent
I. Lake Grove 2009 NTS Project (SW 304th St; Perez 113 Action 10/6/09 5 min.
6th Ave SW to 1st Ave SW) Consent
4. OTHER
5. FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDA ITEMS: The next regularly scheduled LUTC meeting will be Monday,
September 21, 2009.
6. ADJOURN
Committee Members
Linda Kochmar, Chair
Jim Ferrell
Dini Duclos
City Staff
Cary M. Roe, P.E, Director of Parks, Public Wotks and Emergency Management
Darlene LeMaster, Administrative Assistant II
253-835-2701
City of Federal Way
City Council
Land Use/Transportation Committee
August 3, 2009
5:30 PM
City Hall
City Council Chambers
MEETING SUMMARY
Committee Members in Attendance: Committee Chair Kochmar and Committee Members Ferren and Duclos.
Staff Members in Attendance: Director of Community Development Services Greg Fewins, Senior Planner
Joanne Long-Woods, Senior Planner Deb Barker, Planning Manager [saac Conlen, Deputy Public Works
Director Ken Miller, City Attorney Pat Richardson and Administrative Assistant n Darlene LeMaster
1. CALL TO ORDER
Committee Chair Kochmar called the meeting to order at 5:30 PM.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
There was one public comment:
Diana Noble-Gulliford, 2754 SW 314'h St. Federal Way - Ms. Noble-Gull~ford had questions in response to
Sam Pace's recent letter regarding time extensions for short plats and plats: Will the City adopt a local
stimulus plan? Do the proposed code amendments address the concerns in Mr. Pace's letter?
Mr. Fewins commented that the City is making changes to the revised code to help stimulate the City's
economy; however, there is no "stimulus plan."
3. BUSINESS ITEMS
Topic TitlelDescription
Forward
to
Council
N/A
A. Approval of the July 20, 2009, LUTC Minutes
Committee approved July 20, 2009 LUTC minutes as presented.
Moved: Ferrell Seconded: Duclos Passed: Unanimously, 3-0
B/C. Amendments to the Federal Way Revised Doce (FWRC) Title 18 "Subdivisions"
and Title 19 "Zoning and Development Code" regarding plat and land use
application time extensions and related amendments.
9/01/2009
Ordinance
Deb Barker presentation addressed agenda items Band C. There were two public
comments.
John Parr, Developer, Federal Way Village - Mr. Parr commented that as a
developer, the proposed extension will be a huge benefit to developers who have been
hit hard during this recession. Mr. Parr encouraged the committee to approve the
recommendation.
Garrett Huffman, Master Builders Association - The Master Builders Association fully
endorses the proposed code and text amendments and asks the committee approve
staffs recommendation.
:..~
G:\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2009\08-03-09-Minutes.doc
2
r ~nrJ r f<C'",.,rrra.n.:onnn-<::lf';nn (-"r..~~;,.,.""""
Land Use/Transportation Committee
Page 2
August 3, 2009
Ms. Barker stated that a last minute text amendment was made to Section 19.15.045 in
order to clarity "completeness of applications." Ms. Barker also noted that extensions
of plat and land use application time, the code amendments are meant only for active
and valid plat and land use applications.
Committee fonvarded Option #1 as presented.
Moved: Duclos Seconded: Ferrell
Passed: Unanimously, 3-0
Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19.15.045
"Completeness of applications" regarding vesting for use process applications.
9/01/2009
Ordinance
Committee fonvarded Option #1 as amended to include the proposed text
amendment to 19.15.045.
Moved: Duclos
Seconded: Ferrell
Passed~ Unanimously, 3-0
4. OTHER
5. FUTURE MEETING
Given the cancellation of the August 17th meeting and September 7th being Labor Day, provided
enough interest/agenda items, a LUTC meeting may be added on Monday, September 14,2009 at 5:30
PM in City Council Chambers. More information will follow.
The next regular LUTC meeting will be Monday, September 21, 2009, at 5:30 PM In City Council
Chambers.
6. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 5:55 PM.
Attest
Darlene LeMaster, Administrative Assistant n
COMMITTEE APPROVAL:
Linda Kochmar, Chair
Jim Ferrell, Member
Dini Duclos, Member
:~
G:\LUTOLUTC Agendas and Summaries. 2009\08-03-09-Minutes.doc
3
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 6, 2009
ITEM
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: Federal Way Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) Program Ordinance
POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council adopt Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) program replacing the current
pro-rata share mitigation method by requiring new development to pay their proportionate share of the cost of
new facilities?
COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee
MEETING.DATE: Sept. 14,2009
CATEGORY:
o Consent I:8J Ordinance 0 Public Hearing
o City Council Business 0 Resolution 0 Other
~.I-~I."~_~~Ol!!J~~_~aradx LO~&_~E~1:~~~P-<?!!~!!~~Xl~nni~~ EI!~ee!tlPE~::_~~~_t.~~_~~~~~________..._
Attachments: Memorandum to the Land Use and Transportation Committee (LUTC) dated September 14, 2009,
including attachments.
Options Considered:
1. Recommend adoption of the Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance (FWRC Chapter 19.91) and text
amendments to Concurrency code (FWRC Chapter 19.90) as recommended by the Planning Commission.
2. Modify the proposed TIF ordinance to reflect the Permit Stakeholders preference for Impact Fee collection
prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy, and forward to City Council for adoption of the FWRC text
amendments as modified.
3. Modify the TIF Ordinance by providing option for residential development (Plat and Subdivision) to either
pay the impact fee prior to the issuance of Building Permit or provide a lien on the property in the amount of
the TIF to be paid and lien cleared at Certificate of Occupancy (C/O). Commercials and retail developments
would be paid prior to the issuance of Building Permit.
4. Modify the proposed FWRC text amendments and forward to City Council for adoption of the FWCC text
amendments as modified.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Option I and deferring implementation to July 1,2010.
'('7ld~tl /JAAA
CITY MANAGER ApPROVAL: jJ L,J~ 1 DIRECTOR ApPROVAL: f.j/Y" L
Committee Council CommIttee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Committee recommends forwarding Option I and deferring implementation
to July 1,2010.
Linda Kochmar, Chair
Dini Duclos, Member
Jim Ferrell, Member
4
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION:
1 sl Reading of Ordinance (October 6, 2009): HI move to forward the Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance
(FWRC Chapter 19.91) and text amendments to Concurrency code (FWRC Chapter 19.90) to the October 20,
2009 City Council Meetingfor 2"d Reading. "
2nd Reading of Ordinance (October 20, 2009): HI move adoption of the Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance
(FWRC Chapter 19.91) and text amendments to Concurrency code (FWRC Chapter 19.90)."
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
o APPROVED
o DENIED
o TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION
o MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED - 02/06/2006
COUNCIL BILL #
1ST reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE #
RESOLUTION #
K:\LUTC\2009\FW Traffic Impact Fee Agenda Bill- 091409 LUTC.doc
5
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:
September 14,2009
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Brian Wilson, Interim City Manager
Rick Perez, P.E., City Traffic Engineer ~
Sarady Long, Senior Transportation Planmng Engineer ~
Federal Way Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) ProKram Ordinance
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
BACKGROUND
Attached is the draft Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) ordinance as approved by the Planning
Commission. This is a new section added to Chapter 19.91 of the Federal Way Revise Code (FWRC),
which pertains to Transportation Impact Fee Ordinance. Second, the Concurrency Ordinance FWRC
Chapter 19.90 is amended to delete reference to the pro-rata mitigation as the new mitigation will be
under the TIF code.
Currently, the City utilizes two methods to collect traffic mitigation fees; the concurrency system and the
City Center Planned Action. Under the concurrency system which was adopted in June 2006, all
development outside the Planned Action SEP A area that generates new trips is required to contribute pro-
rata share mitigation to Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) projects impacted by the development
consistent with RCW 82.02.020.
The pro~rata share mitigation fees assessed are calculated on a case-by-case basis and vary from no
mitigation to over $5,900 per trip depending on the location of the development and projects on the TIP.
For development within the City Center Planned Action SEP A area, a set fee of $2,827 per trip has been
established. This fee needs to be updated this year to reflect current projects and costs. The new cost per
trip results in a higher rate which is estimated around $5,000 per trip. SEPA is still required to address
safety, access, and impacts occurring during other peak periods. '
All development is required to pay the identified traffic mitigation fees prior to the issuance of a building
permit for commercial and multi-family projects and prior to plat recording for subdivision projects. The
funds from the traffic mitigation fees are used to support transportation improvement projects listed in the
City' s Six~ Year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP).
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE (TIF) PROGRAM
The impact fees are mitigation payments authorized under GMA (RCW 82.02.050). The impact fee
would replace the existing code-based pro-rata fees in the concurrency code (FWRC 19.90) and the
Planned Action SEP A fee, create a more systematic way for applying the fees, and provide predictability
for developers. The work involved with development of a TIF includes the following important factors:
1. Forecast growth on the City's transportation network attributed to new traffic growth using the
Travel Demand model.
2. Identify transportation improvements, costs and existing deficiencies using adopted level of
service (LOS) thresholds.
3. Determine portion of costs attributed to future traffic growth in Federal Way.
K:\LUTC\2009\09-14-09 LUTe Memo V2W0609.doc
6
LUTC Memorandum
RE: Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program
September 14,2009
Page 2 of 4
4. Identify other revenues needed.
5. Establish a maximum impact fee rate based on the trips generated by traffic growth and the costs
associated with the transportation improvement projects needed to support that growth. The City
Council may refine this fee taking into consideration fees charged by the surrounding cities and
the city's ability to fund the transportation improvement projects.
In October 2008, staff presented to the Council an overview of the City's current mitigation program and
the proposed impact fee program. Staff returned to a Council study session on February 2009 to present
the result of the study and to seek Council direction before proceeding further with the TIF development.
Staff was directed to continue refining the one-zone impact fee rate of $9,800 per PM Peak Hour trip with
consideration of the followings:
I. Current pro-rata mitigation fee collected under concurrency
2. Adjacent jurisdictions impact fees
3. City Center redevelopment
Following the Council study session, staff met with the development community (Permit Stakeholders) in
March 2009 to discuss approaches and the proposed impact fee rate as presented to Council. As a result
of these processes, staff performed additional analysis including surveying surrounding cities in
Snohomish, King and Pierce County and produced a comprehensive overview of all city impact fee
programs. The chart below depicts the city's current average pro-rata share mitigation fee under the
concurrency process along with a summary of adjacent cities average impact fees. A more detailed
comparison of impact fee rates and collection timing is attached as Exhibit "A" - Transportation Impact
Fee Rates for Cities in Snohomish, Pierce and King County.
$500
Impact Fee of Comparable Cities
(Cost per PM Trip)
$3,737 $3,769
$4,000
$3,500
$3,000
$2,500
$2,000
$1,500
$1,000
$-
Avg. Citywide
Mitigation
(Existing)
Avg.3
Counties
Avg. Cities in
KC
Avg. of larger
Cities with
25,000+ Pop.
Avg. of
Comparable
Cities
K:\LUTC\2009\09-14-09 LUTC Memo V2090609.doc 7
LUTC Memorandum
RE: Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program
September 14,2009
Page 3 of4
In South King County and North Pierce County, the City of Auburn, City of Puyallup, City of Tukwila
and City of Maple Valley all have imposed traffic impact fees on new development. Their traffic impact
fee ranges from $1,244 per PM trip up to $6,272 per PM trip. Of all the cities surveyed, majority or all
cities collect impact fee at the building permit stage.
In May 2009, staff returned to the Stakeholders to present the following staff recommendations:
A. Citywide one zone system
B. Impact fee rate between $2,729 to $3,578 per PM Peak Hour Trip
C. Replace the Planned Action SEPArate of $2,827 per trip with the TIF rate
D. Adjustment/reduction up to 40 percent for qualified development within City Center due to
lower trip generation;
E. Collection timing of impact fee at building permits for all developments. Under existing
process, commercial and multi-family development must pay traffic mitigation fees prior to the
issuance of a building permit and prior to plat recording for subdivision projects.
The Stakeholders concurred with most staff recommendations with the exception of collection timing.
The Stakeholders recommend shifting the collection timing from Building Permit to the Certificate of
Occupancy (C/O) and defer implementation to July 2010. It is assumed that pushing the payment to the
Certificates of Occupancy (C/O) would reduce the amount financed by the applicant to complete the
project, thereby reducing finance charges; and savings gained by the developer would then be passed on
to the end user. The Stakeholders also recommend that the City impose the lower impact fee rate of
$2,729 per PM Peak Hour trip as this is the current average pro-rata share mitigation paid by the
developer. Based on the recommended rate of $2,729 per PM trip, a rate schedule was developed and
attached as Exhibit "B" along with a rate study "Transportation Impact Fee Program" prepared by Fehr &
PeersIMirai dated February 2009, attached as Exhibit "C". The following are examples of typical
developments and their potential traffic mitigation under the TIF program.
T ffi .
tF E
ra IC 1m pac ee xamPI e
Example Land Use Size Impact Fee Rate Total Traffic
Mitigation
Single Family 1 Unit $3,112/ Unit $3,112
Multi-Family (Townhouse) 10 Units $2,019 / Unit $20,019
General Office 10,000 sfGFA $4.72 / sf $47,200
Restaurant (City Center) 4,000 sf GF A $9.42/ sf $37,680
The TIF's consultant (Fehr and Peers) strongly suggests for the City to implement payment of impact fee
at Building Permit as this time frame is used in every impact fee program they developed. Only two
jurisdictions (Kitsap and Pierce Counties) within Washington have implemented payment of impact fees
after building permit issuance. Since then, these jurisdictions have changed their collection timing due to
default of impact fee payments. Pierce County repealed their ordinance due to a 27 percent delinquency
rate and Kitsap County changed their collection point to final inspection instead of Certificate of
Occupancy due to high delinquency rates. The Kitsap County Prosecuting Attorneys Office is currently
exploring ways of collecting unpaid impact fees.
K:\LUTC\2009\09-14-09 LUTC Memo V2090609.doc 8
LUTC Memorandum
RE: Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) Program
September 14,2009
Page 4 of 4
The following is list of potential pros and cons for each of collection timing method:
Building Permits Issuance
Pros:
I. Consistent with current practice for school impact fee.
2. Consistent with other cities that have an impact fee program (there would not be a
surprise for developers).
3. Minimal staff time to administer with high collection rate without institutional
enforcement as current system is in place for this method.
4. Predictability as impact fee would be assessed and payable at the same time.
Cons:
1. May add financing cost for development due to financing charges.
Certificate of Occupancy (C/O)
Pros:
1. May lower financing cost for development.
2. Timing of payment of fee coincides with timing of actual imBacts.
Cons:
1. Staff may be pressured to grant Certificate of Occupancy to projects that are completed
with the exception of fee payment.
2. Projects often change hands during the construction process and the end user may not be
informed that fees are tied to Certificate of Occupancy as was the case in Pierce County.
3. Unpredictability. Most developer would like to tie down cost at the start of the project
and collection at C/O does not accomplish this desire with lengthy project and yearly TIF
update. Impact fee may be higher at time of collection than at building permit issuance.
4. Increase staff time devoted to tracking deferred fees and delinquent collection activity.
5. High delinquency rate as demonstrated in Pierce and Kitsap County.
On July 1,2009, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing regarding the proposed impact fee
code FWRC Chapter 19.91 and an amendment to the existing concurrency code to replace pro-rata
mitigation with the TIF. No public comment was received and the Planning Commission unanimously
recommended approval as drafted by staff without any changes. Planning Commission staff report and
minutes are attached as Exhibit "D".
Attachment: Exhibit A - Transportation Impact Fee Rates for Cities in Snohomish, Pierce and King County
Exhibit B - Federal Way Impact Fee Components and Schedule
Exhibit C - Transportation Impact Fee Program prepared by Fehr & PeerslMirai dated February 2009
Exhibit D - Planning Commission Staff Report and minutes
Chapter 19.91 Transportation Impact Fees
Chapter 19.90 Transportation Concurrency
cc: Project File
Day File
K:\LUTC\2009\09-14-09 LUTC Memo V2090609.doc 9
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating
to Transportation Impact Fee (TIF); and adding new sections to
Federal Way Revised Code chapters 19.91.
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need to periodically modify Title 19 of the Federal
Way Revised Code (FWRC), "Zoning and Development Code," in order to conform to state and
federal law, codify administrative practices, clarify and update zoning regulations as deemed
necessary, and improve the. efficiency of the regulations and the development review process;
and
WHEREAS, this ordinance, containing amendments to development regulations and the
text of Title 19 FWRC, has complied with Process VI review, chapter 19.80 FWRC, pursuant to
chapter 19.35 FWRC; and
WHEREAS, the City Council fmds that new growth and development in the City will
create additional demand and need for public facilities; and
WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Chapter 82.02 RCW to require new growth and
development within the City to pay a proportionate share of the cost of new facilities to serve
such new development activity through the assessment of impact fees; and
WHEREAS, the impact fees assessed pursuant to Chapter 82.02 RCW must be based
upon a showing that new growth and development creates additional demand and need for public
facilities, that the impact fees do not exceed a proportionate share of the costs of such additional
public facilities, and that the fees spent for facilities reasonable related to the new growth and
development; and
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page _ of_
10
WHEREAS, the City is authorized by Chapter 82.02 RCW to impose impact fees for
system improvement costs previously incurred by. the City to the extent that new growth and
development will be served by the previously constructed improvements; and
WHEREAS, impact fee may be collected and spent for system improvements that are
included within a capital facilities plan element of a comprehensive plan,; and
WHEREAS, the City has adopted a list of transportation capital facilities In the
Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, RCW 58.17.110 and RCW 58.17.060 require the Council and administrative
personnel to make written finding that public facilities; such as roads and streets, are adequate
before approving proposed subdivisions, dedications, short plats, and short subdivisions; and
WHEREAS, to meet these requirements with respect to public streets and roads, the
Council finds that it must assure that public street and roads are adequate to serve new growth
and development; and
WHEREAS, the Council finds that it is in the public interest, and consistent with the
intent and purposes of the Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A et seq., for the City to adopt
transportation impact fees which are uniform to the greatest extent practicable; and
WHEREAS, The City has conducted extensive research and analysis documenting the
procedures for measuring the impact of new growth and development on public streets and
roads, and has prepared the report "City of Federal Way Transportation Impact Fees Program"
dated February 2009 which serves as the basis for the actions taken by the Council; and
WHEREAS, the Council hereby incorporates the Rate Study into this ordinance by
reference. The Rate Study utilizes a methodology for calculating transportation impact fees
which fulfills all ofthe requirement ofRCW 82.02.060(1); and
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page_of_
11
WHEREAS, based on information in the Rate Study, the Council has determined that the
City is composed a single services area for purposes of assessing transportation impact fees; and
WHEREAS, in developing the impact fees for public facilities contained in this
ordinance, the City has provided adjustments for past and future taxes paid or to be paid by new
growth and development, which are earmarked or proratable to the same new public facilities
that will serve the new growth and development; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted properly conducted a duly noticed
public hearing on these code amendments on July 1,2009; and forwarded a recommendation of
approval to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the Land Use/Transportation Committee of the Federal Way City Council
considered these code amendments on September 14, 2009 and recommended adoption of the
text amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission with further modifications as
follows: (1)
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings. The City Council of the City of Federal Way makes the following
findings with respect to the proposed amendments.
(a) These code amendments are in the best interest of the residents of the City and
will benefit the City as a whole by providing a more systematic way for applying the impact fees,
and provide predictability for developers.
(b) These code amendments comply with Chapter 36.70A RCW, Growth
Management.
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page _ of_
12
(c) These code amendments are consistent with the intent and purpose of Title 19
FWRC and will implement and are consistent with the applicable provisions of the Federal Way
Comprehensive Plan.
(d) These code amendments bear a substantial relationship to, and will protect and
not adversely affect, the public health, safety, and welfare.
(e) These code amendments have followed the proper procedure required under the
FWRC.
Section 2. Conclusions. Pursuant to chapter 19.80 FWRC and chapter 19.35 FWRC, and
based upon the recitals and the findings set forth in Section 1, the Federal Way City Council
makes the following Conclusions of Law with respect to the decisional criteria necessary for the
adoption of the proposed amendments:
(a) The proposed FWRC amendments are consistent with, and substantially
implement, the following Federal Way Comprehensive Plan goals and policies:
TG J J Develop and implement funding mechanisms to:
a. Leverage state and federal funds for transportation improvements.
b. Meet GMA 's concurrency requirements.
c. Provide consistent, fair, and predictable assessment of sufficient mitigation
fees for development consistent with SEP A.
d Assure that adequate transportation infrastructure is provided to
accommodate forecast growth.
TP82 Assure cost-effective maintenance of transportation facilities under the City's
jurisdiction.
TP 85 Develop a transportation impact fee by 2002 to simplify development review,
assess mitigation fees consistently and fairly, improve the City's ability to
leverage grant funding for transportation funding, and provide adequate
infrastructure to accommodate new growth.
Ordinance No. Page _ of _
Rev 3/09 Land Use
13
LUG2 Develop an efficient and timely development review process based on a
public/private partnership.
LUP4 Maximize efficiency of the development review process.
HP9 Maximize efficiency in the City's development review process and ensure that
unnecessary time delays and expenses are eliminated. Continue to provide
streamlined permitting processes for development that is consistent with the
FWCP and FWCC, and that has no adverse impacts.
HP 10 Encourage community input, where appropriate, into the development permit
process by providing thorough and timely information to the public.
(b) The proposed FWRC amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public
health, safety, and welfare because it would replace the existing code-based pro-rata fees in the
concurrency code and the Planned Action SEP A fee, create a more systematic way for applying
the fees in this national economic conditions that impact local land development and housing-
related industries by implementing development regulations to provide predictability for
developers during the development review. process that is not provided in the current code; and
clarifies to increase the efficiency of the development review process.
(c) The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the public and the residents of
the City of Federal Way as it will provide the developer with an up front cost of the impact fees
for development proposal, which results in attracting and continued development within the City,
thus aiding the local economy.
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page _ of _
14
Section . A new section is added to chapter 19.91 FWRC to read as follows:
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES
Sections:
19.91.010
19.91.020
19.91.030
19.91.040
19.91.050
19.91.060
19.91.070
19.91.080
19.91.090
19.91.100
19.91.110
19.91.120
19.91.130
19.91.140
19.91.150
19.91.160
19.91.170
19.91.180
19.91.190
19.91.200
19.91.210
Title
Purpose and Intent
Findings and authority
Definitions
Transportation Impact Fees Methodology
Assessment ofImpact Fees
Independent Fee Calculations
Exemptions
Credits
Adjustments
Establishment ofImpact Fee Account
Authorization for interlocal agreements
Administrative Guidelines
Refunds
Use of Funds
Periodic Adjustment of Rate
Administrative Fees
Appeals
Existing authority unimpaired
Relationship to State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A)
Relationship to Concurrency
19.91.010 Title. This code shall be hereinafter known as the City of Federal Way
transportation impact fee (TIF).
19.91.020 Purpose and Intent. The purpose and intent of this chapter is for the
collection of impact fees for streets and roads, and providing for certain other matters in
connection therewith.
19.91.030 Findings and authority. The City Council of the City of Federal Way hereby
finds and determines that development activities, including but not limited to new residential,
commercial, retail, office, and industrial development in the City of Federal Way will create
additional demand and need for public facilities in the City, and the Council finds that such new
growth and development should pay a proportionate share of the cost of new facilities needed to
serve the new growth and development. The City of Federal Way has conducted extensive
Ordinance No. Page _ of _
Rev 3/09 Land Use
15
research and analysis documenting the procedures for measunng the impact of new
developments on public facilities, has prepared the "Rate Study for Transportation Impact Fees,
City of Federal Way" dated February 2009 ("Rate Study"), and incorporates that Rate Study into
this title by this reference. The Rate Study utilizes a methodology for calculating impact fees
that fulfills all of the requirements ofRCW 82.02.060(1). A copy ofthe Rate Study shall be kept
on file with the City Clerk and is available to the public for review. Therefore, pursuant to
Chapter 82.02 RCW, the Council adopts this title to assess impact fees for streets and roads. The
provisions of this title shall be liberally construed in order to carry out the purposes of the
Council in establishing the impact fee program.
19.91.040 Definitions. The following words and terms shall have the following
meanings for the purposes of this chapter, unless the context clearly requires otherwise. Terms
otherwise not defined herein shall be defined pursuant to RCW 82.02.090, or given their usual
and customary meaning.
A. Applicant means a person who applies for a building permit under this article and who is
the owner of the subject property or the authorized agent of the property owner.
B. Building Permit means an official document or certification which is issued by the
building official and which authorizes the construction, alteration, enlargement, conversion,
reconstruction, remodeling, rehabilitation, erection, demolition, moving, or repair of a building
or structure.
C. Capital Facilities Plan means the capital facilities element of the City's Comprehensive
Plan adopted pursuant to RCW 36.70A and such plan as amended.
D. Council means the City Council of the City.
E. Department means the City's Department of Public Works.
F. Development Activity means any work, condition, or activity which requires a permit or
approval under the city's subdivision, zoning, or building code. Exempt permits are set forth in
FWRC 19.91.080.
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page_of_
16
G. Development Approval means any written authorization from the City authorizing the
commencement of a development activity or use.
H. Director means the Director of the Department of Public Works of the City of Federal
Way or herlhis designee
1. Encumbered means to reserve, set aside, or otherwise earmark the impact fees in order to
pay for commitments, contractual obligations, or other liabilities incurred for public facilities.
J. Hearing Examiner means the hearing examiner operating pursuant to the powers and
duties set forth by Chapter 2.20 FWRC.
K. Impact fee means a payment of money imposed by the City of Federal Way on
development activity pursuant to this title as a condition of granting development approval.
"Impact fee" does not include a reasonable permit fee, an application fee, the administrative fee
for collecting and handling impact fees, or the cost of reviewing independent fee calculations.
L. Independent Fee Calculation means the street and road impact calculation, and/or
economic documentation prepared by a applicant, to support the assessment of an impact fee
other than by the use of the rates listed in the fee schedule, or the calculations prepared by the
Director where none of the fee categories or fee amounts in the traffic impact fee in the fee
schedule accurately describe or capture the impacts of the development activity on public
facilities.
M. Interest means the average interest rate earned in the last fiscal year by the City of
Federal Way.
N. ITE Land Use Code means the classification code number assigned to a type of land use
by the Institute of Transportation Engineers in the latest Edition of Trip Generation.
O. CITY CODE SECTION means the City of Federal Way Revised Code or, when followed
by a numerical designation, a provision of the FWRC Code.
P. P.M Peak Hour means the highest volume of traffic for a continuous hour between 4:00
p.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays.
Ordinance No. Page _ of _
Rev 3/09 Land Use
17
Q. P.M Peak Hour Trips means the total vehicular trips entering and leaving a place of new
development activity on the adjacent public road or street during the p.m. peak hour.
R. Project Improvements mean site improvements and facilities that are planned and
designed to provide service for a particular development project and are necessary for the use
and convenience of the occupants or users of the project, and are not system improvements. No
improvement or facility included in a capital facilities plan adopted by the Council shall be
considered a project improvement.
S. Public Facilities, for purposes of this chapter, means the following capital facilities
owned or operated by the City of Federal Way or other governmental entities: public streets and
roads.
T. Rate Study means the "Transportation Impact Fees Program," City of Federal Way, by
Fehr & Peers / Mirai, dated February 2009.
U. Residential or Residential Development means all types of construction intended for
human habitation. This shall include, but is not limited to, single-family, duplex, triplex, and
other multifamily development.
V. RCW means the Revised Code of Washington or, when followed by a numerical
designation, a provision of the Revised Code of Washington.
W. Square Footage means the square footage of the gross floor area of the development as
defined in FWRC.
X. Street or Road means a public right-of-way and all related appurtenances, which enables
motor vehicles, transit vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians to travel between destinations, and
affords the principal means of access to abutting property, including avenue, place, way, drive,
lane, boulevard, highway, street, and other thoroughfare. For purposes of this chapter, public
streets and roads are collectively referred to as "transportation."
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page_of_
18
Y. System Improvements means public facilities that are included in the City of Federal
Way's capital facilities plan, and such plan as amended, and are designed to provide service to
service areas within the community at large, in contrast to project improvements.
Z Transportation means public streets and roads and related appurtenances.
AA. Transportation Impact Fee Account(s) means the account(s) established for the
transportation impact fees that are collected. The account(s) shall be established pursuant to
FWRC 19.91.110, and shall comply with the requirements ofRCW 82.02.070.
19.91.050 Transportation Impact Fees Methodology and Applicability. The
transportation impact fee rates are generated from the formula for calculating impact fees set
forth in the Rate Study, which is on file with the Public Works Department. Except as otherwise
provided for independent fee calculations in FWRC 19.91.070, exemptions in FWRC 19.91.080,
and credits in FWRC 19.91.090, all new development activity in the City will be charged the
transportation impact fee applicable to the type of development as set forth in the Traffic Impact
Fee in the current Fee Schedule as adopted by Council.
19.91.060 Assessment of Impact Fees.
A. The City shall collect impact fees, based on the land use categories and rates on the
current Fee Schedule, from any applicant seeking development permits from the City where such
development activity requires the issuance of a building permit or approval for a change in use,
except for development exempt under FWRC 19.91.080. This shall include, but is not limited to,
the development of residential, commercial, retail, office, and industrial land, and includes the
expansion of existing uses that creates a demand for additional system improvements as well as a
change in existing use that creates a demand for additional system improvements. The public
works department is authorized to determine the appropriate land use category found in the rate
schedule applies to the application.
B. All impact fees shall be due and payable prior to issuance of the building permit or at the
time of permit approval for a change in land use when no building permit is required based on
the land use categories on the Fee Schedule. Unless the use of an independent fee calculation
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page _ of_
19
has been approved, or unless a development agreement entered into pursuant to RCW
36.708.170 provided otherwise, the fee shall be calculated based on the impact fee schedule in
effect at the time a completed building permit application is filed. For a change in use for which
no building permit is required, the fee shall be calculated based on the impact fee schedule in
effect on the date of payment of the impact fee.
C. The public works department shall establish the traffic impact fee rate for a land use that
is not listed in the fee schedule. The applicant shall submit all information requested by the City
for purposes of determining the impact fee rate pursuant to FWRC 19.91.070.
D. For a change in use of an existing building or dwelling unit, including any alteration,
expansion, replacement or new accessory building that generate additional trips, the impact fee
shall be the applicable impact fee for the land use category of the new use, less any impact fee
previously paid for the land use category of the prior use. If no impact fee was paid for the prior
use, the impact fee for the new use shall be reduced by an amount equal to the current impact fee
rate of the current use.
E. For mixed use developments, impact fees shall be imposed for the proportionate share of
each land use based on the applicable measurement in the traffic impact fee rates set forth in the
fee schedule.
F. The Community Development Department shall not issue the required building permit
until the traffic impact fees set forth in the fee schedule have been paid as set forth in the fee
schedule or in the amounts that they exceed any credits allowable under this chapter. For a
change in use where a building permit is not required, the applicant shall not occupy or permit a
tenant to occupy the subject property unless and until the impact fee has been paid.
19.91.070 Independent Fee Calculations.
A. If in the judgment of the director, none of the fee categories or fee amounts set forth in
foregoing section of this title accurately describes or captures the impacts of a new development
on roads, the department may conduct independent fee calculations and the director may i~pose
alternative fees on a specific development based on those calculations.
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page_of_
20
B. The applicant may opt not to have the impact fees determined according to the fee
structure in the traffic impact fee schedule listed in the City Fee Schedule, in which case the
applicant shall prepare and submit to the director an independent fee calculation for the
development activity for which a development permit is being sought. The documentation
submitted shall be prepared by a licensed traffic engineer and shall show the basis upon which
the independent fee calculation was made using procedures consistent with those established in
the Trip Generation Handbook, current edition, by the institute of Transportation Engineers. An
independent fee calculation shall use the same methodology used to establish impact fees set
forth in the traffic impact fee schedule, shall be limited to adjustments in trip generation rates
and lengths used in the Rate Study, and shall not include travel demand forecasts, trip
distribution, transportation service areas, costs of road projects, or cost allocation procedures.
C. The applicant submitting an independent fee calculation will be required to pay the City
of Federal Way a fee to cover the cost of reviewing the independent fee calculation. The fee
required by the City for conducting the review of the independent fee calculation shall be
charged on an hourly rate as adopted by council at the time of the submittal.
D. There is a rebuttable presumption that the calculations set forth in the Rate Study and the
fee set forth in the traffic impact fee in the fee schedule are valid. The director shall consider the
documentation submitted by the applicant, but is not required to accept such documentation or
analysis which the director reasonably deems to be inapplicable, inaccurate or not reliable. The
director may require the applicant to submit additional or different documentation for
consideration. The director is authorized to adjust the impact fees on a case-by-case basis based
on the independent fee calculation, the specific characteristics of the development, and/or
principles of fairness.
E. Determinations made by the director pursuant to this section may be appealed as set forth
in FWRC 19.91.180.
19.91.080 Exemptions.
A. Except as provided for below, the following shall be exempted from the payment of
transportation impact fees:
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page_of_
21
1. Alteration or replacement of an existing nonresidential structure that does not
expand the usable space, add any residential units or generate any additional p.m. peak trips.
2. Miscellaneous improvements which do not generate increased p.m. peak trips,
including, but not limited to, fences, walls, residential swimming pools, and signs;
3. Demolition or moving of a structure when additional p.m. peak hour trips are not
generated.
4. A change of use that does not generate one or more p.m. peak hour trips.
5. Miscellaneous permits such as Electrical, Fire Protection System, Mechanical,
Plumbing, Right-of-way use, Shoreline and sign permits which do not generate any new trips.
6. Rezones, Comprehensive plan amendments, Land surface modifications,
Commercial subdivisions, Boundary line adjustment and Lot line eliminations, which does not
generate any trips.
7. Structures constructed by regional transit authority as define in RCW 82.02.09.
8. Any development permit application that has been submitted to the City before
5 :00 p.m. the business day before the effective date of this chapter and subsequently determined
to be a complete land use application conjunction with a concurrency application, based on the
information on file as of the effective date of this chapter.
B. The director shall be authorized to determine whether a particular development activity
falls within an exemption identified in this FWRC 19.91.080 or under other applicable law.
Determinations of the director shall be subject to the appeals procedures set forth in FWRC
19.91.180.
19.91.090 Credits
A. An applicant may request that a credit or credits for impact fees be awarded to him/her
for the total value of system improvements, including dedications of land, improvements and/or
construction provided by the applicant. Credits will be given only if the land, improvements,
and/or the facility constructed are:
1. For one or more of the transportation projects listed in the Rate Study as the basis
for calculating the impact fee.
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page _ of_
22
B. The director shall determine if requests for credits meet the criteria in subsection A,
above or under other applicable law. Determinations of the director shall be subject to the
appeals procedure set forth in FWRC 19.91.180.
C. Each request for a credit or credits shall include a legal description of the dedicated land,
a detailed description of improvements or construction provided, and a legal description or other
adequate description of the development to which the credit will be applied.
D. For each request for a credit or credits, the director shall determine the value of the
dedicated land, improvements, Of construction on a case-by-case basis. In the event that the
applicant disagree with the director's valuation, the applicant may submit an appraisal for the
director's consideration, prepared by a state certified MAl (Member of the American Institute of
Appraisers) or licensed engineer and be licensed in good standing pursuant to RCW 18.40
et.seq., in the category for the property to be appraised, and shall not have a fiduciary or personal
interest in the property being appraised.
E. The appraiser and/or licensed engineer shall be directed to determine the fair market
value of the total value of the dedicated land, improvements, and/or construction provided by the
applicant. The applicant shall pay for the actual costs for the appraisal.
F. After receiving and reviewing the appraisal, the director will determine the dollar amount
of any credit, the basis for the credit, the legal description of the real property dedicated where
applicable, and the legal description or other adequate description of the project or development
to which the credit may be applied with issuance of the building permit. If the total value of any
such dedication, improvement or construction cost exceeds the amount of the impact fee
obligation, the developer will not be entitled to reimbursement of the difference.
G. No credit shall be given for project improvements or right-or-way dedications for direct
access improvements to and/or within the subject development above and beyond what is
proposed in the capital facilities plan.
H. Any claim for credit must be made before payment of the impact fee and prior to the
issuance of the building permit or a permit for a change in use. The failure to timely file such a
claim shall constitute a final bar to later request any such credit.
Ordinance No. Page _ of_
Rev 3/09 Land Use
23
I. Determinations made by the director pursuant to this chapter shall be subjected to the
appeals procedures set forth in FWRC 19.91.180.
J. No impact fee for a specific development shall be increased or decreased once said fee
has been paid.
19.91.100 Adjustments.
Pursuant to and consistent with the requirements of RCW 82.02.060, the Rate Study has
provided adjustments for future taxes to be paid by the development activity which are
earmarked or pro-ratable to the same new public facilities which will serve the new
development. The traffic impact fee rates in the fee schedule have been reasonably adjusted for
taxes and other revenue sources which are anticipated to be available to fund public
improvements.
19.91.110 Establishment oflmpact Fee Account.
A. Impact fee receipts shall be earmarked specifically and deposited in a special interest-
bearing account.
B. The City shall establish a separate impact fee account for the fees collected pursuant to
this chapter: Transportation Impact Fee Account. Funds withdrawn from the account must be
used in accordance with the provisions of this chapter and applicable state law. Interest earned
on the fees shall be retained in the account and expended for the purposes for which the impact
fees were collected.
C. On an annual basis, the finance director shall provide a report to the Council on the
transportation impact fee account showing the source and amount of all moneys collected,
earned, or received, and the public improvements that were financed in whole or in part by
impact fees.
Impact fees shall be expended or encumbered within six (6) years of receipt, unless the Council
identifies in written findings of extraordinary and compelling reasons for the City to hold the
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page _ of_
24
fees beyond the six (6) year period. Under such circumstances, the Council shall establish the
period of time within which the impact fees shall be expended or encumbered.
19.91.120. Authorization for interlocal agreement.
The city manager is authorized to execute, on behalf of the city, an interlocal agreement with
other agencies having authority over transportation facilities to identify impacts and provide
mitigation for those impacts. In no case shall mitigation payments to the city be reduced to
account for mitigation payments to other jurisdictions.
19.91.130 Administrative Guidelines. The Public Works Director is hereby authorized
to adopt internal guidelines for the administration of transportation impact fees, which may
include the adoption of a procedures guide for transportation impact fees.
19.91.140 Refunds
A. If the City fails to expend or encumber the impact fees within six (6) years of when the
fees were paid, or where extraordinary or compelling reasons exist, such other time periods as
established pursuant to 19.91.110, the current owner of the property on which impact fees have
been paid may receive a refund of such fees. In determining whether impact fees have been
expended or encumbered, impact fees shall be considered expended or encumbered on a first in,
first out basis.
B. The City shall notify potential claimants by first class mail deposited with the United
States Postal Service at the last known address of such claimants. A potential claimant or
claimants must be the owner of record of the real property against which the impact fee was
assessed.
C. Property owners seeking a refund of impact fees must submit a written request for a
refund of the fees to the director within one (1) year of the date the right to claim the refund
arises or the date that notice is given, whichever is later.
D. Any impact fees for which no application for a refund has been made within this one-year
period shall be retained by the City and expended on the appropriate system improvements.
Ordinance No. Page _ of _
Rev 3/09 Land Use
25
E. Refunds of impact fees or offsets against subsequent impact fees under this section shall
include any interest earned on the impact fees by the City.
F. When the City seeks to terminate any or all components of the impact fee program, all
unexpended or unencumbered funds from any terminated component or components, including
interest earned, shall be refunded pursuant to this section. Upon the finding that any or all fee
requirements are to be terminated, the City shall place notice of such termination and the
availability of refunds in a newspaper of general circulation at least two (2) times and shall notify
all potential claimants by first class mail at the last known address of the claimants. All funds
available for refund shall be retained for a period of one (1) year after the second publication. At
the end of one (1) year, any remaining funds shall be retained by the City, but must be expended
for the appropriate public facilities. This notice requirement shall not apply if there are no
unexpended or unencumbered balances within the account or accounts being terminated.
G. The City shall also refund to the current owner of property for which impact fees have
been paid all impact fees paid, including interest earned on the impact fees, if the development
activity for which the impact fees were imposed did not occur; provided, however, that, if the
City has expended or encumbered the impact fees in good faith prior to the application for a
. .
refund, the director can decline to provide the refund. If within a period of three (3) years, the
same or subsequent owner of the property proceeds with the same or substantially similar
development activity, the owner can petition the director for an offset in the amount of the fee
originally paid and not refunded. The petitioner must provide receipts of impact fees previously
paid for a development activity of the same or substantially similar nature on the same real
property or some portion thereof. The director shall determine whether to grant an offset, and
the determinations of the director may be appealed pursuant to the procedure in Section
19.91.180.
19.91.150 Use of Funds.
A. Pursuant to this title, transportation impact fees:
1. Shall be used for system improvements that will reasonably benefit the new
development activity;
2. Shall not be imposed to make up for deficiencies in public facilities; and
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page _ of_
26
3. Shall not be used for maintenance or operation.
B. Transportation impact fees may be spent for public improvements to streets and roads as
herein defined and, including, but not limited to, transportation planning, engineering design
studies, land survey, right-of-way acquisition, site improvements, necessary off.site
improvements, engineering, architectural, permitting, financing, administrative expenses,
construction of streets and roads and related facilities such as curbs, gutters, sidewalks, bike
lanes, storm drainage and installation of traffic signals, signs and street lights, applicable impact
fees or mitigation costs, and any other expenses which can be capitalized.
C. Transportation impact fees may also be used to recoup system improvement costs
previously incurred by the City to the extent that new growth and development will be served by
the previously constructed improvements or incurred costs.
D. In the event that bonds or similar debt instruments are or have been issued for the
advanced provision of public improvements for which impact fees may be expended, impact fees
may be used to pay debt service on such bonds or similar debt instruments to the extent that the
facilities or improvements provided are consistent with the requirements of this section and are
used to serve the new development.
19.91.160 Periodic Adjustment of Rates.
A. The traffic impact fee in the fee schedule will be amended to reflect changes to the
twenty-year transportation project list as part of adoption of amendments to the capital facilities
element of the City's comprehensive plan. Amendment to the schedule for this purpose shall be
adopted by the council.
B. The traffic impact fee in the fee schedule shall be indexed to provide for an automatic fee
increase each January 1 st beginning in the year 2011. A three-year moving average of the
Washington State Department of Transportation Construction Cost Index will be used to
determine the increase in fees for each year to reflect increased project costs.
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page _ of_
27
C. A new rate study, which established the traffic impact fee in the fee schedule, shall be
updated every three years, unless the city determines that circumstances have not changed to
warrant an update.
19.91.170 Administrative Fees.
A. There shall be a fee for the administration of the Transportation Impact Fee Program in
an amount equal to three percent (3%) of the amount of the total traffic impact fee determined
from the fee schedules. The administrative fee shall be deposited into an administrative fee
account within the transportation impact fee funds. Administrative fees shall be used to defray
the cost incurred by the City in the administration and update of the transportation impact fee
program. The administrative fee is not creditable or refundable.
B. The administrative fee, in addition to the impact fee, shall be paid by the applicant at the
same time as the impact fee.
19.91.180 Review by Director and Appeals.
A. The applicant may pay the impact fees imposed by this title under protest so that the
building permit, or a change in use when no building permit is required. No appeal shall be
permitted until the impact fees at issue have been paid.
B. Requests for review regarding the impact fees imposed on any development activity may
be filed only by the applicant for the development activity at issue.
C. The applicant must first file a request for review regarding impact fees with the director,
as provided herein:
1. The request shall be in writing on the form provided by the City;
2. The request for review by the director shall be filed within fourteen (14) calendar
days after the applicant's payment of the impact fee at issue. The failure to timely file such a
request shall constitute a final bar to later seek such review;
3. No administrative fee will be imposed for the request for review by the director;
and
4. The director shall issue his/her determination in writing.
D. Determinations of the director with respect to the applicability of the impact fees to a
given development activity, the availability or value of a credit, or the director's decision
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page _ of_
28
concerning the independent fee calculation which is authorized in Sect. 19.91.070, or any other
determination which the director is authorized to make pursuant to this title, may be appealed by
the applicant or owner using the same process as the underlying development permit application
or process I of Chapter 19 FWRC if there is no underlying development permit, substituting the
director of public works for the director of community development. The appeal, in the form of a
letter of appeal, must be delivered to the department of community development within 14
calendar days after issuance of the decision of the director. In those cases where the proposed
development activity may require a public hearing under the authority of other chapters of this
code, the hearings may be combined. For example, if the underlying development permit
application is a preliminary plat, the appeal shall be heard at the preliminary plat public hearing.
19.91.190 Existing Authority Unimpaired.
Nothing in this title shall preclude the City from requiring the applicant or the proponent of a
development activity to mitigate adverse environmental impacts of a specific development
pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW, based on the
environmental documents accompanying the underlying development approval process, and/or
Chapter 58.17 RCW, governing plats and subdivisions; so long as the exercise of such authority
is consistent with the provisions of Chapter 43.21C RCW and Chapter 82.02 RCW.
19.91.200 Relationship to State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A)
(1) All development shall be subject to the environmental review pursuant to SEPA and other
applicable city ordinances and regulations.
(2) Further mitigation in addition to the impact fee shall be required for identified adverse
impacts appropriate for mitigation pursuant to SEP A that are not mitigated by an impact fee
program.
19.91.210 Relationship to Concurrency Management
Neither compliance with this chapter or the payment of any fee hereunder shall constitute a
determination of transportation concurrency under this chapter.
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page _ of_
29
Section . Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared separate and
severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, sect jon, or portion of
this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall
not affect the validity of the remainder of the ordinance, or the validity of its application to any
other persons or circumstances.
Section . Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this ordinance are
authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance including, but not limited to, the
correction of scrivener/clerical errors, references, ordinance numbering, section/subsection
numbers and any references thereto.
Section . Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective
date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed.
Section . Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force July 1, 2010 as
provided by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this
day of
,200_.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MAYOR, JACK DOVEY
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK, CAROL MCNEILLY, CMC
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page_of_
30
CITY ATTORNEY, PATRICIA A. RICHARDSON
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.:
Ordinance No.
Rev 3/09 Land Use
Page _ of_
31
~
c
~
0
l.J
at
C
i2
"C
C
III
tU
~
lU
a:
.="
III
'E
0
.=
0
c
~ In
.5
:: III
.c lU
~
.- U
.c
>< ...
W oS!
III
lU
....
III
ac:
lU
lU
L&.
....
U
III
Q.
E
....
c
0
~
~
0
Q.
III
C
III
...
....
(ij
>
o
.....
a.
a.
m
(U
a::
(ij
c:
u:::
at U
C c:
.- m
E~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~
~ E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
lU .5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5.5 .5.5 .5.5.5.-.5
=~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
l.Jmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm~m
Q.
~ 'C
A.....
"'M m M~Mm~~N~~N ~OVNMMO~ov~N~m~
~~~~m~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~~~~~~;~~;
Q..:E: -~ -m - - - - - - - - - -~ v - - - - - - - - - - - - - -00
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
o III
l.J lU
A.
c
o
~
~ooooooooooo 000000 0 0 000
~O~M~~OO~NN~OO~~NOO~NOO~~N~~~~~M~~~~
Q.~-~~~~~~~~~N~~~~~q~~~~~~~~~o~q~
Oo~~~~~~~oooooo -~ooo~ooo -~ - - - - -~ -~~o
A.~~~M~N~NN~N ~~~~N~~~~~~~~~M~M~~
0Cl ~
Q
Q
N
.......
(1)
O'l
~
~ ~
~ ~ (1) ~
......... Vl (1) -l7i (1)..lo<:: ..... a.
~~~~(1) ~ !u ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 ~c:Vl
(1) ~~~m""'u> VlC: mUmc: ~~o ..... a......~ou
E~~C:O'l:EuE~OEC:(1)c:mOE~E~=~EC1)~~ eac:~~.....~co
~(1) (1)C: cr m-ou ~ ~~ ~C:..lo<::(1) Ioea (1)
~=E~~Vl~eac:~a.~~uc:Eea..lo<::o~c:uO'l(1) ~~E2~E
-~(1)O~OC1)C:~C1)~~~C1)C1)C1)eaC1)~g~o~u~~~~~c:~u
l.J~~~~UCW_~~~~Z~~~~~>~~~W~~~a.~~~w
~~
Vl Vl
'E 'E
c (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) 0 0
~0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l0'l~~~~~~~~~~~~
8~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
32
"iij
>
o
...
a.
a.
ttl
~
a:
"iij
c
u::
'U
C
ttl
~-
- ttl
0..>
"iije
.S: a.
u.o.
Olttl
.S: ~
'U-
...0..
0-
c..> ttl
Q).S:
r:r:u.
'U 'U
C C
ttl ttl
"iij
>
o
...
a.
a.
ttl
~
a:
"iij
c
u::
'U
C
ttl
+-" .-....~..--.--
E 'E "E "E "E 'E "E "E
Q) QiwwCoQ> G>Q)
a.. 0..0..0..0..0.. 0..0..
0l0l0l0l0l0l0l0l0l0l0l
c c C c c c c c c c c
:g'O'O:g:g:g:g:g'O:g:g
._ c C._ ._"_"_._ C "_._
~ Q) Q) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q) ~ ~
a:lo..o..a:la:la:la:la:lo..a:la:l
OC")O)O) 1!)(O(OC\Jo)
~1!)1!)f'...C")I!)r;;f'...C")"""f'...C\I
0) (0 C\J_ ~ 0). f'..._ C") ~ """_ ~ "!. C\!.
f:l7f:17~~~t,;f:I7t,;t,;~~~
800000000LrlO
M ..... O'l ..0 f'... Lrl M Lrl N <r. Lrl
'N N qf'...,ll'!.O'l,O~O <r Lrl
N ~ '1'1'..000 ' , ~
~NMM""''''''NNO'lLrl<:r
0)
U
CO
...
I-[j
.!!!
"iij O)~ 0) -tl'U
... U. = 0) ~ 0 "- 0
....... caCO .......0) "5 0) 0) ~ 0) E 0
....... Ul...O...............OS;C
l!:! 'U '2 ":>.. u ... c = .c: c CO
O)-co!;..._c~~o .......
>o...co=oo~c.s:;
wl!)l!):E:E:E:E:EVlVlVl
.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:
Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul Ul
"E"E"E "E"E "E'E"E"E 'E'E
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:.c:
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000
c c c c c c c c c c c
VlVlVlVlVlVlVlVlVlVlVl
33
Exhibit "B"
Federal Way Impact Fee Components and Schedule
ITE Land Use Unit of Basic New Trip New Trip Avg.Trip Trip Length Impact Fee Impact Fee
Land Use Code Measure Trip Rate % Rate Length Adjustment Rate Rate
(miles)
Cost Per Trip End 3.1 $2 729 $2 729
Residential
Sinole Familv IDetached 210 dwellino 1.01 100% 1.01 3.5 1.129 ~3111.94 ~3112
Multi-Family 220, 221,230. dwelling 0.62 100% 0.62 3.7 1.19 $2,019.46 $2,019
233
Senior Housino 251 dwellino 0.31 100% 0.31 2.8 0.90 $764.12 $764
Mabile Home in MH Park 240 dwellina 0.59 100% 0.59 2.8 0.90 $1 454.29 $1454
Commercia/- Sewices
Drive~n Bank 912 sf/GFA 25.82 60% 15.49 1.5 0.48 $20.46 ~20.46
Hotel 310 room 0.59 100% 0.59 4.0 1.29 $2 077.56 $2 078
Motel 320 room 0.47 100% 0.47 4.0 1.29 ~1 655.01 ~1655
Dav Care Center 565 sf/GFA 12.46 75% 9.35 2.0 0.65 ~16.45 $16.45
Librarv , 59Q sf/GFA 7.30 75% 5.48 1.7 0.55 $8.19 $8.19
Past Office 732 sflGFA 11.12 75% 8.34 1.7 0.55 $12.48 $12.48
Service Station 944 VFP 13.87 40% 5.55 1.7 0.55 $8302.8 ~8 303
Service Station with Minimart 945 sf/GFA 97.08 30% 29.12 1.7 0.55 $43.59 $43.59
Auto Care Center 942 sf/GLA 3.38 70% 2.37 2.2 0.71 $4.58 $4.58
Movie Theater 444 445 seat 0.07 85% 0.06 2.3 0.74 $120.47 ~120
Health Club 492 493 sflGFA 3.53 75% 2.65 3.1 1.00 7.23 ~7.23
Commercial. Institutional
Elementarv School 520 sflGFA 1.21 80% 0.97 1.7 0.55 $1.45 $1.45
Middle/Jr Hiah School 522 sflGFA 1.19 80% 0.95 2.7 0.87 $2.26 $2.26
Hiah School 530 sflGFA 0.97 80% 0.78 3.7 1.19 $2.53 $2.53
Assisted Livino Nursino Home 254 620 bed 0.22 100% 0.22 2.8 0.90 ~542.28 $542
Church 560 sf/GFA 0.55 100% 0.55 3.7 1.19 $1.79 $1.79
Hosoital 610 sflGFA 1.14 80% 0.91 4.0 1.29 ~3.21 $3.21
Commercia/- Restautant
Restaurant I 931 sf/GFA I 7.49 60%1 4.49 3.4 1.101 $13.45 $13.45
Hinh Turnover Restaurant I 932 sf/GFA I 11.15 60%1 6.69 2.3 0.741 $13.55 $13.55
Fast Food Restaurant I 934 sf/GFA I 33.64 50%1 16.92 2.0 0.651 $29.79 $29.79
Espresso with Drive- Throuah I 938 sflGFA 1 75.00 20%1 15.00 2.0 0.651 $26.41 $26.41
Commercial- Retail ShoDDina
ShooPino Center 820 sf/GLA 3.87 70% 2.71 2.1 0.68 $5.01 $5.01
Suoermarket 850 sf/GFA 10.50 75% 7.88 2.1 0.68 $14.56 $14.56
Convenience Market 851 sf/GF A 52.41 45% 23.58 1.3 0.42 $26.9 $26.99
Free Standino Discount Store 813 815 857 sf/GF A 4.67 70% 3.27 2.1 0.68 $6.04 $6.04
Hardware/Paint Store 816 sf/GFA 4.84 40% 1.94 1.7 0.55 $2.90 $2.90
SnAcialtv Retail Center 814 sf/GFA 2.71 50% 1.36 1.7 0.55 $2.03 $2.03
Fumiture Store 890 sf/GFA 0.45 60% 0.27 1.7 0.55 $0.40 $0.40
Home Imnrovement Sunerstore 862 sflGFA 2.37 70% 1.66 2.1 0.68 $3.07 $3.07
Phannacv with Drive- Throunh 881 sf/GF A 10.35 50% 5.18 1.7 0.55 $7.74 $7.74
Car Sales -New/ Used 841 sflGFA 2.59 80% 2.07 4.0 1.29 $7.30 $7.30
Commen:ia/- Office
General Office 710 715 750 sflGFA 1.49 90%1 1.34 4.0 1.29 $4.72 ~4.72
Medical Office 720 sflGFA 3.46 75%1 2.60 4,0 1.29 ~9.14 $9.14
Industrial
Linht Industrv/Manufacturinn 110140 sflGFA 0.97 100% 0.97 4.0 1.29 $3.42 $3.42
Heavv Industrv 120 sf/GFA 0.68 100% 0.68 4.0 1.29 $2.39 . $2.39
Industrial Park 130 sflGFA 0.86 100% 0.86 4.0 1.29 $3.03 $3.03
Mini-Warehouse/Storaoe 151 sflGFA 0.26 100% 0.26 4.0 1.29 $0.92 $0.92
Warehousino 150 sflGFA 0.32 100% 0.32 4.0 1.29 $1.13 $1.13
City Center City Center City Center
City Center Impact Fee Rates Reduction Impact Fee Impact Fee
Factor Rate Rate
Residential
Multi-Family (CC) 220. 221,230. dwelling 0.62 100% 0.62 3.7 1.19 $2,019.46 $2,019 72% $1,453.68 $1,454
233
Senior Housino ICC 251 dwellina I 0.31 100%1 0.311 2.8 0.90 $764.12 $7641 72% $550.08 ~550
Commercial- Services
Drive-in Bank CCI 912 sflGFA 25.82 60% 15.49 1.5 0.48 $20.46 $20.46 70% $14.32 ~14.32
Dav Care Center ICC 565 sflGF A 12.46 75% 9.35 2.0 0.65 $16.45 $16.45 70% $11.52 $11.52
Librarv ICCI 590 sflGFA 7.30 75% 5.48 1.7 0.55 $8.19 $8.19 70% $5.73 $5.73
Past Office ICC 732 sflGFA 11.12 75% 8.34 1.7 0.55 $12.48 $12.48 70% $8.74 $8.74
Movie Theater CCI 444 445 seat 0.07 85% 0.06 2.3 0.74 $120.47 $120 70% $64.00 $84.00
Health Club ICC 492 493 sflGFA 3.53 75% 2.65 3.1 1.00 $7.23 $7.23 70% $5.06 ~5.06
Commen:ia/- Restautant
Restaurant ICC 931 sflGFA 7.49 60% 4.491 3.41 1.10 $13.45 $13.45 70% $9.42 $9.42
Hioh Tumover Restaurant CC 932 sflGFA 11.15 60% 6.691 2.31 0.74 $13.55 $13.551 70% $9.49 $9.49
Fast Food Restaurant ICC 934 sflGFA 33.84 50% 16.921 2.01 0.65 $29.79 $29.79 70% $20.85 $20.85
Commen:ia/- Retail ShoDDino
Shoooino Center ICC 820 sflGLA 3.87 70% 2.711 2.11 0.68 $5.01 $5.01 70% $3.51 ~3.51
Suoermarket CCI 850 sflGFA 10.50 75% 7.881 2.11 0.68 $14.56 $14.56 70% $10.19 $10.19
Phannacv with Drive- Throuoh CC 881 sflGFA 10.35 50% 5.181 1.71 0.55 $774 $7.74 70% $5.42 $5.42
Commen:ia/- Office
General Office CCI 710 715 750 sflGFA 1.49 90% 1.341 4.01 1.29 ~4.72 $4.721 60% $2.83 $2.83
Medical Office CC 720 sflGFA 3.46 75% 2.601 4.01 1.29 $9.14 $9.14 60% $5.48 $5.48
Nob':s:
GFA" Gross Floor Area
GLA" Gross Leasable Area
CC" City Center
For uses with Unit of Measure in sF, trip rate is given as trips per 1,000 sF
VFP .. Vehicle Fueling Positions (Maximum number of vehicles that can be fueled simultaneously)
34
11410 NE 122ndWay
Suite 320
Kirkland, WA 98034
35
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fP
FEHR & PEERS
--...---...--.---.-....-.-.--.
-
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the policy and technical development of the Transportation Impact
Fee program for the City of Federal Way, Washington.
DEFINITION OF IMPACT FEES
Impact fees are a broad category of charges on new development assessed to pay for capital
improvements (e.g., parks, schools, roads, etc.) necessitated by new development. Cities
collect transportation impact fees to fund improvements that add capacity to the
transportation system accommodating the travel demand added by new development.
The City developed the program based on the following findings:
. Development activity in the City, including residential, commercial, retail, office,
and industrial development, will create additional demand and need for public road
facilities;
. Federal Way is authorized under the state's Growth Management Act (Chapter
82.02.050 RCW) to require new growth and development within the City to pay a
proportionate share of the cost of new road facilities serving that new growth and
development through the imposition of impact fees;
. Impact fees (Chapter 92.02) may be collected and spent for public road facilities
needed for system improvements that are included within the capital facilities plan
in the City's comprehensive plan.
LEGAL BASIS
The primary enabling mechanism for imposing impact fees in Washington State is the
Growth Management Act (GMA). Prior to the passage of the GMA, local agencies primarily
relied on the State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A) process to require developers to fund
mitigation projects necessitated by new development.
The GMA, passed in 1990, modified the portion of RCW 82.05.050 regarding impact fees and
specifically authorized the use of impact fees for areas planning under the Growth
Management Act. The GMA allows impact fees for system improvements that reasonably
relate to the impacts of new development, and specifies that fees are not to exceed a
proportionate share of the costs of improvements.
For a city to impose GMA impact fees, the following specific provisions are required:
. The city must have an ordinance authorizing impact fees;
. Fees may apply only to improvements identified in a Capital Facilities Plan;
. The agency must establish one or more service areas for fees;
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
February 2009
Page 1
36
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fP
FEHR & PEERS
-----.-.--.-..--.-.-----.---
--
· A formula or other method for calculating impact fees must be established;
· The fees cannot be used to finance the portion of improvements needed to pay for
existing capacity deficiencies. (Note: the fees can be usedto recoup the cost of
improvements already made to address the needs of future development);
. The fees may not be arbitrary or duplicative;
· The fees must be earmarked specifically and be retained in special interest-bearing
accounts;
. Fees may be paid under protest; and,
Figure 1. Traffic Impact Fee
Program Development
Steps
· Fees not expended within six years must be refunded
with interest.
An accounting system is important to ensure that the impact
fees collected are assigned to the appropriate improvement
projects and the developer is not charged twice for the same
improvement.
DEVELOP
IMPROVEMENTUST
AND COSTS
GUIDING PRINCIPLES
A set of guiding principles provided consistent direction for
development of the transportation impact fee program. The
program should: .
ALLOCATE COSTS TO
GROWTH WITHIN
CITY
. Be legally and technically defensible (provide a nexus
to impact);
. Be financially constrained;
IDENTIFY AVAILABLE
FUNDING
· Be fair, consistent and predictable in its development
and application;
. Have reasonable rates based on improvements
necessary to accommodate new growth and
development under the Comprehensive Plan;
IMPACT FEE COSTS
· Be simple to administer and not preclude other
requirements of SEP A such as safety issues, access
improvements, etc.; and,
IMPACT FEE
SCHEDULE
· Address multi-jurisdictional issues as much as
practicable.
These guiding principles were used to test alternative ideas and select an appropriate
method of calculating impact fees for the City.
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
February 2009
Page 2
37
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fP
F E H R & PE E RS
__'_'__"'W_"_'__
-
IMPACT FEE STRUCTURE
The key steps involved in the impact fee process are shown in Figure 1. Steps include
developing a list of road improvements and costs, allocating growth-related costs within the
City, and identifying available funding. The remaining costs can be charged as impact fees,
which are displayed in the form of a fee schedule. Each step is described in more detail in
subsequent sections of this report.
ORGANIZATION OF REPORT
This report includes the following sections:
. Introduction
. Impact Fee Project List
. Cost Allocation
. Impact Fee Schedule
DATA ROUNDING
The data in this study were prepared using computer spreadsheet software. In some tables
in this study, there will be very small variations from the results that would be obtained
using a calculator to compute the same data. The reason for these insignificant differences is
that the spreadsheet software calculated the results to more places after the decimal than is
reported in the tables in the report.
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
38
February 2009
Page 3
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
tp
F E H R & PEERS
----"--------_..
--
CHAPTER 2. IMPACT FEE PROJECT LIST
Washington State law RCW 82.02.050 specifies that Transportation Impact Fees are to be
spent on II system improvements. II System improvements can include physical or
operational changes to existing roadways, as well as new roadway connections that are built
in one location to benefit projected needs at another location. These are generally projects
that add capacity (new streets, additional lanes, widening, signalization, et al).
The impact fee structure for the City of Federal Way was designed to determine the fair
share of road improvement costs that may be charged to new developments. During the
transportation planning process, the City identified projects needed by 2030 to meet the
transportation needs of the adopted land use in the Comprehensive Plan. The task was
accomplished by examining existing roadway deficiencies and forecasting future needs.
The City of Federal Way used a cost model to estimate the costs for these capacity
improvements.. These capital projects form the basis for the impact fees project list, which
includes public and private sources.
The impact fee project list was composed of selected capacity projects from the City's 2009-
2014 Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), which covers a six-year period and the City's
2009-2020 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The project list, shown in Table 1 and
illustrated in Figure 2 includes 35 projects.
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
February 2009
Page 4
39
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fP
F E H R & PEERS
...__...____.___.____....M____
--
Table 1. List of Transportation Capacity Projects
1 D City Center Access Phase 3 Add 2nd SB left-tum lane, 3rd SB right- $2,850,000
turn lane to 1-5 SB off-ramp to S 320th St
2 0 City Center Access Phase 4 Widen S 320th St bridge over 1-5, realign 20,621,000
loop ramp and NB off-ramp
Add 2nd left-turn lanes, WB, NB, SB
3 B S 320th St @ 1st Ave S right-tum lanes, widen 1 st Ave S to 5 12,600,000
lanes to S 316th St
4 C S 320th St: 8th Ave S - SR 99 Add HOV lanes, install raised median 15,523,000
5 H S 348th St @ 1 st Ave S Add SB, WB right-turn lanes, 2nd EB, 5,400,000
WB left-turn lanes
6 G 10th Ave SW @ SW Campus Add SB right-turn lane 1,308,000
Dr
7 G SW 344th St: 12th Ave SW - Extend 3 lane principal collector with 7,115,000
21st Ave SW bike lanes, sidewalks
8 C S 320th St @ 20th Ave S Add 2nd left-turn lanes EB, WB 5,760,000
9 G 21 st Ave SW @ SW 336th St Add 2nd left-tum lanes all approaches, 12,348,000
WB right-turn lane
10 C SR 99 @ S 312th St Add 2nd left-turn lane NB 8,568,000
11 B SW 312th St: 14th Ave SW- Widen to 3 lanes with bike lanes, 4,366,000
SR 509 sidewalks, new signal at 14th Ave SW
12 H S 356th St: SR 99 - SR 161 Widen to 5 lanes, bike lanes, sidewalks 8,712,000
13 A S 304th St @ 28th Ave S Add NB right-turn lane, signal 2,148,000
14 H S 352nd St: SR 99 - SR 161 Extend 3 lane principal collector and 5,200,000
signal at SR-99
15 B SW 320th St@21stAve SW Add 2nd WB left-turn lane, Interconnect 4,320,000
to 26th Ave SW
16 C S 320th St: 1 st Ave S - 8th Add HOV lanes, install raised median 15,523,000
AveS
17 A Military Rd S: S Star Lake Rd Widen to 5 lanes, sidewalks, street lights 13,068,000
- S 288th St
18 F SW 320th St @ 47th Ave SW Install traffic signal 360,000
19 A S 312th St @ 28th Ave S Add SB right-tum lane 540,000
20 F SW 336th Wy I SW 340th St: Widen to 5 lanes, add signal at 26th PI 15,312,000
26th PI SW - Hoyt Rd SW
21 E S 336th St: 18th Ave S- Widen to 3 lanes 1,200,000
Weyerhaeuser Way S
22 H SR 99: S 340th St - S 356th Construct HOV lanes, add WB right-turn 33,264,000
St: lane, 2nd SB left-turn lane @ 348th
23 C S 312th St: 23rd Ave S - 28th Widen to 5 lanes 5,544,000
AveS
24 H S 348th St: 1 st Ave S - 9th Add HOV lanes 15,523,000
AveS
25 C S 324th St: SR 99 - 23rd Ave Widen to 5 lanes, add 3rd WB left-turn 7,840,000
S lane @ SR 99
26 H 1 st Ave S: S 366th St - SR 99 Extend 2-lane road 5,610,000
27 C 14th Ave S: S 312th St- S Ring Road extension 4,066,000
316th St
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
40
February 2009
Page 5
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fP
F E H R & PEERS
----..--.-----.---...--....-.--
-
Table 1. List of Transportation Capacity Projects (Continued)
28 C S 316th St: SR 99 - 11th PI S Ring Road extension 6,160,000
29 D S 312th St: 28th Ave S- Extend 5-lane arterial, interchange @ 1-5 23,894,000
Military Rd
30 H SR18@SR161 Add 3rd SB thru lane, 3rd SB left-turn 9,072,000
lane, 2nd NB right-tum lane
31 A S 304th St @ SR 99 Add left-turn lanes on 304th 1,080,000
32 E SR 99 @ S 336th St Add 2nd EB and SB left lane, widen 6,300,000
336th to 5 lanes to 20th
33 A Military Rd S: S 288th St - 1-5 Widen to 5 lanes 17,424,000
34 C SW 330th St @ 1 st Ave S Signal modifications, extend NB left-turn 377,000
lane
35 C S 312th St: 1 st Ave S to 14th Widen to 5 lanes 21,344,000
AveS
Total Project Costs $320,340,000
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
41
February 2009
Page 6
f
U\'
~
'0'
a:
c
.2
t)
(I)
UJ
Ol
E
o
'"
U..c
''''~'ru- ~I
t ~.i'
~..j V11
I s "AV4IS .
I
o
z
W
C)
W
.....I
l't1
...
ill
lit
.5
o
^MH ^all~^;SaM
i
t) C5
(I) Ol
'e -g
Cl. u..
Q) '5
~ ~
en 6
I
i
(I)
()
<Il
a.
(J)
c
(I)
a.
o
@z
W
.....I
<(
()
CIJ
o
l-
I-
o
Z
$
'E
::J
;::- ~
6 ~
~- /
r~t;~..aL~
42
,
r'c'o--'-'''''-
!
I
._,__1
I '
,
~
'-".
",
..\;.....1""
.,'':;'',.......;--j
. s "^Vli1Blm,,;'"
-' It.iaI '1
~:
..c
~
~:
Vl[
r:i
:r:
~
j:..l..,
enN
I-w
Oa:
w::;)
..,2
OlL
a:
a.
w
w
u.
I-
o
~
2
-
z
o
~
I-
a:
o
a.
en
z
<(
a:
I-
"
x
E
ci
"
<;;
"
a.
"
,,,
.!!
d
E
";1
Iii
~I
o
Cl
E5
x
:;;
00
~
:2
~
9
"
"
LL
~
a.
,g
~
s:
..
0;
"
"
~I
<0
o
o
cO
o
w
~
U
"
"e
g,
z
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fp
FE H R & PEERS
---'----------..--
--
CHAPTER 3. COST AllOCATION
The City used an impact fee methodology that distinguishes between facility improvements
th.at address existing deficiencies and those that are needed to serve new growth. For
growth-related projects, this method assumes that traffic generated by future development
is the reason for the improvement project(s). Figure 3 diagrams the process.
Figure 3. Impact Fee Cost Allocation Concept
List of Projects
+
+ t
Capacity Safety Ped!' Bike -
Projects Maintenance! Other
I
t t
Portion Due to New Portion Due to --.
Growth Existing Deficiency
f- - N::n-~ity2r~l:!.. - r
y
Cost Allocated to Cost Paid by ~
Impact Fees City or Others
TRANSPORTATION DEFICIENCIES
RCW 82.02.050(4) (a) requires that the Capital Facilities Element of a jurisdiction's
comprehensive plan identify" deficiencies in public facilities serving existing development".
Under the GMA, future development cannot be held responsible for the portion of added
roadway capacity needed to serve existing development.
To adequately assess both the extent of the existing roadway deficiencies and the magnitude
of the future needs on arterial roadways, the City developed a standard evaluation criterion.
A criterion selected to be uniform, consistent, and easily applied to the available roadway
traffic volume data.
The criterion selected is defined by the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) average
volume/ capacity (v / c) ratio for intersections along a roadway section. The v / c ratio was
calculated using the Synchro software. For roadway segments that contain multiple
intersections, an average v / c was calculated. The average was weighted according to the
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
February 2009
Page 8
43
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fp
F E H R & PEE RS
-
total traffic volumes passing through each intersection with a v / c ratio greater than 1.0
considered to be over capacity or deficient. The standards used to apply the v / c ratio are
documented in the adopted Transportation Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Using this methodology e~ roadway segments in two project were found to have existing
deficiencies with v / c ratios of 1.01 and 1.05. Table 2 summarizes the analysis findings.
Next the City needed to determine the "existing deficiency portion" (as opposed to the
portion that would be attributable to new growth). Under the GM1\, the City is responsible
for financing the existing deficiency portion, but the City can charge new development for
the remainder of the roadway improvement. The City can select from several approaches to
proportionately allocate the cost. The Federal Way Impact Fee Program uses a method
based on the amount of excess" existing and future new traffic" that exceeds the current
capacity of the roadway facility. The formula for determining the existing deficiency
percentage of a road follows.
Existing Deficiency Percentage = (Existing vie - 1.0) + (Existing vie - Improved vie)
As an example, consider the existing deficiency percentage for project # 5 (selected from
Table 2) that would be calculated as follows.
Existing Deficiency Percentage:
(1.05 - 1.0) + (1.05 - 0.78) = 0.05 + 0.27 = 18.5 percent
Using this formula, 18.5 percent of the roadway improvement capacity is attributed to
existing traffic. This formula was also applied to the other deficient segment and the
resulting percent deficient is shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Transportation Deficiency Calculation
5
5 348th 5t @ 1st Ave 5 Add 58, W8 right-turn lanes, 2nd E8,
WB left-tum lanes
1.05
0.78
18.5%
30 5R 18@5R161
Add 3rd 58 thru lane, 3rd 58 left-turn
lane, 2nd NB right-turn lane
1.01
0.87
7.1%
* Refer to Figure 2
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
44
February 2009
Page 9
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fp
FE H R & }l E E RS
--------.--
--
TRAVEL GROWTH
To match the 2008 -2030 Capital Investment Program, the City used a 23-year land use
growth estimate. Table 3 shows Federal Way land use forecasts in terms of housing (single
family and multi family) and employment (retail, office and industrial) units for the years
2008 to 2030. The land use forecasts are listed for the City Center, non-City Center area (rest
of the City) and the citywide total.
The housing and employment growth estimates were converted to PM peak hour vehicle
trip ends' using trip generation rates from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
Trip Generation (8th Edition, 2008). These growth estimates result in an increase of 13,974
PM peak hour vehicle trip ends within the City during the 23-year period. Of the total trip
ends, 4,481 trips ends are within the City Center and 9,493 are within the rest of the City.
This growth in vehicle trip ends was used to calculate the impact fee rates.
Table 3. Federal Way Land Use Growth
1 1
802 2,242
6,490 9,416
18,466 1,918
15,317 761
21,838 8,454
18,467
16,119
28,328
Source: City of Federal Way, 2008
20,385
18,320
39,708
1,918
2,201
11,380
1 A vehicle trip travels between an origin and a destination. Each vehicle trip has two trip ends, one
each at the origin and destination. Trip ends represent the traffic coming to and from a given land
use. The trip ends were calculated with trip generation formulas used by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers.
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
45
February 2009
Page 10
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fP
rEHR & PEERS
----.
COST ALLOCATION RESULTS
The cost allocation process distributes the growth costs for each project based upon the
travel patterns between the different geographic areas within and outside the City limits. A
"select link" assignment procedure provided the origin and destination information for each
vehicle trip traveling through a particular improvement project group. The grouping of
projects for the select link assignments is shown in the first column of Table 1. Trips that
pass through Federal Way, but do not have any origins or destinations internal to Federal
Way, were not allocated to Federal Way growth. That is, development in Federal Way
would not be charged for impacts by growth in trips passing "through" the City.
Figure 4 summarizes the cost allocation results. For discussion purposes, the dollar
amounts shown in this figure and the following text descriptions are approximate values
expressed in million dollars. The actual amounts used in the calculations are accurate to a
single dollar.
The total cost of the capacity projects on the capacity project list is $320.3 million. The City
has committed developer funds equaling $1.3 million which leaves a need for $319.0 million.
The remaining $319.0 was divided into growth costs and existing deficiencies, with the
growth costs representing $317.4 million, or 99 percent of the total costs. The growth costs
were further divided into" city growth" and "outside city growth" components using the
City' s traffic model data. The details of this calculation are shown in Appendix A.
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
February 2009
Page 11
46
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fP
FEHR & PEERS
--
Figure 4. Impact Fee Cost Allocation Results
Total Cost
$32.0.3 M..
Appropriated
SEPA Funds
$1.3M
Funds Needed
$319.0 M
Existing Deficiencies
$1.6 M (1%)
Growth Costs
$317-4 M (99%)
City Growth
$136.9 M (43%)
Outside City Growth
$180A M (57%)
New Impact Fee
Costs
$136.9 M
Other Funds Needed
$182.1 M
New PM Peak Hour Trip Ends = 13,974
Cost/Trip End = $9,SOO
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
47
February 2009
Page 12
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
11>
FEHR & PEERS
_0__________
--
Figure 5 shows that the new impact fees could contribute $136.9 million (43 percent) of the
total $320.3 million cost of the improvement projects. New grant funds ($116.3 million)
would cover approximately 36 percent of the total cost, while growth related SEPA funds
and expected SEPA funds from other jurisdictions would each contribute less than one
percent of the total project costs.
Figure 5. Impact Fee Program Funding Sources
City of Federal Way Cost Allocation of
Transportation Improvement Projects (2008 - 2030)
Total Project Costs = $320,340,000
Other City Funds,
$20,295,306
Gro'hth Related Committed
Funds (SEPAl,
$1,332,097
Expected SEPA Funds
from Other Jurisdictions,
$835,000
Expected Grant Funds,
$116,335,200
I
I
Expected Impact Fee
Funds,
$136,945,397
City Funds from Utility and
Real Estate El<<::ise Taxes,
$44,597,000
The final step in the cost allocation process dealt with calculating the "cost per new trip end"
within Federal Way, which was derived by dividing the total eligible project cost by the
total number of new PM peak hour trip ends based in Federal Way. The City is likely to gain
an additional 13,974 new PM peak hour vehicle trip ends within the City between 2008 and
2030. The $9,800 per trip end represents the maximum allowable rate to meet the GMA
requirements. The analysis produced the following results.
Impact fee costs $ 136,945,397
Divided by:
New PM peak hour trip ends 13,974
Equals:
Cost per new trip end $ 9,800
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
48
February 2009
Page 13
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
tp
fEHR & PEERS
.-..--......-.-.-..---
-
CHAPTER 4 - IMPACT FEE SCHEDULE
The impact fee schedule was developed by adjusting the "cost per trip end" information to
reflect differences in trip-making characteristics for a variety of land use types within the
study area. The rates in the fee schedule represent dollars per unit for each land use
category. Table 4 shows the various components of the fee schedule (trip generation rates,
new trip percentages, trip lengths, and trip length adjustment for each land use).
TRIP GENERATION COMPONENTS
Trip generation rates for each land use type are derived from the Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (8th Edition). The rates are expressed as vehicle trips
entering and leaving a property during the PM peak hour.
Pass-by Trip Adjustment
Trip generation rates represent the total traffic entering and leaving a property at the
driveway points. For certain land uses (e.g., retail), a substantial amount of this traffic is
already passing by the property and merely turns into and out of the driveway. These pass-
by trips do not significantly impact the surrounding street system and therefore are
subtracted out prior to calculating the impact fee. The resulting trips are considered "new"
to the street system and are therefore subject to the impact fee calculation. The "new" trip
percentages are derived partially from ITE data and from available surveys conducted
around the country.2
Trip Length Adjustment
Another variable that affects traffic impacts is the length of the trip generated by a particular
land use. The" cost per trip" calculated in the impact fee program represents an average for
all new trips generated within Federal vyay. Being an average, there will be certain land
uses that generate trips of different lengths. If a given trip length is shorter than the
average, then its relative traffic impacts on the street system will be lower than average.
Conversely, longer trips will impact a larger proportion of the transportation network. To
account for these differences, an adjustment factor is used, calculated as the ratio between
the trip length for a particular land use type and the "average" trip length for the city. The
average trip length estimated for Federal Way was 3.1 miles, based upon the 2030 mix of
land use types within the study area and the geographic size of the city.
2 Trip Generation Sources: ITE Trip Generation (8th Edition); ITE Trip Generation
Handbook,(March 2001); Pinellas County (FI) Impact Fee Study (1991), Osceola County (FI),
Alternative Traffic Generation Rate Study (2004), Polk County (FI) Transportation Impact Fee Study
(2005).
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
February 2009
Page 14
49
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fP
fEHR & PEERS
-..----.----.....-....----
--
Table 4. Impact Fee Schedule Components
Residential
Single Family (Detached) 210 dwelling 1.01 100% 1.01 3.5 1.13
Multi-Family 220, 21, dwelling 0.62 100% 0.62 3.7 1.19
230,233
Senior Housing 251 dwelling 0.31 100% 0.31 2.8 0.90
Mobile Home in MH Park 240 dwelling 0.59 100% 0.59 2.8 0.90
Commercial- Services
Drive-in Bank 912 sf/GFA 25.82 60% 15.49 1.5 0.48
Hotel 310 room 0.59 100% 0.59 4.0 1.29
Motel 320 room 0.47 100% 0.47 4.0 1.29
Day Care Center 565 sf/GFA 12.46 75% 9.35 2.0 0.65
Library 590 sf/GFA 7.30 75% 5.48 1.7 0.55
Post Office 732 sf/GFA 11.12 75% 8.34 1.7 0.55
Service Station 944 VFP 13.87 40% 5.55 1.7 0.55
Service Station with Minimart 945 sf/GFA 97.08 30% 29.12 1.7 0.55
Auto Care Center 942 sf/GLA 3.38 70% 2.37 2.2 0.71
Movie Theater 444,445 seat 0.07 85% 0.06 2.3 0.74
Health Club 492,493 sf/GFA 3.53 75% 2.65 3.1 1.00
Commercial- Institutional
Elementary School 520 sf/GFA 1.21 80% 0.97 1.7 0.55
Middle/Jr High School 522 sf/GFA 1.19 80% 0.95 2.7 0.87
High School 530 sf/GFA 0.97 80% 0.78 3.7 1.19
Assisted Living, Nursing Home 254,620 bed 0.22 100% 0.22 2.8 0.90
Church 560 sf/GFA 0.55 100% 0.55 3.7 1.19
Hospital 610 sf/GFA 1.14 80% 0.91 4.0 1.29
Commercial- Restaurant
Restaurant 931 sf/GFA 7.49 80% 5.99 3.4 1.10
High Tumover Restaurant 932 sf/GFA 11.15 80% 8.92 2.3 0.74
Fast Food Restaurant 934 sf/GFA 33.84 50% 16.92 2.0 0.65
Espresso wId rive thru 938 sf/GFA 75.00 20% 15.00 2.0 0.65
Commercial- Retail Shopping
Shopping Center 820 sf/GLA 3.87 70% 2.71 2.1 0.68
Supennarket 850 sf/GFA 10.50 75% 7.88 2.1 0.68
Convenience Market 851 sf/GFA 52.41 45% 23.58 1.3 0.42
813,815,
Free Standing Discount Store 857, 863, sf/GFA 4.67 70% 3.27 2.1 0.68
864
HardwarelPaint Store 816 sf/GFA 4.84 40% 1.94 1.7 0.55
Specialty Retail Center 814 sf/GFA 2.71 50% 1.36 1.7 0.55
Furniture Store 890 sf/GFA 0.45 60% 0.27 1.7 0.55
Home Improvement Superstore 862 sf/GFA 2.37 70% 1.66 2.1 0.68
Pharmacy (with Drive Through) 881 sf/GFA 10.35 50% 5.18 1.7 0.55
Car Sales -Newl Used 841 sf/GFA 2.59 80% 2.07 4.0 1.29
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
50
February 2009
Page 15
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fP
F E H R & PH RS
--...-.---
Table 4. Impact Fee Schedule Components (Continued)
Commercial - Office
Medical Office
Industrial
Light Industry/Manufacturing
Heavy Industry
Industrial Park
Mini-Warehouse/Storage
Warehousing
Notes:
GF A = Gross Floor Area
GLA = Gross Leasable Area
For uses with Unit of Measure in SF, trip rate is given as trips per 1000 SF
VFP = Vehicle Fueling Positions (Maximum number of vehicles that can be fueled simultaneously)
710, 715,
750
720
sf/GFA
1.49
90%
1.34
4.0 1.29
4.0 1.29
4.0 1.29
4.0 1.29
4.0 1.29
4.0 1.29
4.0 1.29
General Office
sf/GFA
3.46
75%
2.60
110,140
120
130
151
150
sf/GFA
sf/GFA
sf/GFA
sf/GFA
sf/GFA
0.97
0.68
0.86
0.26
0.32
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
0.97
0.68
0.86
0.26
0.32
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
February 2009
Page 16
51
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
Pp
F E H R & PEE RS
________..____0___..__...___.
-
SCHEDULE OF RATES
The impact fee schedule of maximum allowable rates is shown in TableS. In the fee
schedule, fees are shown as dollars per unit of development for various Hind use categories,
as defined in Appendix B. The impact fee program is flexible, in that, if a use does not fit
into one of the categories, an impact fee can be calculated based on the development's
projected trip generation.
Two Zone Approach
A two zone approach will start with citywide cost per trip and apply lower trip generation
rates in City Center for certain land uses anticipated in the Planned Action SEP A. The City
Center is anticipated to have lower trip generation rates due to the higher density of
buildings, mix of land uses and the availability of transit. This results in lower impact fee
rates in City Center as shown in Table X.
Table X Reduced Trip Generation Rates in City Center
Insert Table
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
52
Febl"\.lary 2009
Page 17
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
Table 5. Impact Fee Schedule (Maximum Allowable Rates)
Residential
Single Family (Detached) 210 dwelling $11,175
Multi-Family 220, 221,230, dwelling $7,252
233
Senior Housing 251 dwelling $2,744
Mobile Home in MH Park 240 dwelling $5,222
Commercial- Services
Drive-in Bank 912 sf/GFA $73.46
Hotel 310 room $7,461
Motel 320 room $5,943
Day Care Center 565 sf/GFA $59.09
Library 590 sf/GFA $29.42
Post Office 732 sf/GFA $44.82
Service Station 944 VFP $29,816
Service Station with Minimart 945 sf/GFA $157
Auto Care Center 942 sf/GLA $16.46
Movie Theater 444,445 seat $433
Health Club 492,493 sf/GFA $25.95
Commercial - Institutional
Elementary School 520 sf/GFA $5.20
Middle/Jr High School 522 sf/GFA $8.13
High School . 530 sf/GFA $9.08
Assisted Living, Nursing Home 254, 620 bed $1,947
Church 560 sf/GFA $6.43
Hospital 610 sf/GFA $11.53
Commercial- Restaurant
Restaurant 931 sf/GFA $64.41
High Turnover Restaurant 932 sf/GFA $64.86
Fast Food Restaurant 934 sf/GFA $107
Espresso wId rive thru 938 sf/GFA $94.84
Commercial- Retail Shopping
Shopping Center 820 sf/GLA $17.99
Supermarket 850 sf/GFA $52.28
Convenience Market 851 sf/GFA $96.93
Free Standing Discount Store 813,815,857, sf/GFA $21.70
863,864
HardwarelPaint Store 816 sf/GFA $10.41
Specialty Retail Center 814 sf/GFA $7.28
Furniture Store 890 sf/GFA $1.45
Home Improvement Superstore 862 sf/GFA $11.01
Pharmacy (with Drive Through) 881 sf/GFA $27.81
Car Sales -Newl Used 841 sf/GFA $26.20
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
53
fp
F E H R & PE E RS
~~____W..__""'_.H__._..____
-
February 2009
Page 18
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
Table 5. Impact Fee Schedule Continued (Maximum Allowable Rates)
Commercial - Office
General Office
Medical Office
Industrial
Light Industry/Manufacturing
Heavy Industry
Industrial Park
Mini-Warehouse/Storage
Warehousing
Notes:
GF A = Gross Floor Area
GLA = Gross Leasable Area
For uses with Unit of Measure in SF, trip rate is given as trips per 1000 SF
VFP = Vehicle Fueling Positions (Maximum number of vehicles that can be fueled
simultaneously)
710, 715, 750
720
sf/GFA
sf/GFA
110,140
120
130
151
150
sf/GFA
sf/GFA
sf/GFA
sf/GFA
sf/GFA
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
54
$16.96
$32.82
$12.27
$8.60
$10.88
$3.29
$4.05
19>
rEHR & PEERS
--.-.--.----....----..-.--
-
February 2009
Page 19
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
f1>
rEHR & PEERS
--....-.--..-........--..--
--
Table 6 provides two examples (residential and office) of the calculation.
Table 6. Example Calculations of Impact Fee Rate (Maximum Allowable Rates)
x Percent New Trips 100% 90%
x Trip Length Adjustment
Trip Length (miles) 3.5 4.0
Average Trip Length (miles) 3.1 3.1
x Average Cost per Trip End $9,800 $9,800
.,.. Divide by 1000 for rate per square foot NA 1000
= Impact Fee Rate (per unit) $11,175/dwelling $16.96/sq ft
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
February 2009
Page 20
55
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fp
FEHR & PEERS
._.__....______.M._.___..__
--
APPENDIX A - COST ALLOCATION RESULTS
The cost allocation results are summarized in this Appendix. Exhibit A-I illustrates how
the impact fee project costs (shown in Table 1) were diyided into growth-related costs
attributable to the City. In order to determine this proportion, the City's travel demand
model was used to identify the portion of trip-making associated with existing and growth-
related traffic. A technique called" select-link" analysis was used to isolate the vehicle trips
using each of the impact fee projects. The first column of Exhibit A-I shows several "project
groups", which represent the grouping of impact fee projects used in the select link traffic
forecasts. Each project group includes impact fee projects that are located within close
proximity to each other, representing similar traffic patterns. The grouping of projects is
shown at the bottom of Exhibit A-I.
Exhibit A-1. Cost Allocation by Project Group
A $34,260,000 $0 $2,216 $34,257,784 17.4% $5,973,801
B $21,286,000 $0 $250,697 $21,035,303 28.5% $5,989,469
C $90,705,000 $0 $381,867 $90,323,133 56.8% $51,322,735
D $47,365,000 $0 $164,172 $47,200,828 34.2% $16,122,584
E $7,500,000 $0 $36,885 $7,463,115 37.0% $2,758,108
F $.15,672,000 $0 $0 $15,672,000 38.1% $5,972,561
G $20,771,000 $0 $253,129 $20,517,871 41.3% $8,468,565
H $82,781 ,000 $1,648,000 $243,131 $80,889,869 49.9% $40,337,576
Total $320,340,000 $1,648,000 $1,332,097 $317,359,903 $136,945,397
Total $317,359,903 43.2% $136,945,397
Project Group Definitions (used for grouping capacity projects for travel modeling)
A Northeast Federal Way
B North Central Federal Way, SR 509
C City Center
D 1-5 Interchanges at S 312th St and S 304th St
E S 336th Corridor
F West Federal Way
G South Central Federal Way, 21st Avenue SW
F Southeast Federal Way
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
February 2009
Page 21
56
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fp
rEHR & PEERS
"__'_H__'__._...__...~
,-
Exhibit A-2 shows how the growth costs were determined for each impact fee project. The
growth costs equal the total project cost subtracted by the existing deficiency amount and
growth related committed costs.
Exhibit A-2. Growth Cost Calculations
1 0 City Center Access Phase 3 $2,850,000 $164,172 $2,685,828
2 0 City Center Access Phase 4 20,621,000 20,621,000
3 B S 320th St @ 1st Ave S 12,600,000 135,331 12,464,669
4 C S 320th St: 8th Ave S - SR 99 15,523,000 259,762 15,263,238
5 H S 348th St @ 1st Ave S 5,400,000 1,000,000 170,446 4,229,554
6 G 10th Ave SW @ SW Campus Dr 1,308,000 1,308,000
7 G SW 344th St: 12th Ave SW - 21st Ave 7,115,000 253,129 6,861,871
SW
8 C S 320th St @ 20th Ave S 5,760,000 62,121 5,697,879
9 G 21st Ave SW @ SW 336th St 12,348,000 12,348,000
10 C SR 99 @ S 312th St 8,568,000 8,568,000
11 B SW 312th St: 14th Ave SW - SR 509 4,366,000 110,244 4,255,756
12 H S 356th St: SR 99 - SR 161 8,712,000 24,773 8,687,227
13 A S 304th St @ 28th Ave S 2,148,000 2,148,000
14 H S 352nd St: SR 99 - SR 161 5,200,000 47,912 5,152,088
15 B SW 320th St @ 21 st Ave SW 4,320,000 5,122 4,314,878
16 C S 320th St: 1 st Ave S - 8th Ave S 15,523,000 59,984 15,463,016
17 A Military Rd S: S Star Lake Rd - S 288th 13,068,000 13,068,000
St
18 F SW 320th St @ 47th Ave SW 360,000 360,000
19 A S 312th St @ 28th Ave S 540,000 2,216 537,784
20 F SW 336th Wy / SW 340th St: 26th PI 15,312,000 15,312,000
SW - Hoyt Rd
21 E S 336th St: 18th Ave S- 1,200,000 36,885 1 ,163,115
Weyerhaeuser Way S
22 H SR 99: S 340th St - S 356th St: 33,264,000 33,264,000
23 C S 312th St: 23rd Ave S - 28th Ave S 5,544,000 5,544,000
24 H S 348th St: 1 st Ave S - 9th Ave S 15,523,000 15,523,000
25 C S 324th St: SR 99 - 23rd Ave S 7,840,000 7,840,000
26 H 1 st Ave S: S 366th St - SR 99 5,610,000 5,610,000
27 C 14th Ave S: S 312th St- S 316th St 4,066,000 4,066,000
28 C S 316th St: SR 99 - 11th PI S 6,160,000 6,160,000
29 0 S 312th St: 28th Ave S - Military Rd 23,894,000 23,894,000
30 H SR18@SR161 9,072,000 648,000 8,424,000
31 A S 304th St @ SR 99 1,080,000 1,080,000
32 E SR 99 @ S 336th St 6,300,000 6,300,000
33 A Military Rd S: S 288th St - 1-5 17,424,000 17,424,000
34 C SW 330th St @ 1 st Ave S 377,000 377,000
35 C S 312th St: 1st Ave S to 14th Ave S 21,344,000 21,344,000
Total $320,340,000 $1,648,000 $1,332,097 $317,359,903
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
57
February 2009
Page 22
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
tp
FE H R & PEERS
----......--.------..-----.
-
APPENDIX B - LAND USE DEFINITIONS
The following land use definitions are derived from the ITE Trip Generation (8th Edition).
They have been modified as appropriate for the City of Federal Way. Land use codes
marked with and asterisk (*) were selected for use in the Impact Fee Schedule.
RESIDENTIAL
Single Family: One or more detached housing units located on an individual lot. Also
includes accessory dwelling units and duplexes. (ITE # 210)
Multi Family: A building or buildings designed to house three or more families living
independently of each other. Includes apartments, condos, attached duplexes and attached
townhouses. Includes accessory dwelling units (separate structure) and single room
occupancy, if additional parking provided. (ITE #s 220*, 221, 230, and 233)
Senior Housing: Residential units similar to apartments or condominiums restricted to
senior citizens. (ITE # 251. Uses 50 percent of trip generation values used for ITE #s 220*,
221, 230, and 233)
Mobile Home (in Mobile Home Park): Trailers shipped, sited, and installed on permanent
foundations within a mobile home park. (ITE # 240)
COMMERClAL-SERVICES
Drive-in Bank: A free-standing building, with or without a drive-up window, for the
custody or exchange of money, and for facilitating the transmission of funds. (ITE # 912)
Hotel: A place of lodging providing sleeping accommodations. May include restaurants,
cocktail lounges, meeting and banquet rooms or convention facilities. (ITE # 310)
Motel: A place of lodging providing sleeping accommodations. Motels generally offer free
on-site parking, little or no meeting space, and may have exterior corridors. (ITE # 320)
Day Care Center: A facility for the care of infant and preschool age children during the
daytime hours. Generally includes classrooms, offices, eating areas, and a playground.
(ITE # 565)
Library: A public facility for the use, but not sale, of literary, musical, artistic, or reference
materials. (ITE # 590)
Post Office: Houses service windows for mailing packages and letters, post office boxes,
offices, vehicle storage areas, and sorting and distribution facilities for mail. (ITE # 732)
Service Station: A facility used for the sale of gasoline, oil, and lubricants. May include
areas for servicing, repairing, and washing vehicles. (ITE # 944)
Service Station with Minimart: A facility which combines elements of a convenience store
and a gas station. Convenience food items are sold along with gasoline and other car
products; gas pumps are primarily or completely self-service. (ITE # 945)
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
February 2009
Page 23
58
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
11>
F E H R & PEE RS
-.--..-------....---.-..
--
Automobile Care Center: An automobile care center houses numerous businesses that
provide automobile-related services, such as repair and servicing, stereo installation and
seat cover upholstering. (ITE # 942)
Movie Theater: Consists of audience seating, one or more screens and auditoriums, and a
lobby and refreshment stand. Typically includes matinee showings. (ITE #s 444*, 445)
Health Club: Privately owned facilities that primarily focus on individual fitness or
training. They generally offer exercise or dance classes, weightlifting, fitness and gymnastics
equipments, spas, massage services, locker rooms and small restaurants or juice/ snack bars.
These may also include ancillary facilities, such as swimming pools, whirlpools, saunas and
tennis. (ITE #s 492*, 493)
COMMERCIAL-INSTITUTIONAL
Elementary School: These are facilities of education serving students attending
kindergarten through fifth or sixth grade. (ITE # 520)
Elementary and Junior High School: These are facilities of education serving students who
have completed elementary school and have not yet entered high school. (ITE #s 522)
High School: High Schools serve students who have completed middle or junior high
school. (ITE # 530)
Assisted Living, Nursing Home: One or more multi-unit buildings designed for the elderly
or those who are unable to live independently due to physical or mental handicap. Facilities
may contain dining rooms, medical facilities, and recreational facilities. The primary
function of a nursing home is to provide chronic or convalescent care for persons who by
reason of illness or infirmity are unable to care for themselves. Applies to rest homes,
chronic care, and convalescent centers. (ITE #s 254* and 620)
Church: A building providing public worship facilities. Generally houses as assembly hall
or sanctuary, meeting rooms, classrooms, and occasionally dining facilities. (ITE # 560)
Hospital: A building or buildings designed for the medical, surgical diagnosis, treatment
and housing of persons under the care of doctors and nurses. Rest homes, nursing homes,
convalescent homes and clinics are not included. (ITE #610)
COMMERCIAL-RESTAURANT
Restaurant: An eating establishment, which sells prepared food or beverages and generally
offers accommodations for consuming the food or beverage on the premises. Usually serves
breakfast, lunch, and/ or dinner; generally does not have a drive-up window. Includes bars/
taverns. (ITE # 931)
High Turnover Restaurant: A sit-down, full-service eating establishment with a turnover
rate of approximately one hour or less. This type of restaurant is usually moderately priced
and frequently belongs to a restaurant chain. Generally, these restaurants serve lunch and
dinner; they may also be open for breakfast and are sometimes open 24 hours per day.
(ITE # 932)
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
59
February 2009
Page 24
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
fP
FE H R & PEERS
_..~._.~....--_.__._._._._-.~
--
Fast Food Restaurant: An eating establishment that offers quick food service and a limited
menu of items. Food is generally served in disposable wrappings or containers, and may be
consumed inside or outside the restaurant building. Restaurants in this category have a
drive-up window. (ITE # 934)
Espresso Drive Thru: A drive-up kiosk serving coffee and related beverages. No inside
seating is provided and facilities are typically 200 square feet or smaller (ITE # 938; trip rates
using local surveys*)
COMMERCIAL-RETAIL
Shopping Center: An integrated group of commercial establishments that is planned,
developed, owned, or managed as a unit. On-site parking facilities are provided, and
administrative office areas are usually included. In addition to the integrated unit of shops
in one building or enclosed around a mall, include peripheral buildings located on the
perimeter of the center adjacent to the streets and major access points. Supermarkets should
typically be separated for calculation purposes from the rest of the shopping center.
(ITE # 820)
Supermarket: Retail store (greater than 5,000 gsf) that sells a complete assortment of food,
food preparation and wrapping materials, and household cleaning and servicing items.
(ITE # 850)
Convenience Market: A use (less than 5,000 gsf) that combines retail food sales with fast
foods or take-out food service; generally open long hours or 24 hours a day. (ITE # 851)
Free-Standing Discount Store: A free-standing store or warehouse with off-street parking.
Usually offers centralized cashiering and a wide range of merchandise and! or food
products. May include items sold in large quantities or bulk. Often is the only store on a
site, but can be found in mutual operation with its own or other supermarkets, garden
centers and service stations, or as part of community-sized shopping centers. Fred Meyer
stores, Costco, and big box consumer electronic/ computer! toy stores are examples of this
land use. (ITE #s 813, 815, 857, 863, and 864 - average of rates used)
HardwarefPaint Store: A small free-standing or attached store with off-street parking.
Stores sell hardware, paint, and related materials. Storage areas are not included in the total
gross floor area. (ITE # 816)
Specialty Retail Center: These retail centers are generally small strip shopping centers that
contain a variety of retail shops and specialize in quality apparel; hard goods; and services,
such as retail estate offices, dance studios, florists and small restaurants. (ITE # 814)
Furniture Store: Furniture stores specialize in the sale of furniture, and often, carpeting.
The stores are generally large and include storage areas. (ITE # 890)
Home Improvement Superstore: A free-standing warehouse type facility (25,000 to 150,000
gsf) with off-street parking. Generally offers a variety of customer services (home
improvements; lumber, tools, paint, lighting, wallpaper, kitchen and bathroom fixtures,
lawn equipment, and garden equipment) and centralized cashiering. (ITE # 862)
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
60
February 2009
Page 25
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REPORT
tp
rEHR & PEERS
---,,-~,'-----'-'---'--
-
Pharmacy (with drive-through window): A pharmacy which sells prescriptions and non-
prescription drugs, cosmetics, toiletries, medications, stationery, personal care products,
limited food products, and general merchandise. The drug stores may contain drive-
through windows. (ITE # 881)
Car Sales (New and Used): Facilities are generally located as strip development along major
arterial streets that already have a preponderance of commercial development. Generally
included are auto services and parts sales along with a sometimes substantial used-car
operation. Some dealerships also include leasing activities and truck sales and servicing.
(ITE # 841)
COMMERCIAL-OFFICE
General Office: An office building houses one or more tenants and is the location where
affairs of a business, commercial or industrial organization, professional person or firm are
conducted. The building or buildings may be limited to one tenant, either the owner or
lessee, or contain a mixture of tenants including professional services, insurance companies,
investment brokers, and company headquarters. Services such as a bank or savings and
loan, a restaurant or cafeteria, miscellaneous retail facilities, and fitness facilities for building
tenants may also be included. (ITE #s 710*, 715, and 750)
Medical Office: A facility which provides diagnoses and outpatient care on a routine basis
but which is unable to provide prolonged in-house medicalf surgical care. A medical office
is generally operated by either a single private physician. (ITE # 720)
INDUSTRIAL
Light IndustryjManufacturing: A facility where the primary activity is the conversion of
raw materials or parts into finished products. Generally also have offices and associated
functions. Typical uses are printing plants, material testing laboratories, bio-technology,
medical instrumentation or supplies, communications and information technology, and
computer hardware and software. (ITE #s 110* and 140)
Heavy Industry: These facilities usually have a high number of employees per industrial
plant and could also be categorized as manufacturing facilities. Heavy industrial uses are
limited to the manufacturing of large items. (ITE # 120)
Industrial Park: Areas containing a number of industrial or related facilities. They are
characterized by a mix of manufacturing, service, and warehouse facilities with a wide
variation in the proportion of each type of use from one location to another. Industrial
parks include research centers facilities or groups of facilities that are devoted nearly
exclusively to research and development activities. (ITE # 130)
Mini-Warehouse: Buildings in which a number of storage units or vaults are rented for the
storage of goods. Each unit is physically separated from other units, and access is usually
provided through an overhead door or other common access point. (ITE # 151)
Warehousing: Facilities that are primarily devoted to the storage of materials, including
vehicles. They may also include office and maintenance areas. (ITE # 150)
City of Federal Way
Transportation Impact Fee Rate Study
February 2009
Page 26
61
Exhibi+ IID"
CITY OF
Federal Way
STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Public Hearing - July 1, 2009
Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC)
Title 19, Zoning and Development Code
Division III. Mitigation and Fees
(File No. 09-102146-00-UP)
I. BACKGROUND
The Federal Way Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995 with Policy (TP85) which calls
for the implementation of a Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) system to better assure consistency with
concurrency requirements of the Growth Management Act (GMA).
TP 85 Develop a transportation impact fee by 2002 to simplify development review,
assess mitigationfees consistently andfairly, improve the City's ability to leverage grant
funding for transportation funding, and provide adequate infrastntcture to accommodate new
growth.
The impact fees are mitigation payments authorized under GMA (RCW 82.02.050). The
Traffic Impact Fee would replace the existing code-based pro-rata fees, and create a more
systematic way for applying the fees and fulfill the Comprehensive Plan Policy TP85.
II. EXISTING MITIGATION PROGRAM
Currently, the City utilizes two methods to collect traffic mitigation fees; the concurrency
system and the City Center Planned Action. Under the concurrency system which was
adopted in June 2006, all development outside the Planned Action SEPA area that generates
new trips is required to contribute pro-rata share mitigation to Transportation [mprovement
Plan (TIP) projects impacted by the development consistent with RCW 82.02.020. The
mitigation fees assessed are calculated on a case-by-case basis and vary from no mitigation to
over $5,900 per trip depending on the location of the development and projects on the TIP.
Under the concurrency system, the average pro-rata mitigation fee collected over the last two
year is approximately $2,729 per PM Peak Hour trip. For development within the City
Center Planned Action SEP A area, a set fee of $2,827 per trip has been established. All
development must pay the identified traffic mitigation fees prior to the issuance of a building
permit for commercial and multi-family projects and prior to plat recording for subdivision
projects. The funds from the traffic mitigation fees are used to support transportation
improvement projects listed in the City's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP).
:~
62
.<, '..
.
. .
III. PROPOSED TRAFFIC IMP ACT FEE PROGRAM
The proposed amendments would be a new code section, FWRC Title 19 "Zoning and
Development Code," Division III "Mitigation and Fees" requiring developers to mitigate
traffic impacts generated by new development to the city,
As mentioned above, under the current pro-rata share mitigation program, adopted in June
2006, fees for new development have varied from zero to $5,900 per trip depending on project
location. The proposed TIP would replace the existing pro-rata mitigation fee in the
concurrency code, create a more systematic way for applying the fees, and provide
predictability for the developers. The work involved with development of a TIF includes the
following important factors:
1. Forecast growth on the City's transportation network attributed to new traffic growth using
the Travel Demand model.
2. Identify transportation improvements, costs and existing deficiencies using adopted level of
service (LOS) thresholds.
3. Determine portion of costs attributed to future traffic growth in Federal Way.
4. [dentify other revenues needed.
5. Established a maximum impact fee rate based on the trips generated by traffic growth and
the costs associated with the transportation improvement projects needed to support that
growth. The City Council may refine this fee taking into consideration fees charged by the
surrounding cities and the city's ability to fund the transportation improvement projects.
On October 21,2009, staff presented to the Council an overview of the City's current
mitigation program and the proposed impact fee program. On February 17, 2009, staff returned
to a Council study session to present the result of the study with a maximum allowable impact
fee rate of $9,800 per PM Peak Hour Trip and discuss policy direction. The result of the initial
study is presented in Table I below.
Table 1. FW TIF Program
Total CIP eligible Project Costs $320 Million
Number of eligible projects 35 Projects
Traffic Growth - New Peak Hour Trip Ends 13,974
Number of Years (Assumed) 23 Years
Estimate Fee Revenues - (with Maximum Rate of $9,800) $137 Million
Portion of Project paid by new development in Federal Way 43%
Maximum allowable Cost per PM Peak Hour Trip (Citywide)* $9,800
*The City Council may refine this fee taking into consideration fees charged by the surrounding cities
and the city's ability to fund the transportation improvement projects.
Council provided direction to continue refining the fee rate with consideration of the current
mitigation fee collected and impact fees from adjacent jurisdictions.
Following the Council study session, staff met with the development community (Permit
Stakeholders) in early March of 2009 to discuss approaches and the proposed impact fee rate as
presented to Council. The Stakeholders list is attached as Exhibit "A". As a result of these
2
_'i
63
processes, staff surveyed surrounding cities in Snohomish, King and Pierce County and produced a
comprehensive overview of all city impact fees.
Local Cities Experience with the TIF Collection Timine and Fee Rate
In South King County and North Pierce County, the City of Auburn, City of Puyallup, City of
Tukwila and City of Maple Valley all have imposed traffic impact fees on new development. Their
traffic impact fee ranges from $1,244 per trip up to $6,272. The chart below depicts the city's
current average pro-rata share mitigation fee along with adjacent cities impact fee. Of the cities
surveyed, majority or all collect impact fee at the building permit stage. A more detailed
comparison of impact fee rates and collection timing is attached as Exhibit "B" - Transportation
Impact Fee Rates for Cities in Snohomish, Pierce and King County.
$3,769
$4,000 .
$3,500 $3,229
$3,000
$2,500
$2,000 .
$1,500
$1,000
$500
$-
Avg. Citywde Avg.3 Avg. Cities in Avg. of larger Avg. of
Concurrency Counties KC Cities with Comparable
Mitigation 25,000+ Pop. Cities
On May 6, 2009, staff returned to the development community to present the staff recommended
impact fee rate between $2,729 to $3,578 per PM Peak Hour Trip and the following key issues:
· Citywide one zone system
· Adjustmentslreduction up to 40 percent for qualified development within City Center
due to lower trip generation
· Collection of impact fee at building permit for all developments
The stakeholders recommended moving the TIF forward with an impact fee rate of $2,729 per PM
. Peak Hour trip, modifying the collection timing to the Certificate of Occupancy (C/O) and defer
implementation to July 2010. Staff concurred with the recommended fee of $2,729 per PM trip as
this is the average pro-rata mitigation fee current collected. Based on the recommended rate of
$2,729 per PM trip, a rate schedule was developed and attached as Exhibit "C". The following are
examples of typical developments and their potential traffic mitigation under the TIF program.
3
64
T ffi .
F E
ra IC ImDact ee xamD e
Example Land Use Size PM Peak Trip Transportation Total Project
Generated Impact Fee Traffic
Rate Mitil!ation
Single Family I Unit 1.01 I Unit $3,112 I Unit $3.112
Multi-Family (Townhouse) to Units 0.62/ Unit $2,019 I Unit $2,019
Restaurant 4,000 sf GLA 0.00449 I sf $13.45 I sf $53,800
Restaurant (City Center) 4,000 sf GLA 0.00449/ sf $9.42 I sf $37,680
IV. SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT
The proposed amendments are as follows:
Exhibit "D" - Chapter 19.91 - Transportation Impact Fee. This is all new code language and is
not underlined.
Exhibit "E" - Chapter 19.90 - Transportation Concurrency Management. The following
sections would be amended:
Section 19.90.010 - 'Trip Generation" definition is amended to read as follows:
'Trip Generation" means the number of peak hour trips estimated to be produced by the
development activity using Institute offfa#ie Transportation Engineers (ITE).
Section 19.90.130 Concurrency administration ~ Purpose and procedure.
Section (4) (j) is deleted entirely as it's not longer applicable with the TIF.
Section 19.90.140 (2) is amended to read as follows:
(2) Denial. If no appeal is transmitted to the director pursuant to FWRC 19.90.160 within +4
30 calendar days after issuance of the determination, the encumbrance shall be released and
made available for subsequent applications.
Section 19.90.160 is amended to read as follows:
The concurrency determination of the director may be appealed by the applicant or owner using
the same process as the underlying development permit application or as provided for in
process N of this title if there is no underlying development permit. The appeal, in the form of
a notice of appeal, must be delivered to the department of public works within +4 30 calendar
days after issuance of the decision of the director. [n those cases where the proposed
development activity may require a public hearing, the hearings may be combined.
Section 19.90.060 (2) is amended to read as follows:
(2) The following types of development permits are typically exempt from concurrency
management review and the requirements of this chapter because they do not create additional
long-term impacts on road facilities. However, if any development permit from the list below
generates any net new trips in the peak period, it shall not be exempt from concurrency
evaluation.
(a) Boundary line adjustment;
(b) Demolition permit;
(c) Electrical permit;
(d) Fire protection system permit;
(e) Tenant improvements with no change of use;
(0 Land surface modification;
4
,'t
65
(g) Lot line elimination;
(h) Mechanical permit;
(i) Plumbing permit;
(j) Right-of-way modification;
(k) Right-of-way use permit;
(I) Sign permit;
(m) Single-family remodeling with no change of use;
(n) Rezones;
(0) Comprehensive plan amendment;
(p) Shoreline permit;
(q) Commercial subdivisions;
(r) Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)
(s) Binding Site Plan CBSP)
(t) Business License
(u) Use Process [
V. ANAL YSIS OF KEY ISSUES
The proposed traffic impact fee if adopted would help to mitigate impacts created by new
development. This policy complies with the state's Growth Management Act (GMA) intent
that new growth and development should pay a proportionate share of the cost of new facilities
needed to serve the new growth and development.
As referenced above, staff met with Permit Stakeholders twice and as a result of this process
recommendations/suggestion raised by the group were addressed and incorporated into the
proposed code with the exception of collection timing. The following are keys issues from the
group with staff responses:
How would the TIF affect existing applications (vested for TIF)?
Staff Response: Any development permits application with a concurrency application in
conjunction with a complete land use application would be vested to the current pro-rata
mitigation system.
Are there any land uses that are exempt from paying impact fee?
Staff Response: Yes, only structures constructed by a regional transit authority as define in
RCW 82.02.09. No other uses are exempt, which is consistent with current pro-rata mitigation
system.
How will change of use be handled?
Staff Response: The impact fee for change of use would be assessed based on the difference of
the fees between the uses.
Can the mixed use development reduction/adjustment proposed in City Center be used
elsewhere in the City?
Staff Response: Yes, with supporting documentation to be provided by the applicant.
In developing the impact fee rate, would the City provide average impact fee from other
jurisdictions for comparison?
Staff Response: [n this area, the City of Auburn. City of Puyallup, City of Tukwila and City of
Maple Valley all have imposed traffic impact fees on new development. Their traffic impact
5
(i
66
fee ranges from $1,244 per trip up to $6,272. Staff also considered other cities within the three
counties (King, Pierce and Snohomish County) that have a transportation impact fee rates. The
impact fee rate from all the cities in the three counties is attached (Exhibit B).
Would the City consider using the 6-Year TIP project list and not the CIP project list as a
based for the TIF calculation?
Staff Response: Yes. The consultant evaluated both options and provided staff with a cost per
trip with pros and cons for each. The maximum allowable cost per trip for the 6- Year TIP
project is $12,587 and $9,800 for the CIP. The 6- Year TIP project would be approximately
$2,787 per trip over the CIP (2030) project. Please see table below for calculations.
~o 15 TIP 12030 CIP
Project Costs $161.6 M $320.3 M
Years 6 23
Traffic Growth Trips 5,221 13,974
Cost Per PM Trip ~12,587 :Ji9,800
When would Impact Fee payment required?
Staff Response: Currently, mitigation fees are collected prior to building permit issuance for
commercial and multi-family projects and prior to plat recording for subdivision projects.
Under the proposed impact fee system, staff is proposing to have impact fee payable at
building permits issuance for all developments which is consistent with adjacent cities
collection method and as recommended by the consultant. Please see attachment of
Transportation lmpact Fee Rates for Cities in Snohomish, King and I?ierce County.
On May 6, 2009 meeting with the development community, the consensus among the
Stakeholders group was to have the impact fee payable at the issuance of a Certificates of
Occupancy (CIO) for all developments with the flexibility for director to modify on a case-by-
case basis. It is assumed that pushing the payment to the Certificates of Occupancy would
reduce the amount financed by the applicant to complete the project, thereby reducing finance
charges; and savings gained by the developer are then passed on to the end user.
Only two jurisdictions (Kitsap and Pierce Counties) within Washington have implemented
payment of impact fees after building permits issuance. Since then, these jurisdictions have
changed their collection timing due to default of impact fee payments. Pierce County repealed
their ordinance due to a 27 percent delinquency rate. Kitsap County changed their collection
point to final inspection instead of Certificate of Occupancy due to high delinquency rates.
The Kitsap County Prosecuting Attorneys Office is currently exploring ways of collecting
unpaid impact fees.
The following are list of potential pros and cons for each of collection timing method:
Building Pennits Issuance
Pros:
6
,,,
67
L. Consistent with most or all of cities with impact fee program
2. Minimal staff time to administer with high coLLection rate without institutional
enforcement
3. Predictability as impact fee wouLd be assessed and payable at the same time
Cons:
1. May add financing cost for development due to financing charges
Certificate of Occupancy (C/O)
Pros:
I. May lower financing cost for deveLopment
2. Timing of payment of fee coincides with timing of actuaL impacts
Cons:
I. Staff may be pressured to grant Certificate of Occupancy to projects that are
completed with the exception of fee payment.
2. Projects often change hands during the construction process and the end user may
not realize that fees are tied to Certificate of Occupancy.
3. [ncrease staff time devoted to tracking deferred fees and deLinquent collection
activity
4. High delinquency rate as demonstrated in Pierce and Kitsap County
5. Impact fee may be higher at time of collection than at building permit issuance
VI. Environmental Review
Pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(19), the proposed amendments are categorically exempt from
review under the State Environmental Policy Act as it reLates to governmentaL procedures and
contains no substantive standards respecting use or modification of the environment.
VII. ST AFF R.ECOMMENDA TION
Staff recommends that the code amendment attached as Exhibit "D" and fee schedule as
Exhibit "e" be recommended for approval to the City Council. Due to current economic
climate and the potential perception that the TIP would be a new fee in addition to, rather than
a replacement for the current pro-rata mitigation system, staff proposes to defer
implementation to July I, 20LO.
VIII. BASIS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
FWRC Title 19 "Zoning and Development" Chapter 19.80 "Process V[ Review" establishes a
process and criteria for development reguLation amendments. Consistent with Process V[ review,
the role of the Planning Commission is as foLLows:
1. To review and evaluate the proposed development regulation amendments.
2. To determine whether the proposed development regulation amendment meets the criteria
provided by FWRC L 9.80.130
3. To forward a recommendation to City Council regarding adoption of the proposed
development regulation amendment.
7
...:(
68
IX. DECISIONAL CRITERIA
FWRC 19.80.130 provides criteria for development regulation amendments. The following
section analyzes the compliance of the proposed amendments with the criteria provided by
FWRC 19.80.130. The City may amend the text of the FWRC only if it finds that:
1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the
comprehensive plan.
The proposed FWRC text amendment is consistent with the following Federal Way
Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) goals and policies:
LUP-6 Conduct regular reviews of development regulations to detennine how to
improve upon the permit review process.
TP 85 Develop a transportation impact fee by 2002 to simplify development review.
assess mitigation fees consistently andfairly, improve the City's ability to
leverage grant funding for transportation funding, and provide adequate
infrastructure to accommodate new growth.
HP-8 Consider the economic impact of all development regulations on the cost of
housing.
2. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to public health, safety,
or welfare.
The proposed amendment bears substantial relationship to public health, safety, and
welfare as it seeks to ensure funding for capital projects in meeting concurrency and
provide development with predictability, consistency and fairness in assessing traffic
impact thus may reduce finance charges to the developer. Consistency and predictability
for developers may encourage new development bringing new jobs and providing more
economic activity in the city.
3. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the residents of the City.
The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the residents of the city as its intent is to
have new development pay a proportionate share of the cost of new facilities needed to
serve new growth, ensure funding for capital projects to meet concurrency needs and
provide predictability, consistency and fairness to the developers in assessing development
impact fees.
X. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Consistent with the provisions of FWRC 19.80.240, the Planning Commission may take the
following actions regarding the proposed development regulation amendments:
I. Recommend to City Council adoption of the FWRC text amendments as proposed;
2. Modify the proposed FWRC text amendments to reflect the Permit Stakeholders
preference for Impact Fee collection prior to issuance of Certificate of Occupancy,
and recommend to City Council adoption of the FWRC text amendments as
modified;
8
.:l
69
3. Modify the proposed FWRC text amendments and recommend to City Council
adoption of the FWCC text amendments as modified;
4. Recommend to City Council that the proposed FWRC text amendments not be
adopted; or
5. Forward the proposed FWRC text amendments to City Council without a
recommendation.
EXHIBITS
A - Stakholders Distribution List Name
B - Transportation Impact Fee Rates for Cities in Snohomish, Pierce, and King County
C - Federal Way Impact Fee Components and Schedule
D - Chapter 19.91 Transportation Impact Fees
E - Chapter 19.90 Transportation Concurrency Management
Report Prepared by:
Rick Perez, P.E., City Traffic Engineer
9
...:4.
70
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
PLANNING COMMISSION
July 1,2009
7:00 p.m.
City Hall
Council Chambers
MEETING MINUTES
Commissioners present: Merle Pfeifer, Hope Elder, Lawson Bronson, Wayne Carlson, Tom Medhurst, Tim
O'Neil, and Sarady Long. Commissioners absent: none. Staff present: Senior Planner Margaret Clark,
Public Works Director Marwan Salloum, City Traffic Engineer Rick Perez, Assistant City Attorney Peter
Beckwith, and Administrative Assistant Tina Piety. _
Chair Pfeifer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ApPROV AL OF MINUTES
The minutes of May 20, 2009, were approved as written.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
ADMINISTRATIVE REpORT
None
COMMISSION BUSINESS
PuBLIC HEARING - Traffic Impact Fee
Commissioner Long recused himself as he is the city's project manager for the Traffic Impact Fee (TIF).
He asked if it would be acceptable for him to remain in the audience to be available to answer questions.
Chair Pfeifer replied that would be acceptable.
Mr. Perez delivered the staff report. He explained that currently the city uses a concurrency analysis to
detennine if traffic mitigation is necessary. The city uses a pro-rata share mitigation method (which can
result in fees ranging from zero up to $5,600 per trip) to arrive at the mitigation fee. For projects in the city
center, a set fee (as determined by the City Center Planned Action) is used. SEPA mitigation is used for
construction improvements beyond projects identified in the program and site~specific impacts. The city is
proposing a set TIP as opposed to the pro-rata share mitigation method. The concurrency analysis would
still be done and SEP A mitigation will not change.
Mr. Don Samdahl with Fehr & PeersIMirai continued the presentation with information on the reasons to
have a TIF, state requirements, and how the proposed amount of the fee was developed.
Mr. Perez stated that the city worked closely with a Stakeholders Group. That group agrees with the city's
proposal, with the exception of when the payment of the fee should be made. The Stakeholders Group
believes the payment of the TIF should occur at the time of the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy
(CO). The city believes the fee should be paid at the time of building pennit issuance. The pros and cons are
,:~
K:\Planning Commission\2009\M~ing Summary 07-0 L-Q9.doc
71
Planning Commission Minutes
Page 2
July 1.2009
as follows:
Certificate of Occupancy (CO)
Pros: - May lower financing cost for development
- Payment of mitigate fee coincide with timing of actual impacts
Cons: - Staff may be pressured to grant Certificate of Occupancy to projects that are completed with
exception of fee payment
- Projects often change hands during the construction process and the end user may not realize
that fees are tied to Certificate of Occupancy
- Increased staff time to: develop a new system, track deferred fees, and collect delinquent fees
- High delinquency rate as demonstrated in Pierce and Kitsap County
- Impact fee may be higher at time of collection than at building issuance
Building Permit Issuance
Pros: - Consistent with most or all of cities with impact fee program
- Minimal staff time to administer with high collection rate without institutional enforcement
- Predictability as impact fee would be assessed and payable at the same time
- Consistent with current practice for school impact fee
Cons: - May add financing cost for development due to financing charges
Conunissioner O'Neil asked if under the current system, unused funds are returned. Mr. Perez replied that
funds are retuned if they have not been spent on the designated project within five years. Commissioner
O'Neil how much has been returned in the last ten years. Mr. Perez stated that he has been with the city
about 13 years. In that time the city has, on average, collected over a million dollars a year in traffic
mitigation. Of the total funds collected in those years, the city has had to return less than $10,000.
Conunissioner O'Neil asked how often the TIP amount will be adjusted. Mr. Perez replied that it will be
adjusted annually for inflation and a new rate study will be performed every three years.
Conunissioner Carlson commented that this is one of the best TIPs he has seen. He believes that in light of
the pros and cons, collection should be done at the building permit issuance. A number of other
jurisdictions collect a TIP and do so at the building permit issuance stage.
Conunissioner Carlson expressed some concern with the projected Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
project cost of approximately $320 million. Does it reflect potential impacts from surrounding
communities, or just growth within Federal Way? Mr. Perez replied that it is based on historical averages
for growth within Federal Way. Growth in surrounding communities could increase the amount.
Vice-Chair Elder commented that she would prefer that the TIP be collected at the building permit
issuance stage in order to protect a new homeowner from a possible unexpected fee at the time of the CO.
Conunissioner Medhurst asked if a contractor's cost of improvements would offset the TIP. Mr. Perez
replied that it would depend upon the location of the project; whether it was on the Transportation
Improvement Plan (TIP) and if so, it is possible that the cost of improvements could offset the TIF.
Mr. Perez stated that due to the current economic climate it is possible the TIP could be regarded as a new
fee, as opposed to a replacement of the current system. Because of this, staff recommends that
,~
K:\Planning Corrunission\2009\Meeting Summary 07-01.09.doc
72
Planning Commission Minutes
Page 3
July 1,2009
implementation of the TIF be deferred to July 1,2010.
Commissioner Bronson noted that the current project map shows only one project on a state highway. Does
the state help pay for improvements on 99? Mr. Perez replied that city attempts to obtain state funds, but
the state focus is on major freeways and does not have much money for smaller highways.
Chair Pfeifer asked if other cities use our current system of the pro-rata share mitigation method. Mr. Perez
responded that some do use it, but more and more cities are moving to a TIF because of its predictability.
Chair Pfeifer asked if the TIF amount is more expensive than the current pro-rata share mitigation method.
Mr. Perez responded that while it would depend upon the project, the staffs research showed that for
many projects the overall TIF cost would be lower than the current method. Specifically, the Rivera
OfficelMedical building paid $258,019 under the current system, but under the proposed TIF it would
have been $129,500. The Fred Meyer fuel project paid $207,664, but would have paid only $83,030 under
the proposed TIF. Finally, the Sound Credit Union Bank, which is a city center project, paid $255,551, but
under the proposed TIF would have paid only $52,454.
Commissioner 0' Neil commented that according to Staff Report Exhibit B, the amount of the TIF varies
greatly between cities. Mr. Samdahl responded that one reason for that is that the cities use different
methods to arrive at the TIF amount.
Commissioner Carlson moved (and it was seconded) to recommend adoption of the staff recommendation
with collection of the TIF to occur at the building permit issuance. There was one abstain and six yes; the
motion passed.
The public hearing was closed.
AODITIONAL BUSINESS
Ms. Clark stated that the Planning Commission regularly scheduled meeting of July 15th has been moved to
July 22, 2009. At that time, the Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on Plat and Land Use
AppLication Time Limit Extensions and Vesting Clarification.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
AOJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m.
.:~
K:\Planning Commi.ssion\2009\Mea.ing SUllUl\JIY 07 -0 1-09_doc
73
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 6,2009
ITEM
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: Emergency Equipment purchase Update
POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council approve the purchase of additional emergency equipment to
assist the City in providing services to our citizens and businesses during emergency conditions?
COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee
MEETING DATE: September 14, 2009
CATEGORY:
[gI Consent D Ordinance
D City Council Business D Resolution
STAFF REpORT By: Cary M. Roe, Director of Parks, Public Works
and Emergency Management
D Public Hearing
D Other
DEPT: Public Works
Attachments: Memorandum to the Land Use and Transportation Committee dated September 14, 2009.
Options Considered:
1. Authorize staff to purchase the additional emergency equipment listed in the attached LUTC
memorandum utilizing the emergency equipment purchase fund balance.
2. Authorize staff to purchase some subset of the emergency equipment listed in the attached LUTC
memorandum utilizing the emergency equipment purchase fund balance.
3. Do not authorize staff to purchase the additional equipment.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Option 1 be forwarded to October 6,2009 City Council Consent
Agenda for approval.
CITYMANAGERAPPROVAL:6-lv.j~ ~fil/ M
DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
ChWl
Committee
Council
Committee
Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Forward staff recommendation to October 6, 2009 Council Consent Agenda
for approval.
Linda Kochmar, Chair
Jim Ferrell, Member
Dini Duclos, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "J move approval to authorize staff to purchase the additional emergency
equipment listed in the attached LUTe memorandum utilizing the emergency equipment purchase fund
balance. "
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFF/CE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
o APPROVED
o DENIED
o TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION
o MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED - 02/06/2006
COUNCIL BILL #
1 ST reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE #
RESOLUTION #
74
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
September 14,2009
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Brian Wilson, Interim City Manager
Cary M. Roe, P.E., Director of Parks, Public Works and Emergency Management
Emel1!ency Equipment Purchase Update
~
BACKGROUND:
As part of the 2007/08 mid biannual budget adjustments the City Council appropriated $1,725,490 for the
purchase of equipment that would assist staff in improving the City's response to winter storms and
emergency situations. The List of equipment is organized into the following four categories:
. Snow & Ice Equipment
. Auxiliary Power Equipment/Electrical Upgrades
. Emergency Communication Equipment
. Community Preparedness Grant Program
All of the equipment purchased was authorized by the city council has been completed and operational.
Project cost data is summarized below.
Budgeted Amount Final Cost
(including contingencv)
Snow & Ice Equipment $556,429 $545,662
Auxiliary Power Equipment/Electrical Upgrades $1,014,061 $941,359
Emergency Communication Equipment $55,000 $38,889
Community Preparedness Grant Program $100,000 $100,000
Subtotal $1,725,490 $1,625,910
Available Balance $99,580
Staff investigated the need for any additional emergency equipment to improve the cities response to
future winter and ice storm storms and other emergency situations. The following list and estimated costs
have been developed:
. Retrofit an existing 1.5 ton Park Department truck with sander and plow to
handle City owned facilities (City Hall parking lot, Community Center $20,000
parking lot etc.)
. Purchase and install three-sided cover for the salt and sand storage bins at $20,000
Steel Lake maintenance yard
. Purchase and install a total of six (6) portable GPS units on the Snow and Ice $10,000
trucks.
. Portable trailer for temoorarv traffic control devices $ 5,000
Total Estimated Cost $55,000
Staff requests Council approval for the purchase of the addition emergency equipment as listed above
utilizing the 2008 emergency equipment purchase fund balance.
cc:
Project File
Day File
75
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 6, 2009
ITEM
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: Department of Ecology Stormwater Grant - FY 2010 Grant Funding Offer
POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council authorize staff to pursue a State Department of Ecology Stormwater Grant
for $50,000 to be used to assist the City in implementing the new Phase II NPDES permit?
COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee MEETING DATE: September 14,2009
CA TEGORY:
~ Consent 0 Ordinance 0 Public Hearing
o City Council Business 0 Resolution 0 Other
~l'~!".!_~!"O~T l.!Y-.:_~U!i~_~p-E!~ton,!>.:E.~~,:!.x.i~~.C::_~ at~_~an~g~~~~: Pu~ic W ork~____.._______
Attachments:
1. Memorandum to Land Use and Transportation Committee dated September 14,2009
2. August 20th, 2007 email from Ecology offering a grant of $50,000 and requesting the City submit 3
signed copies of the attached grant agreement by October 30,2009.
3. Copy ofFY 2010-2011 Phase II Stormwater Pass-Through Grant Agreement between Washington State
Department of Ecology and the City OF Federal way.
Options Considered:
Ecology has funds to disperse to local NPDES Phase II jurisdictions and will be doing so via a $50;000 grant to
each jurisdiction with no match required. Each jurisdiction must submit three (3) signed originals of the attached
grant agreement by October 30th, 2009 or forfeit the grant monies. The grant can only be used to assist the City
in implementing the new NPDES Phase II permit requirements.
1. Authorize the Interim City Manager to execute and submit the required grant agreement in order to
obtain grant assistance in the amount of $50,000.
2. Do not authorize staff to execute and submit the agreement and provide direction to staff.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Forward Option
approval. I
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ,Dl,.,./t.vl ~ /tt/M
Committee
1 to the October 6, 2009 City Council Consent Agenda for
DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
~
Council
Committee
Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Forward staff recommendation to the October 6, 2009 City Council Consent
Agenda for approval.
Linda Kochmar, Chair
Jim Ferrell, Member
Dini Duclos, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "] move to authorize the Interim City Manager to prepare and execute the
grant agreement required to apply for grant assistance in the amount of$50,000."
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
o APPROVED
o DENIED
o TABLEDfDEFERRED/NO ACTION
o MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED - 02/06/2006
76
COUNCIL BILL #
1ST reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE #
RESOLUTION #
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
September 14,2009
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Brian Wilson, Interim City Manager , j /
William Appleton, P.E., Surface Water Manager tfr .
Phase II Stormwater Pass-throu~h Grant
BACKGROUND:
In August of 2009, the Department of Ecology announced the availability of Grant funding in an amount
up to $50,000.00 for each Phase II jurisdiction. Grant funding is to be used to carry out the requirements
of the NPDES permit through training, equipment purchases, education and outreach,
inspection/monitoring and program development. There are no matching requirements for this grant. The
grant application is due by October 31,2009 and all funds awarded must be expended by June 30th, 2011.
Staff is requesting authorization to proc.eed with applying for the subject grant.
cc: Project File
Day File
77
William Appleton
From:
Sent:
To:
McCrea, Rachel (ECY) [rmcc461@ECY.WA.GOV}
Friday, August 21, 2009 10:13 AM
CAnderso@co.whatcom.wa.us; breilly@cob.org; BobCecile@cityofferndale.org;
michaels@co.skagit.wa.us; don@cityofanacortes.org; mattr@cityofanacortes.org;
briand@ci.burlington.wa.us; blainec@ci . mount-vernon. wa.us; mstockton@ci.sedro-
woolley.wa.us; steve.bebee@oakharbor.org; Allen Quynn; Andrews, Maiya; Apfelbeck, Cami;
Archer, Andrea; Bennett, Jay; Benson, Boyd; Bertrand, Vince; boettcher, seth; Bond, Jared;
Brian Landau; Carlaw, Tim; Cecil, Rika; Chennault, Kari; Chew, Marci; Clark, Arnie; Clarke,
Ken; Cunningham, John; David Casey; Don Robinett; Dorsey, Mark; Edward Mulhern;
Famurewa, Ruth; Funk, Anya; Gaus, Jenny; Geer, Janet; Gilbertson, Shawn; Gonzales, Jed;
Greg Villanueva; Halverson, Aaron; Hansen, Tom; Hill, Melva; Johnson, Mike; Jones, Scott;
Kelly, James; Kibbey, Heather; Kirk, Brent; Kristin Terpstra; LaFrance, Eric; Landry, Peter;
Larson, Ryan; Latimer, Karen; Lee, Steve; Lim, Heungkook; Loch, Andy; Loewen, Ron;
Maag, Rich; Matel, Larry; Mecham, Michael; Moles, Tod; Niggemyer, Jim; Olson, Craig;
Ostergaard, Dave; Parrish, Ben; Pistoll, Diana; Rheaume, Andy; Ritland, Kerry; Robinson,
Eric; roetemeyer, jerallyn; Romack, Lyle; sansbury, bill; Shaw, Mike; Shuster, Jerry;
Srilofung, Ken; Stewart, Clayton; Straka, Ronald; Thorn, Chris; Thurlow, Theresa; Tucker,
David; Varner, Phyllis; Vaughan, Kent; Wasserman, Mitch; Waters, Larry; William Appleton;
Williams, Jessica; Willis, Joe; Wolanek, Mike; Zenk, Frank;- Zimmerman, Jane
Dettelbach, Anne (ECY); Hood, Steve (ECY)
FW: Ecology Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grants
Picture (Device Independent Bitmap).bmp
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Please excuse any duplication. Anne and I want to make sure this email below about the $50K grants reached
all of you on our regional distribution list of permittee contacts.
Have a great weekend.
Thank you,
Rachel McCrea
Municipal Stormwater Specialist
Department of Ecology NWRO
425-649-7223
Check Ecology's \Jvebpages for regularly updated resources and frequently asked questions associated with the
Municipal Stormwater Permits:
httpJ/www,ecy.wa.fNv/programs/wqfstormwater/mun idpa I/resources tra [ning guidance. htm!
From: Winz, Jocelyn (ECY)
Sent: Thursday, August 20,200912:11 PM
To: Winz, Jocelyn (ECY)
Cc: Beale, Harriet (ECY); Dettelbach, Anne (ECY); McCrea, Rachel (ECY); Duncan, David Joseph (ECY); Wittmeier, Terry
(ECY); Fremont, Kurt (ECY); Winters, Gregory (ECY); Hood, Steve (ECY)
Subject: Ecology Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grants
To: City and county government Phase II permit coordinators:
78
The Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) announces a funding program for cities, towns, and counties
covered by the Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit and the Eastern Washington Phase
II Municipal Stormwater Permit. Each city, town, and county covered by a Phase II permit is eligible for
$50,000 to support implementation of permit requirements, with no match required.
Today we mailed 3 documents in hard copy to the authorized representative for your jurisdiction (generally
the mayor or public works director), including:
. An offer letter with instructions
. Guidelines for the grant program
. A grant funding agreement
Please follow up within your jurisdiction to fill out the scope of work in the grant agreement consistent with
the guidelines. Please return 3 signed copies ofthe grant agreement by October 30, 2009.
Copies of these materials to download are available on our I!llJn.t9.[J?1!L~!9.r.mY.!t.ill;.~!:.f~.mii.n.~Dy'gQP"~g.~.
If you have questions about the scope of work or grant procedures that the guidelines do not answer, you may
contact you r_Ec~'1.qE.Y.B~,gI~~il.~~.G:rlLt.~~~I~ lis!.
For your information: Overview of Ecology stormwater funding opportunities
In order to prevent confusion about the various Ecology stormwater funding programs, we provide the list
below ofthe funding programs related to stormwaterthat Ecology is offering in the next few months:
1. Phase II Municipal Stormwater Pass-through Grants, FY 2010-2011
A funding program only for Phase II local government permittees, as announced in the above
message.
2. Municipal Stormwater Grants of Regional and Statewide Significance, FY 2010-2011
A funding program only for Phase I and Phase II municipal stormwater local government
permittees. We are issuing a Request for Grant Proposals to permittees in a separate message
on August 25, 2009.
3. Ecology's FY2011 Water Quality Combined Fund Assistance Funding Cycle at
b~!.QJ.l~y.w.}y.:.?.~Y.:.Y:{!:H?g'yjr~rg.g[~.m~l.~'!Y.gi.f!dnQ.[j}gL:f.Y.QQJ.n.g:.b.!m.J i nc I ud est he fo Ilowi ng fu n ding p rog ra ms that
solicit proposals that also address stormwater:
Centennial Clean Water Grant Program
Clean Water Act Section 319 Grant Program
Revolving Fund Loan Program
79
Stormwater Retrofit and Low Impact Development projects - Approximately $4 million has been
appropriated for this program. This program will use the current Combined Financial Assistance Funding Cycle
application and run concurrently with that process, with applications being accepted starting September 1,
2009 and accepted no later than December 1, 2009.
Thank you.
Jocelyn \Vinz
Outreach & Edl.lcation
Department of Ecology
360.407.7529
~1'.lI.I.rJj
.~'{..~~W-:............t..............".
ounsTO.PROTeOT....
80
5C3~e cr \N\:-1shi:,,:g;::un
FY2010-2011 PHASE II STORMWATERPASS-THROUGH
GRANTS PROGRAM
GRANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
AND
the City Of Federal Way
DEf'!;~_TMEtH OF
ECOLOGY
THIS is a binding agreement entered into, by, and between the state of Washington Department of
Ecology (DEPARTMENT), and the City Of Federal Way (RECIPIENT). The purpose of this
agreement is to provide funds to the RECIPIENT to cany out the requirements described herein.
PART I. GENERAL INFORMATION
Project Title:
Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grant
Program
Grant Number:
C'd COO 22-;,L
City Of Federal Way
P.O. Box 9718
Federal Way, W A 98063-9718
RECIPIENT Name and Address:
RECIPIENT Contact:
Telephone Number:
Fax Number:
E-Mail Address:
William Appleton, P.E.
253.835.2750
253.835.2709
william. appleton@cityoffederalway.com
RECIPIENT Billing Contact:
Telephone Number:
Fax Number:
E-Mail Address:
William Appleton, P.E.
253.835.2750
253.835.2709
william. appleton@cityoffederalway.com
RECIPIENT Federal ID Number:
91-6001025
DEPARTMENT Project/Financial Manager:
Mailing Address: Water Quality Program
Washington State Department of Ecology
P.O. Box 47600
Olympia, W A 98504-7600
360- 407-6502
360- 407-7151
Telephone Number:
Fax Number:
E-Mail Address:
DESIGNATED LOCAL
GOVERNMENT PARTNERS
ECY 070-357
81
Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
( if applicable)
For partnerships, the lead government and partners must submit a copy of the signed agreement in
Appendix B with each copy of the grant agreement.
DEPARTMENT Funding Source:
2010-2011 BienI)ial Operating Budget/Local
Toxics Control Account
Total Cost (up to $50,000 each recipient):
Total Eligible Cost (up to $50,000 each Recipient):
$ 50,000
$ 50,000
DEPARTMENT Share ($50,000 each Recipient):
$ 50,000
DEPARTMENT Maximum Percentage: 100%
.Ju.J!:) 1/ :L001
The effective date of this grant agreement is _' Any work performed prior to the effective
date of this agreement will be at the sole expense and risk of the RECIPIENT.
This agreement expires on June 30, 2011.
PART ll. PERFORMANCE MEASURES
A. Water Quality Goal.
Improved storm water management and water quality protection associated with
development and implementation of a storrnwater management program.
B. Proiect Outcomes.
Local Government Storm water Grants for local governments to receive grants fOf
municipal stormwater programs, including but not limited to implementation of Phase II
municipal stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits.
C. Post Project Assessment.
The RECIPIENT agrees to submit a brief survey three years after project completion
regarding the key project outcomes and the status of environmental results or goals from
the project. The DEPARTMENT's Performance Measures Lead will e-;-mail the
RECIPIENT the Post Project Assessment Survey.
The DEPARTMENT may conduct on-site interviews and inspections, and may otherwise
evaluate the Project. The DEPARTMENT will enter the information provided into its
performance measures database to be provided to the Washington State Legislature,
United States Environmental Protection Agency, and other natural resource agencies.
Approximate Post Project Assessment Date: June 30,2012
Page 2 of 17
82
Phase II Storm water Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
PART lll. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The RECIPIENT's stormwater project will address implementation or management of municipal
stormwater programs.
PART IV. PROJECT BUDGET
Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grant Program
TOTAL ELIGIBLE
ELEMENTS COST (TEC)*
Task 1 - Project Administration/Management (limited to 10% of total) $ 5,000
Task 2 - Implementation and management of Stormwater Program $ 45,000
Total (limited to $50,000 per Recipient partner) $ 50,000
*The DEPARTMENT's Fiscal Office will track to the Total Eligible Project Cost.
MATCHING REQUIREMENTS (There are no matching requirements)
DEPARTMENT Share FY 2010-11 (100% ofTEC) $ 50,000
Payment Request Submittals. Payment requests will not be submitted more often than monthly,
unless allowed by the DEPARTMENT's ProjectIFinancial Manager. The DEPARTMENT's
Project/Financial Manager may require the RECIPIENT to submit regular payment requests to
ensure efficient and timely use of funds.
Payment Schedule. Payments will be made on a cost-reimbursable basis.
PART V. SCOPE OF WORK
The RECIPIENT shall ensure that this project is completed according to the details of this
agreement. The RECIPIENT may elect to use its own forces or it may contract for professional
services necessary to perform and complete project related work. The RECIPIENT certifies by
signing this agreement that all applicable requirements have been satisfied in the procurement of
any professional services. Eligible and ineligible project costs are separate and identifiable for
billing purposes. If professional services are contracted, the RECIPIENT shall submit a copy of
the final contract to the DEPARTMENT's Project/Financial Manager.
Task 1 - Project AdministrationlMana{!ement
A. The RECIPIENT shall administer the project. Responsibilities will include, but not be
limited to: maintenance of project records; submittal of payment vouchers, fiscal forms,
and progress reports; compliance with applicable procurement, contracting, and interlocal
Page 3 of 17
83
Phase II Storm water Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
agreement requirements; application for, receipt of, and compliance with all required
permits, licenses, easements, or property rights necessary for the project; and submittal of
required performance items.
B. The RECIPIENT shall manage the project. Efforts will include: conducting,
coordinating, and scheduling project activities and assuring quality control. Every effort
will be made to maintain effective communication with the RECIPIENT's designees; the
DEPARTMENT; all affected local, state, or federal jurisdictions; and any interested
individuals or groups. The RECIPIENT shall carry out this project in accordance with
any completion dates outlined in this agreement.
C. The RECIPIENT shall submit all invoice voucher submittals and supportive
documentation, to the DEPARTMENT's ProjectIFinancial Manager. Copies of all
applicable forms shall be included with an original A19-IA, and shall be submitted to the
DEPARTMENT. Blank forms are found in Administrative Requirements for Recipients
of Ecology Grants and Loans at httv~iL~}!:li&~Y,-lY.!:U~.Qy::.Qi12li9j~~JJ 8J]Jml
Required Forms:
Form A 19-1 A (original signature)
Form B2 (ECY 060-7)
Form C2 (ECY 060-9)
Form D (ECY 060-11)
Where Elie:ible Costs Have Incurred:
FormE (ECY 060-12)
Form F (ECY 060-13)
Form G (ECY 060-14)
Form H (F-21)
Form I (ECY 060-15)
D. Ifwork conducted results in a report, the RECIPIENT shall submit the following to the
DEPARTMENT's Project/Financial Manager and in the quantities identified:
. Draft project completion reports - one electronic copy
. Final project completion reports - five copies
. Electronic copy of final project completion report
The RECIPIENT shall submit two copies of any document( s) which requires
DEPARTMENT approval. Once approval is given, one copy will be returned to the
RECIPIENT. If the RECIPIENT needs more than one approved copy, the number of
submittals should be adjusted accordingly.
Task 2 - Imnlementation of Stormwater Plannine: and Manae:ement Needs
A. The RECIPIENT shall address stormwater management needs that protect or restore water
quality. The RECIPIENT may conduct work related to implementation of activities
required by the municipal stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits.
Page 4 of 17
84
Phase II Storm water Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
B. Check the boxes that represent the activities funded under this grant:
IZI Public education and outreach activities
o Public involvement and participation activities
IZI Illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE) program activities, including:
IZI Mapping or geographic information systems of municipal separate storm sewer
systems (MS4s);
o Staff training
o Activities to identify and remove illicit stormwater discharges;
IZI Dry weather outfall screening procedures and field activities;
o Complaint hotline database or tracking system improvements.
IZI Activities to support programs to control runoff from new development, redevelopment,
and construction sites, including:
o Development of an ordinance and associated technical manual
o Inspections before, during, and upon completion of construction, or for post-
construction long-term maintenance.
IZI Training for plan review and/or inspection staff
IZI Pollution prevention, good housekeeping, and operation and maintenance program
activities, such as:
IZI Inspecting and/or maintaining the MS4 infrastructure
o Developing and/or implementing policies, procedures, or stormwater pollution
prevention plans at municipal properties or facilities.
o Annual reporting activities, including developing a summary of identified barriers to the
use of low impact development.
o Establishing and refining storm water utilities, including stable rate structures.
o Water quality monitoring to implement permit requirements for a Water Cleanup Plan
(TMDL). Note that any monitoring funded by this program requires submittal of a Quality
Assurance Project Plan that Ecology approves prior to awarding funding for monitoring.
o Developing a report to plan for monitoring the next permit cycle.
IZI Equipment purchases that result directly in improved compliance with permit
requirements. Allowed costs for equipment purchases must be specific to implementing a
permit requirement (such as a vactor truck) rather than general use (such as a general us
pick-up truck). Qualified equipment purchases include but are not limited to:
IZI Illicit discharge testing equipment and materials
o Vactor truck or sweeper truck for MS4 maintenance activities
o Electronic devices dedicated to mapping ofMS4 facilities and attributes
IZI Software dedicated to tracking permit implementation activities
o Other activities consistent with the funding purposes of this program that support
storm water management programs or permit compliance, which can be completed by the
June 30,2009, deadline. Provide brief description in the space below:
Page 5 of 17
85
Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
PART VI. SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
A. Commencement of Work. In the event that the RECIPIENT fails to commence work on
the project funded herein within four months after the effective date of this agreement, or
by any date mutually agreed upon in writing for commencement of work, the
DEPARTMENT reserves the right to terminate this agreement.
B. DEPARTMENT Funding Recognition. The RECIPIENT shall acknowledge and inform
the public about DEPARTMENT funding participation in this project as appropriate.
Examples include project signs and/or acknowledgement in published materials and
reports, the news media, or other public announcements. Projects addressing site-specific
locations must utilize appropriately sized and weather-resistant signs.
C. Equipment Purchase. The purchase of equipment may be eligible under this project. If the
RECIPIENT determines that equipment is needed to achieve the project outcomes, a
request must be made to the DEPARTMENT. All equipment purchases must have prior
approval by the DEPARTMENT. Allowable equipment purchases include equipment
needed to implement permit requirements (such as a vactor truck) rather than for general
use (such as general use pick-up truck).
D. Indirect Rate. To acknowledge overhead costs, the RECIPIENT may charge an indirect
rate up to 25 percent based on RECIPIENT employee's direct salary and benefit costs
incurred while conducting project related work, provided that prior to signature of this
agreement, the DEPARTMENT's Project/Financial Manager may require a list of items
included in the indirect rate during negotiations or thereafter. Items that are generally
included in an indirect rate are identified in Administrative Requirements for Recipients of
Ecology Grants and Loans.
E. Meetings/Light Refreshments. The RECIPIENT may spend up to $50 per meeting for
light refreshments associated with this project. The total amount spent for light
refreshments under this agreement cannot exceed $300.
F. Minority and Women's Business Participation. The RECIPIENT agrees to solicit and
recruit, to the extent possible, certified minority-owned (MBE) and women-owned (WBE)
businesses in purchases and contracts initiated after the effective date of this agreement.
Contract awards or rejections cannot be made based on MBE or WBE participation.
M/WBE participation is encouraged, however, and the RECIPIENT and all prospective
bidders or persons submitting qualifications should take the following steps, when
possible, in any procurement initiated after the effective date of this agreement:
1. Include qualified minority and women's businesses on solicitation lists.
2. Assure that qualified minority and women's businesses are solicited whenever they are
potential sources of services or supplies.
Page 6 of 17
86
Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
3. Divide the total requirements, when economically feasible, into smaller tasks or
quantities, to pennit maximum participation by qualified minority and women's
businesses.
4. Establish delivery schedules, where work requirements pennit, which will encourage
participation of qualified minority and women's businesses.
5. Use the services and assistance of the State Office of Minority and Women's Business
Enterprises (OMWBE) and the Office of Minority Business Enterprises of the U.S.
Department of Commerce, as appropriate.
The RECIPIENT shall report to the DEPARTMENT at the time of submitting each
invoice, on forms provided by the DEPARTMENT, payments made to qualified firms.
Please include the following information:
1. Name and state OMWBE certification number (if available) of any qualified firm
receiving funds under the invoice, including any sub-and/or sub-subcontractors.
2. The total dollar amount paid to qualified fIrmS under this invoice.
G. Progress Reports. The RECIPIENT shall submit quarterly Progress Reports to the
DEPARTMENT's ProjectlFinancial Manager. Payment requests will not be processed
without a Progress Report.
Renortim~ Periods.
. January 1 through March 31
. April 1 through June 30
. July 1 through September 30
. October 1 through December 31
Renortin!! Due Date. Quarterly Progress Reports are due 15 days following the end of the
quarter.
Renort Content. At a minimum, all Progress Reports must contain a comparison of
actual accomplishments to the objectives established for the period, the reasons for delay
if established objectives were not met, analysis and explanation of any cost overruns, and
any additional pertinent information specified in this agreement.
H. Water Quality Monitoring. Prior to initiating water quality monitoring activities, the
RECIPIENT must prepare a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) that follows
Ecology's Guidelines and Specifications for Preparing Quality Assurance Project Plans
for Environmental Studies, February 2001 (Ecology Publication No. 01-03-003).
The RECIPIENT must submit the QAPP to the DEPARTMENT for review, comment, and
must be approved before starting the environmental monitoring activities.
The RECIPIENT must use an environmental laboratory accredited by Ecology to analyze
water samples for all parameters to be analyzed that require bench testing.
The RECIPIENT should manage all monitoring data collected or acquired under this
agreement in order to be available to secondary users and meet the "ten-year rule."
Pag13'j of 17
Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
Monitoring Data Submittal / Environmental Information Management System Funding
recipients that collect water quality monitoring data must submit all appropriate data to
Ecology through the Environmental Information Management System (ElM).
PART VII. ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREIN
This agreement, the appended GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS, the DEPARTMENT's
current edition of Administrative Requirements for Recipients of Ecology Grants and Loans
("Yellow Book"), and the Local Government Stormwater Grants Program FY 2008 contain the
entire understanding between the parties, and there are no other understandings or representations
other than as set forth or incorporated by reference, herein. No subsequent modification( s) or
amendment( s) of this agreement shall be of any force or effect unless signed by authorized
representatives of the RECIPIENT and DEPARTMENT and made a part of this agreement,
EXCEPT that in response to a request from the RECIPIENT, the DEPARTMENT may
redistribute the grant budget. The DEPARTMENT or RECIPIENT may change their respective
staff contacts without the concurrence of either party.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereby execute this Grant:
STATE OF WASHINGTON
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
JURISDICTION
KELLY SUSEWIND, P.E., P.G. DATE
DATE
WATER QUALITY PROGRAM MANAGER
NAME: BRIAN WILSON
TITLE: INTERIM CITY MANAGER
APPROVED AS TO FORM ONLY
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
(R=,".j....'=r"{ s!:4!no-'
'. '\",..: f ~\,.~. I....'}I.. '..)./ J
Pag13~ of 17
Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
Appendix A
GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS
Pertaining to Grant and Loan Agreements of
the Department of Ecology
A. . RECIPIENT PERFORMANCE
All activities for which grant/loan funds are to be used shall be accomplished by the
RECIPIENT and RECIPIENT's employees. The RECIPIENT shall only use contractor/consultant
assistance if that has been included in the agreement's final scope of work and budget.
B. SUBGRANTEE/CONTRACTOR COMPLIANCE
The RECIPIENT must ensure that all subgrantees and contractors comply with the terms
and conditions of this agreement.
c. TIllRD PARTY BENEFICIARY
The RECIPIENT shall ensure that in all subcontracts entered into by the RECIPIENT
pursuant to this agreement, the state of Washington is named as an express third-party beneficiary
of such subcontracts with full rights as such.
D. CONTRACTING FOR SERVICES (BIDDING)
Contracts for construction, purchase of equipment and professional architectural and
engineering services shall be awarded through a competitive process, if required by State law.
RECIPIENT shall retain copies of all bids received and contracts awarded, for inspection and use
by the DEPARTMENT.
E. ASSIGNMENTS
No right or claim of the RECIPIENT arising under this agreement shall be transferred or
assigned by the RECIPIENT.
F. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL LAWS
1. The RECIPIENT shall comply fully with all applicable Federal, State and local
laws, orders, regulations and permits.
Prior to commencement of any construction, the RECIPIENT shall secure the
necessary approvals and permits required by authorities having jurisdiction over the project,
provide assurance to the DEPARTMENT that all approvals and permits have been secured, and
make copies available to the DEPARTMENT upon request.
2. Discrimination. The DEPARTMENT and the RECIPIENT agree to be bound by
all Federal and State laws, regulations, and policies against discrimination. The RECIPIENT
further agrees to affirmatively support the program of the Office of Minority and Women's
Business Enterprises to the maximum extent possible. If the agreement is federally-funded, the
RECIPIENT shall report to the DEPARTMENT the percent of grant/loan funds available to
women or minority owned businesses.
3. Wages And Job Safety. The RECIPIENT agrees to comply with all applicable
laws, regulations, and policies of the United States and the State of Washington which affect
wages and job safety.
Page 9 of 17
89
Phase II Storm water Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
4. Industrial Insurance. The RECIPIENT certifies full compliance with all applicable
state industrial insurance requirements. If the RECIPIENT fails to comply with such laws, the
DEPARTMENT shall have the right to immediately terminate this agreement for cause as
provided in Section K. 1, herein.
G. KICKBACKS
The RECIPIENT is prohibited from inducing by any means any person employed or
otherwise involved in this project to give up any part of the compensation to which he/she is
otherwise entitled or, receive any fee, commission or gift in return for award of a subcontract
hereunder.
H. AUDITS AND INSPECTIONS
1. The RECIPIENT shall maintain complete program and financial records relating to
this agreement. Such records shall clearly indicate total receipts and expenditures by fund source.
and task or object.
All grant/loan records shall be kept in a manner which provides an audit trail for
all expenditures. All records shall be kept in a common file to facilitate audits and inspections.
Engineering documentation and field inspection reports of all construction work
accomplished under this agreement shall be maintained by the RECIPIENT.
2. All grant/loan records shall be open for audit or inspection by the DEPARTMENT
or by any duly authorized audit representative of the State of Washington for a period of at least
three years after the final grant payment/loan repayment or any dispute resolution hereunder. If
any such audits identify discrepancies in the financial records, the RECIPIENT shall provide
clarification and/or make adjustments accordingly.
3. All work performed under this agreement and any equipment purchased, shall be
made available to the DEPARTMENT and to any authorized state, federal or local representative
for inspection at any time during the course of this agreement and for at least three years
following grant/loan termination or dispute resolution hereunder.
4. RECIPIENT shall meet the provisions in OMB Circular A-133 (Audits of States,
Local Governments & Non Profit Organizations), including the compliance Supplement to OMB
Circular A-133, if the RECIPIENT expends $500,000 or more in a year in Federal funds. The
$500,000 threshold for each year is a cumulative total of all federal funding from all sources. The
RECIPIENT must forward a copy of the audit along with the RECIPIENT'S response and the
final corrective action plan to the DEPARTMENT within ninety (90) days of the date of the audit
report.
I. PERFORMANCE REPORTING
The RECIPIENT shall submit progress reports to the DEPARTMENT with each payment
request or such other schedule as set forth in the Special Conditions. The RECIPIENT shall also
report in writing to the DEPARTMENT any problems, delays or adverse conditions which will
materially affect their ability to meet project objectives or time schedules. This disclosure shall be
accompanied by a statement of the action taken or proposed and any assistance needed from the
DEPARTMENT to resolve the situation. Payments may be withheld if required progress reports
are not submitted.
Page9W of 17
Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
Quarterly reports shall cover the periods January 1 through March 31, April 1 through
June 30, July 1 through September 30, and October 1 through December 31. Reports shall be due
within thirty (30) days following the end of the quarter being reported.
J. COMPENSATION
1. Method of compensation. Payment shall normally be made on a reimbursable basis
as specified in the grant agreement and no more often than once per month. Each request for
payment will be submitted by the RECIPIENT on State voucher request forms provided by the
DEPARTl\tIENT along with documentation of the expenses. Payments shall be made for each
task/phase of the project, or portion thereof, as set out in the Scope of Work when completed by
the RECIPIENT and approved as satisfactory by the Project Officer.
The payment request form and supportive documents must itemize all allowable
costs by major elements as described in the Scope of Work. Instructions for submitting the
payment requests are found in "Administrative Requirements for Ecology Grants and Loans", part
N, published by the DEP AR Tl\tIENT. A copy of this document shall be furnished to the
RECIPIENT. When payment requests are approved by the DEP AR Tl\tIENT, payments will be
made to the mutually agreed upon designee.
Payment requests shall be submitted to the DEP ARTl\tIENT and directed to the
Project Officer assigned to administer this agreement.
2. Period of Compensation. Payments shall only be made for actions of the
RECIPIENT pursuant to the grant/loan agreement and performed after the effective date and prior
to the expiration date of this agreement, unless those dates are specifically modified in writing as
provided herein.
3. Final Request(s) for Payment. The RECIPIENT should submit final requests for
compensation within forty-five(45) days after the expiration date of this agreement and within
fifteen (15) days after the end of a fiscal biennium Failure to comply may result in delayed
reimbursement.
4. Performance Guarantee. The DEPARTl\tIENT may withhold an amount not to
exceed ten percent (10%) of each reimbursement payment as security for the RECIPIENT's
performance. Monies withheld by the DEPARTMENT may be paid to the RECIPIENT when the
project(s) described herein, or a portion thereof, have been completed if, in the DEPARTl\tIENT's
sole discretion, such payment is reasonable and approved according to this agreement and, as
appropriate, upon completion of an audit as specified under section 1.6. herein.
5. Unauthorized Expenditures. All payments to the RECIPIENT may be subject to
final audit by the DEPARTl\tIENT and any unauthorized expenditure(s) charged to this grant/loan
shall be refunded to the DEP AR Tl\tIENT by the RECIPIENT.
6. Mileage and Per Diem. If mileage and per diem are paid to the employees of the
RECIPIENT or other public entities, it shall not exceed the amount allowed under state law for
state employees.
7. Overhead Costs. No reimbursement for overhead costs shall be allowed unless
provided for in the Scope of Work hereunder.
Page 11 of 17
91
Phase II Storm water Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
K. TERMINATION
1. For Cause. The obligation of the DEPARTMENT to the RECIPIENT is contingent
upon satisfactory performance by the RECIPIENT of all of its obligations under this agreement.
In the event the RECIPIENT unjustifiably fails, in the opinion of the DEPARTMENT, to perform
any obligation required of it by this agreement, the DEPARTMENT may refuse to pay any further
funds thereunder and/or terminate this agreement by giving written notice of termination.
A written notice of termination shall be given at least five working days prior to
the effective date of termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data studies,
surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, and reports or other materials prepared by the
RECIPIENT under this agreement, at the option of the DEPARTMENT, shall become
Department property and the RECIPIENT shall be entitled to receive just and equitable
compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials.
Despite the above, the RECIPIENT shall not be relieved of any liability to the
DEPARTMENT for damages sustained by the DEPARTMENT and/or the State of Washington
because of any breach of agreement by the RECIPIENT. The DEPARTMENT may withhold
payments for the purpose of setoff until such time as the exact amount of damages due the
DEPARTMENT from the RECIPIENT is determined.
2. Insufficient Funds. The obligation of the DEPARTMENT to make payments is
contingent on the availability of state and federal funds through legislative appropriation and state
allotment. When this agreement crosses over state fiscal years the obligation of the
DEPARTMENT is contingent upon the appropriation of funds during the next fiscal year. The
failure to appropriate or allot such funds shall be good cause to terminate this agreement as
provided in paragraph K.l above.
When this agreement crosses the RECIPIENT's fiscal year, the obligation of the
RECIPIENT to continue or complete the project described herein shall be contingent upon
appropriation of funds by the RECIPIENT's governing body; Provided, however, that nothing
contained herein shall preclude the DEPARTMENT from demanding repayment of ALL funds
paid to the RECIPIENT in accordance with Section 0 herein.
3. Failure to Commence Work. In the event the RECIPIENT fails to commence work
on the project funded herein within four months after the effective date of this agreement, or by
any date mutually agreed upon in writing for commencement of work, the DEPARTMENT
reserves the right to terminate this agreement.
L. WAIVER
Waiver of any RECIPIENT default is not a waiver of any subsequent default. Waiver of a
breach of any provision of this agreement is not a waiver of any subsequent breach and will not
be construed as a modification of the terms of this agreement unless stated as such in writing by
the authorized representative of the DEPARTMENT.
M. PROPERTY RIGHTS
1. Copyrights and Patents. When the RECIPIENT creates any copyrightable
materials or invents any patentable property, the RECIPIENT may copyright or patent the same
but the DEPARTMENT retains a royalty- free, nonexclusive and irrevocable license to reproduce,
Page 12 of 17
92
Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
publish, recover or otherwise use the material(s) or property and to authorize others to use the
same for federal, state or local government purposes.
Where federal funding is involved, the federal government may have a proprietary
interest in patent rights to any inventions that are developed by the RECIPIENT as provided in 35
U.S.c. 200-212.
2. Publications. When the RECIPIENT or persons employed by the RECIPIENT use
or publish information of the DEPARTMENT; present papers, lectures, or seminars involving
information supplied by the DEPARTMENT; use logos, reports, maps or other data, in printed
reports, signs, brochures, pamphlets, etc., appropriate credit shall be given to the
DEPARTMENT.
3. Tangible Property Rights. The DEPARTMENT's current edition of
"Administrative Requirements for Ecology Grants and Loans", Part V, shall control the use and
disposition of all real and personal property purchased wholly or in part with funds furnished by
the DEPARTMENT in the absence of state, federal statute(s), regulation(s), or policy(s) to the
contrary or upon specific instructions with respect thereto in the Scope of Work.
4. Personal Property Furnished by the DEPARTMENT. When the DEPARTMENT
provides personal property directly to the RECIPIENT for use in performance of the project, it
shall be returned to the DEPARTMENT prior to final payment by the DEPARTMENT. Ifsaid
property is lost, stolen or damaged while in the RECIPIENT's possession, the DEPARTMENT
shall be reimbursed in cash or by setoff by the RECIPIENT for the fair market value of such
property.
5. Acquisition Projects. The following provisions shall apply if the project covered
by this agreement includes funds for the acquisition ofland or facilities:
a. Prior to disbursement of funds provided for in this agreement, the
RECIPIENT shall establish that the cost ofland/or facilities is fair and reasonable.
b. The RECIPIENT shall provide satisfactory evidence of title or ability to
acquire title for each parcel prior to disbursement of funds provided by this agreement. Such
evidence may include title insurance policies, Torrens certificates, or abstracts, and attorney's
opinions establishing that the land is free from any impediment, lien, or claim which would
impair the uses contemplated by this agreement.
6. Conversions. Regardless of the contract termination date shown on the cover sheet,
the RECIPIENT shall not at any time convert any equipment, property or facility acquired or
developed pursuant to this agreement to uses other than those for which assistance was originally
approved without prior written approval of the DEPARTMENT. Such approval may be
conditioned upon payment to the DEPARTMENT of that portion of the proceeds of the sale, lease
or other conversion or encumbrance which monies granted pursuant to this agreement bear to the
total acquisition, purchase or construction costs of such property.
N. SUSTAINABLE PRODUCTS
In order to sustain Washington's natural resources and ecosystems, the RECIPIENT is
encouraged to implement sustainable practices where and when possible. These practices include
use of clean energy, and purchase and use of sustainably produced products (e.g. recycled paper).
For more information, see www.ecy.wa.gov/sustainability..
O. RECOVERY OF PAYMENTS TO RECIPIENT
pageg)3 of 17
Phase II Storm water Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
The right of the RECIPIENT to retain monies paid to it as reimbursement payments is
contingent upon satisfactory performance of this agreement including the satisfactory completion
of the project described in the Scope of Work. In the event the RECIPIENT fails, for any reason,
to perform obligations required of it by this agreement, the RECIPIENT may, at the
DEPARTMENT's sole discretion, be required to repay to the DEPARTMENT all grant/loan
fvIlds disbursed to the RECIPIENT for those parts of the project that are rendered worthless in the
opinion of the DEPARTMENT by such failure to perform.
Interest shall accrue at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per year from the time the
r>EP ARTMENT demands repayment of funds. If payments have been discontinued by the
DEPARTMENT due to insufficient funds as in Section K.2 above, the RECIPIENT shall not be
obligated to repay monies which had been paid to the RECIPIENT prior to such termination. Any
property acquired under this agreement, at the option of the DEPARTMENT, may become the
DEPARTMENT'S property and the RECIPIENT'S liability to repay monies shall be reduced by
an amount reflecting the fair value of such property.
P. PROJECT APPROVAL
The extent and character of all work and services to be performed under this agreement by
the RECIPIENT shall be subject to the review and approval of the DEPARTMENT through the
Project Officer or other designated official to whom the RECIPIENT shall report and be
responsible. In the event there is a dispute with regard to the extent and character of the work to
be done, the determination of the Project Officer or other designated official as to the extent and
character of the work to be done shall govern. The RECIPIENT shall have the right to appeal
decisions as provided for below.
Q. DISPUTES
Except as otherwise provided in this agreement, any dispute concerning a question of fact
arising under this agreement which is not disposed of in writing shall be decided by the Project
Officer or other designated official who shall provide a written statement of decision to the
RECIPIENT. The decision of the Project Officer or other designated official shall be final and
conclusive unless, within thirty days from the date of receipt of such statement, the RECIPIENT
mails or otherwise furnishes to the Director of the DEPARTMENT a written appeal.
In connection with appeal of any proceeding under this clause, the RECIPIENT shall have
the opportunity to be heard and to offer evidence in support of this appeal. The decision of the
Director or duly authorized representative for the determination of such appeals shall be final and
conclusive. Appeals from the Director's determination shall be brought in the Superior Court of
Thurston County. Review of the decision of the Director will not be sought before either the
Pollution Control Hearings Board or the Shoreline Hearings Board. Pending final decision of
dispute hereunder, the RECIPIENT shall proceed diligently with the performance of this
agreement and in accordance with the decision rendered.
R. CONFLICT OF INTEREST
No officer, member, agent, or employee of either party to this agreement who exercises
any function or responsibility in the review, approval, or carrying out of this agreement, shall
participate in any decision which affects his/her personal interest or the interest of any
corporation, partnership or association in which he/she is, directly or indirectly interested; nor
shall he/she have any personal or pecuniary interest, direct or indirect, in this agreement or the
proceeds thereof
Page 14 of 17
94
Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
S. INDEMNIFICATION
1. The DEPARTMENT shall in no way be held responsible for payment of salaries,
consultant's fees, and other costs related to the project described herein, except as provided in the
Scope of Work.
2. To the extent that the Constitution and laws of the State of Washington permit,
each party shall indemnify and hold the other harmless from and against any liability for any or
all injuries to persons or property arising from the negligent act or omission of that party or that
party's agents or employees arising out of this agreement.
T. GOVERNINGLAW
This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington.
U. SEVERABILITY
If any provision of this agreement or any provision of any document incorporated by
reference
V.PRECEDENCE
In the event of inconsistency in this agreement, unless otherwise provided herein, the
inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order: (a) applicable
Federal and State statutes and regulations; (b) Scope of Work; (c) Special Terms and Conditions;
(d) Any terms incorporated herein by reference including the "Administrative Requirements for
Ecology Grants and Loans"; and (e) the General Terms and Conditions.
SS-010 Rev. 04/04
Page 15 of17
95
Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
Appendix B
PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT FOR ECOLOGY GRANTS
FY2010-2011 PHASE IT STORMW ATER PASS-THROUGH GRANTS
The cities, towns, and counties listed below agree to partner under one grant agreement for the
FY2010 -2011 Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grants. The grant shall be administered on
behalf of the partners by the Lead Phase II Local Government. Each partner local government is a
city, town, or county permittee under the Phase II Western Washington Municipal Stormwater
General Permit or the Phase II Eastern Washington Municipal Stormwater General Permit.
Lead Phase II Local Government:
Phase II permit coverage number:
Signature of authorized representative:
Title
Date
Partner Local Government #1:
Phase II permit coverage number: _
Signature of authorized representative:
Title
Date
Partner Local Government #2:
Phase II permit coverage number: _
Signature of authorized representative:
Title
Date
Page 16 of17
96
Phase II Stormwater Pass-through Grant
Grant No.
Partner Local Government #3:
Phase II permit coverage number: _
Date
Partner Local Government #4:
Phase II permit coverage number: _
Signature of authorized representative:
Title
Date
If you require special accommodations or need this document in a format for the visually
impaired, call [program name] at [section secretary phone number]. Persons with hearing loss
can call 711 for Washington Relay Service. Persons with a speech disability can call 877-833-
6341.
Page 17 of17
97
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 6,2009
ITEM
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: Purchase of a Multi-Gas Detector for SWM Utility
POLICY QUESTION: Should the City Council approve the purchase of a new multi-gas detector using
replacement reserve funds?
COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee
MEETING DATE: September 14, 2009
CATEGORY:
I:8J Consent D Ordinance D Public Hearing
D City Council Business D Resolution D Other
~T A!F_~!,_Q~! l!!: W!!!i~_AEP!~~~I.!?~:_~~~_~f~~~_~~!~~ Man~~~PT:_.~~~!.i=_~~~~~_.___..__.._.._..___..______
Attachments: Memorandum to the Land Use and Transportation Committee dated September 14, 2009.
Options Considered:
1. Authorize staff to purchase a new multi-gas detector using replacement reserve funds.
2. Do not authorize staff to purchase the additional equipment.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Option 1 be forwarded to the October 6, 2009 City Council
Consent Agenda for approval.
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: /1tJtflVl qjrJ/M
Committee
DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
~
Council
Committee
Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Forward Opti on 1 to the October 6, 2009 Council Consent Agenda for
approval.
Linda Kochmar, Chair
Jim Ferrell, Member
Dini Duclos, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "J move approval to authorize staff to purchase a new multi-gas detector using
replacement reserve funds. "
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
o APPROVED
o DENIED
o T ABLEDIDEFERREDINO ACTION
o MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED - 02/06/2006
COUNCIL BILL #
1ST reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE #
RESOLUTION #
98
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
September 14,2009
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Brian Wilson, Interim City Manager
William Appleton, P.E., Surface Water Manager
Multi-Gas Detector Purchase
BACKGROUND:
In 2002, the SWM division purchased a multi-gas detector for use in confined spaces. The detector
requires calibration on a monthly basis at a cost of approximately $30.00 per calibration. Technological
advances in the gas detection field have lead to new monitors that are much smaller (about the size of a
pager), and require les frequent calibrations which can be performed by staff at no additional cost. The
new monitors last for a period of two years and then need to be replaced at a total cost of approximately
$600.00; however, since there is no cost associated with calibration, the annual cost of the newer
technology, despite having to replace it on a bi-annual basis, is lower than the cost associated with our
current system.
In summary, staff requests that a new detector be purchased for the following reasons:
· New detectors are smaller/lighter, allowing staff more flexibility with respect to working within
confined spaces
· Annual equipment costs will be reduced from $360/year to $300/year.
· Time spent on calibrations will be reduced
. Easier to use
· New detector has a vibrate feature for high noise environments which adds to staff safety.
The amount of replacement reserves set aside for the future purchase of a gas detector is $2,728.00. Staff
requests that these funds be made available for the purchase of a new multi-gas detector at a cost of
approximately $600.00.
cc: Project File
Day File
99
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 6, 2009
ITEM
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: 2009 - 2011 Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Agreement with WSDOT
POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council enter into an agreement with the Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) allowing the State to reimburse the City its proportionate share of the technical
assistance funding for implementing the State Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) law?
COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee
MEETING DATE: Sept. 14,2009
CATEGORY:
~ Consent 0 Ordinance 0 Public Hearing
o City Council Business 0 Resolution 0 Other
~!~!.F_~_~9_~_'!_!l.Y:__~~~,!~y.!::S?!!g?__~.!::J'Ia~~PS?rtati.S?!!_~~~E!!~K~1.!g!!!~~!J~:~,]~:.~_=..._~~~_~~_~~rks.._._.__~_
Attachments: Memorandum to the Land Use and Transportation Committee dated September 14, 2009.
Options Considered:
1. Authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with WSDOT to accept the state CTR technical fund
in amount of $42,691 for the 2009 - 2011 biennium.
2. Do not enter into an agreement with WSDOT and Implement CTR as required by state law and local CTR
ordinance without the State CTR technical fund. The City would need to allocate budget in the amount of
166 for the 2009 - 2011 biennium.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends forwarding Option 1 to the October 6, 2009 City Council
Consent Agenda for approval.
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
DulllM'1j,,jIJJ,
DIRECTOR ApPROVAL:
~
Committee
Council
Committee
Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Forward staff recommendation to the October 6,2009 City Council Consent
Agenda for approval.
Linda Kochmar, Chair
Dini Duclos, Member
Jim Ferrell, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with WSDOT to
accept the State CTR technical fund in the amount of$42,69I for the 2009-201 I biennium."
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
o APPROVED
o DENIED
o TABLEDIDEFERRED/NO ACTION
o MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED - 02/06/2006
COUNCIL BILL #
1 ST reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE #
RESOLUTION #
100
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
September 14,2009
Land Use and Transportation Committee (LUTe)
Brian Wilson, Interim City Manager
Sarady Long, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer 't!l---
SUBJECT: 2009 - 2011 Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Agreement with WSDOT (GCA6241)
BACKGROUND:
The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) provides technical assistance funding to
the City for developing and implementing the Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) plans and programs as
required by State law. The CTR program requires a two-year agreement with WSDOT from July 1,2009
to June 30, 2011. The purpose of the agreement is to allow the State to reimburse the City its
proportionate share of the technical assistance funding. The work performed under this agreement is as
described in the attached Exhibit 1, Project Scope of Work Commute Trip Reduction (CTR). The City's
current CTR agreement with WSDOT has expired and a new agreement is required.
Based on 13 affected worksites, the agreement capped funding allocation to the City at $42,691.00 for the
July 1,2009 through June 30, 2011 biennium. As in the past, due to workload and expertise the City will
continue to use technical funds from WSDOT to contract with King County for the CTR support services.
Staff will present this contract to the LUTC and Council committee as a separate agenda item;
K:\LUI'C\2009200'L:..'O II
with WSDOT LUTe' ivlcrYhHluc
101
EXHIB IT I
Project Scope of Work
Commute Trip Reduction (CTR)
1. Scope of Work
A. Work Plan
The CONTRACTOR agrees to submit to WSDOT a detailed administrative work
plan no later than ninety (90) days after the affected date of this AGREEMENT. The
work plan shall identify deliverables, schedule and the budget specific to tasks
associated with this AGREEMENT and to include, at a minimum, the following
required activities:
I. Notification of Requirements for Newly Affected Worksites
2. Review of Employer Program Reports
3. Administration of Surveys,
4. Review of Program Exemption Requests. .
The work plan shall also include other tasks as defined in approved and locally
adopted CTR or GTEC plans for the implementation of the local CTR program.
These may include, but are not limited to, employer training, incentives, promotion
and marketing, and emergency ride home. In addition, the work plan shall identify
specific or overall performance measures for each task and deliverable. This work
plan must be approved in writing by the WSDOT Project Manager and signed by the
CONTRACTOR, and shall be incorporated as a written amendment to the
AGREEMENT. The work plan may be amended based on mutual written agreement
between the WSDOT Project Manager and the CONTRACTOR.
B. Work to be Performed
The county or city, whichever applies, has enacted a Commute Trip Reduction (CTR)
ordinance in compliance with RCW 70.94.521-.555. The CONTRACTOR agrees to
implement a CTR program based on the adopted administrative work plan and the
locally adopted CTR plan and to comply with all provisions of the applicable county
or city ordinance.
C. Progress Reports and Invoices
The CONTRACTOR agrees to submit to WSDOT quarterly progress reports, as
specified by WSDOT in Section 7 - Progress Reports of the AGREEMENT, in
Exhibit II, "Project Progress Report", and as integrated with the deliverables
indentified in the administrative work plan, along with all invoices in accordance with
Section 5 - Reimbursement and Payment of the AGREEMENT. The
CONTRACTOR shall accurately and completely report local investments in its
CTR/GTEC plans and programs, as part of its progress reports. All invoices shall be
complete and accurately reflect actual expenditures.
:.t.
Page ~(or II
GCA6241
D. Funding Distribution and Reporting
The CONTRACTOR may distribute funds to local jurisdictions to include counties,
cities, transit agencies, Transportation Management Associations, and Metropolitan
Planning Organizations authorized to enter into agreements for the purposes of
implementing CTR/GTEC plans and ordinances as authorized by RCW 70.94.527(5)
and RCW 70.94.544. The CONTRACTOR shall submit to WSDOT within 30 days
of the execution of any agreement between the CONTRACTOR and the
CONTRACTOR's eligible contracting partner(s) as listed above: (a) a list of dollar
amounts to be disbursed by the CONTRACTOR to its eligible contracting partner(s),
or (b) a fund dispersion methodology.
E. Implementation Plans
The CONTRACTOR shall incorporate appropriate sections ofthe Project Scope of
Work, as well as the approved Work Plan, in all agreements with eligible contracting
partner(s), as necessary, to coordinate the development, implementation, and
administration of the CTR/GTEC plans, and compliance with applicable ordinances.
F. Appeals and Modifications
The CONTRACTOR shall maintain an appeals process consistent with this
AGREEMENT and applicable ordinances, and procedures contained in the Commute
Trip Reduction Guidelines which may be obtained from WSDOT or found at
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/tdm/.
G. Coordination with Regional Transportation Planning Organizations (RTPO)
The CONTRACTOR shall coordinate the development and implementation of its
CTR/GTEC plan and programs with the applicable regional transportation planning
organization (RTPO). The CONTRACTOR agrees to notify the RTPO of any
substantial changes to its plans and programs that could impact the success of the
regional CTR plan. The CONTRACTOR agrees to provide information about the
progress of its CTR/GTEC plan and programs to the RTPO upon request.
H. Survey Coordination
The CONTRACTOR agrees to coordinate with WSDOT and its contracting partners
for baseline and subsequent program assessment surveys.
I. Planning Data
The CONTRACTOR agrees to provide WSDOT with the program goals established
for newly affected worksites when they are established by the local jurisdiction. The
CONTRACTOR agrees to provide WSDOT with updated program goals for affected
worksites and jurisdictions as requested. These updates shall be submitted
electronically in a format specified by WSDOT.
J. Database Updates
The CONTRACTOR agrees to provide WSDOT and the CONTRACTOR's
contracting partners with updated lists of affected or participating worksites,
employee transportation coordinators, and jurisdiction contacts, as requested. These
updates will be submitted in a format specified by WSDOT.
.:.'-
Page ~SP II
GCA6241
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 6, 2009
ITEM
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: 2009-2011 Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Program Agreement with King County
POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council enter into an agreement to delegate implementation of the CTR Act as
required by state law and local CTR ordinance to King County?
COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
o Consent
o City Council Business
MEETING DATE: Sept. 14,2009
o Ordinance
o Resolution
o
o
Public Hearing
Other
~!_~!!~_J>-2~.!ll~2-~~@dy I:ongL~!:_!.!.~!!~~~~SlE__l?l.~!!~g_Eng~!lee~~~!.: ~~_~~~~.._~~~~~.._.___.______
Attachments: Memorandum to the Land Use and Transportation Committee (LUTe) dated September 14, 2009.
Options Considered:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute Professional Services Contract with King County Metro in the
amount of $40,166 for CTR implementation and forward to the October 6 Council meeting for approval.
2. Do not sign an agreement with King County and hire part-time (0.60 FTE) CTR Coordinator. The City will
need to identify and supplement additional budget on a yearly basis to cover employee cost and program start
up.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Option I be forwarded to the October 6,2009 City Council
Consent Agenda for approval.
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ~I/~ DIRECTOR APPROVAL: !/W)
Committee Council Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Forward staff recommendation to October 6, 2009 City Council Consent
Agenda for approval.
Linda Kochmar, Chair
Dini Duclos, Member
Jim Ferrell, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "] authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement with King County in
the amount of $40,166. "
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
o APPROVED
o DENIED
o T ABLEDIDEFERRED/NO ACTION
o MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED - 02/06/2006
COUNCIL BILL #
1ST reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE #
RESOLUTION #
104
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
September 14,2009
Land Use and Transportation Committee (LUTe)
Brian Wilson, Interim City Manager
FROM:
Sarady Long, Senior Transportation Planning Engineer ~
SUBJECT: 2009-2011 Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Program Agreement with King County
BACKGROUND:
The Washington State's Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Law requires 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 am to 9:00 am to develop plans and programs to reduce Single Occupant
Vehicle (SOV) and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) commuting trips.
In order to comply with the state CTR Law and to ensure consistency and fairness in its administration,
the City proposes to enter into a Professional Services Agreement with King County. The purpose of the
agreement is to delegate implementation of the CTR Act as required by state law and local CTR
Ordinances to King County. The work to be performed under this agreement is described in the attached
Exhibit A, Commute Trip Reduction Services Contract Scope of Work Period July 1, 2009 through
June 30, 2011. The two-year agreement period would match with the State CTR Technical funding
biennium period.
Over the last ten (10) years the City has been contracting with King County for the CTR support services
to implement the program. Staff believes this is a cost-effective relationship, as most cities have a full-
time CTR coordinator.
The 2009-2011 Professional Service Agreement will be fully funded by the state CTR grant. Based on 13
affected worksites, the City of Federal Way will receive approximately $42,691.00 for the 2009 to 2011
biennium. The State CTR grant would be sufficient to fund the 2009-2011 Agreement with King County
Metro, which is estimated at $40,166.00. Please see attached Exhibit B for assumptions of state grant and
expenditures.
K:\LUTC\2009\9-14-09 2009-2011 KC CTR Contract LW(fQ; memo. doc
City of Federal Way - Exhibit A
Commute Trip Reduction Services Contract
Scope of Work
Period: July 1,2009, through June 30,2011
King County will implement all elements of the City of Federal Way CTR workplan through the
following activities
L Required Activities
A) Notification of new worksites and consultation with new ETCs:
I) Notify new sites
a. Identify contact for potential sites
b. Send notification inquiry letter
c. Follow up with site
d. Confirm status and send second letter
e. Secure state code
[ Create timeline and legal file
2) Meet/consult with ETC at new sites
a) Discuss CTR timeline and requirements of the law
b) Assist with baseline survey
c) Assist with program development and submittal of initial program report
3) Meet/consult with new ETCs at existing sites
a) Discuss the requirements of the law, provide copy and discuss survey results and
current approved program report, assist with updating CTR program summary,
describe training and networking opportunities
b) Assist with program element implementation (when necessary)
B) Administration of CTR Surveys:
I. Prepare and send survey notifications and an enhanced survey response form (SRF) to
each site
2. Schedule and hold survey briefings
3. Follow up with phone calls and emails for sites with late SRFs
4. Review and grant extensions
5. Set up and assist sites in the online survey system
6. Mail surveys to, and assist sites with paper surveys
7. Track survey completion and processing
8. Generate and send next steps letter and survey results report to site
9. Analyze survey results and make recommendations for program improvements for
sites not making progress; recommendations based on review of survey data, site
characteristics, worksite policies and zip code data
10. Meet with ETCs and PM or management to discuss program recommendations,
explain product and incentive opportunities and program promotion
..."'t
106
C) Employer Report:
l. Send report reminder letters
2. Monitor program report receipt
3. Follow up with sites with late program reports via phone or email
4. Review and grant extensions
5. Provide ongoing assistance to ETCs with the online report system
6. Review all program reports for completeness and potential for trip reduction
· Incentives/Subsidies or Pre-Tax benefit
· Parking Management
· Guaranteed Ride Home
· CTR Program Summary and program promotion plan
7. Assist with development or updating of CTR Program Summary
8. Provide jurisdiction with summary of programs and recommended actions
9. Generate approval letter for City signature
ro. Complete report entry and approve in the online system
~
D) Review of Exemptions:
I. Inform ETCs about process and criteria
2. Receive requests and copy to city
3. Review and analyze request and provide comments to City
4. Contact employer as needed, generate and send response per city
E) Record Maintenance:
I. Maintain database on all affected sites
2. Maintain database on all ETCs
3. Maintain master file records on all affected sites
4. On a quarterly basis, provide WSDOT with hard copy of each employer program
report approved within the quarter
5. Provide WSDOT with an electronic copy of the CTR database of the City's CTR-
affected employers, quarterly or as required by WSDOT
6. Provide quarterly report information for jurisdiction to complete state funds billing
F) Enforcement:
1. Non-compliance issues with approval by Jurisdiction
a. Review legal guidelines (ordinance, municipal code and RCW)
b. Document infractions (emails sent, legal files, phone calls) and assemble
information for review
c. Determine next steps with jurisdiction
d. Provide legal files for jurisdiction to review
e. Consult with jurisdiction
f. Prepare and send correspondence to site
g. Follow up with site and negotiate steps for compliance
...~
2107
II. Employer Service Activities
A) Employer Training:
1. Schedule, promote, register and conduct ETC Training:
a. Part I of Basic Training (Orientation to the CTR Law)
b. Part 2 of Basic Training (Program Implementation and Promotion)
c. Survey briefings
d. Pre-Tax Commuter Benefit Quick Course
2. Tracktraining attendance and notify ETCs of training requirement
3. Provide other training (as applicable)
B) Incentives:
Purchase incentives for worksites as directed by the City
C) Promotion, Marketing and Employer Outreach:
1. Respond to ETCs questions and requests regarding CTR requirements, surveying,
reporting, transit service, commute options, commute products
2. Utilize tools and resources available on the internet provided by CTR
3. Conduct employer commute and relocation events
a. Conduct origin and destination analysis and provide solution/recommendations
b. Conduct route planning and/or van and carpool formations
4. Schedule, promote, engage speakers and facilitate Employer Network group meetings
5. Update and maintain CTR website and printed with current information about
transportation infrastructure, commute products and commute related tax information.
6. Send transportation related news/announcements via email to all ETCs
7. Coordinate, promote and mail Wheel Options/Bike to Work Day packets to sites
K:\TRAFFIC\ctr\2009-2011\Federal Way Scope of Work 2009-2011 #2.doc
..,
198
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
Commute Trip Reduction Services
Period: July 1,2009 through June 30, 2011
Exhibit B
FUNDING
State CTR Funds
TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE
$ 42,691.00
NUMBER OF SITES
13
CTRSERVICESCONTRACT
Required Activities
A. Notification of new worksites $ 624
B. Administration of CTR Surveys $ 6,760
C. Employer Report $ 4,394
D. Review of Exemptions $ 624
E. Records Maintenance $ 13,250
F. Enforcement with approval by Jurisdiction $ 624
Total Required Activities $ 26,276
Emvlover Service
A. Employer Training $ 1,600
B. Incentives $ -
C. Promotions, Marketing and Employer Outreach $ 12,290
Total Employer Service $ 13,890
CONTRACT TOTAL $ 40,166
109
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 6,2009
ITEM #:_
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: Sherwood Forest NTS - 27th Ave SW (SW 344th St to SW 351 st St)
POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council approve the installation of five speed humps and c-curbing along 27th
Ave SW?
COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee
MEETING DATE: September 14, 2009
~eATEGORY:
~ Consent 0 Ordinance 0 Public Hearing
o City Council Business 0 Resolution 0 Other
~!~!...~~Q~!_~X:__J.~.~_~~.!i~!la~s, PJ~~:2._~~~~~I!._~ff.!~_~'lg!1?ee~~.~~.~___J?El'!._~. p~~~~ ~':~~~___._..__._____..
Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated September 14,2009.
Options Considered:
1. Authorize the installation of five speed humps and c-curbing along 27th Ave SW between SW 344lh St
and SW 351s1 St.
2. Do not authorize the installation of the proposed traffic calming devices and provide direction to staff.
.--.-.---.------.---.--..---.--.--..-.---------..-.-.---..--.------..-.-----
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends forwarding Option 1 to the October 6,2009 City Council
Consent Agenda for approval.
CITY MANAGER APPROV AL:n lv,/~ c,/IJ! Jrvf DIRECTOR APPROVAL: f/t.4Yl
Committee Council Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Committee recommends forwarding Option 1 to the October 6, 2009 City
Council Consent Agenda for approval.
Linda Kochmar, Chair
Jim Ferrell, Member
Dini Duclos, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "1 move to authorize the installation of five speed humps and c-curbing along
21h Ave SW between SW 344th St and SW 35Ft St."
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
o APPROVED
o DENIED
o TABLEDIDEFERRED/NO ACTION
o MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED - 02/06/2006
COUNCIL BILL #
1ST reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE #
RESOLUTION #
110
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
September 14,2009
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Brian Wilson, Interim City Manager d7
Rick Perez, P.E., City Traffic Engineer If/'
Jesse Hannahs, P. E., Senior Traffic Engineer dtJj-
Sherwood Forest NTS - 21h Avenue SW (SW 344'h STto SW 351st S1)
BACKGROUND:
Residents in the vicinity of 27th Ave SW between SW 344th Street and SW 35151 Street submitted a petition
requesting the installation of traffic calming devices to control vehicle speeds and minimize cut-through traffic
in their neighborhood. A traffic study was conducted and the results are as follows:
· Average Daily Traffic (ADT) = 836
. 85th percentile speed = 30 mph
. 5-Year Collision History = 2 Collisions with I injury
Based on the current adopted NTS installation criteria (please Table 1 below), the neighborhood scored 3.0 total
severity points. This reaches the minimum 3.0 severity point to qualify for the installation of traffic calming
devices.
Table 1
Point 85th Percentile Average Daily Location 5- Year Collision History
Scale Speed Traffic (ADT) SchoollPark Total In.iury Fatal
0.0 0-25 0- 1,000 No 1 - -
0.5 26 - 27 1,001-1,800 Yes 2 - -
1.0 28 - 29 1,801 - 2,600 - 3 1 -
1.5 30 - 31 2,601 - 3,400 - 4 - -
2.0 32 - 33 3,401 - 4,200 - 5 2 I
2.5 34 - 35 4,201 - 5,000 - 6 - -
3.0 36+ 5,001+ - 7+ 3+ 2+
A neighborhood traffic safety meeting was held on June 24, 2009 at City Hall to discuss potential traffic
calming devices that could be implemented along 27th Ave SW. At the meeting, residents also raised
safety concerns regarding drivers accessing 27 Ave SW from westbound SW 344th St and
safety/aesthetics concerns with the traffic circle at the intersection of 27th Ave SW and SW 3491h St.
To be effective in reducing speeds along 2ih Ave SW and to improve vehicular and pedestrian safety, the
group consensus was to have the City construct the following improvements:
I) Install five speed humps on 271h Ave S W between S 3441h St and SW 351 sl St near the following
addresses:
111
Wildwood NTS
January 14,2008
Page 2
a. 34430 27th Ave SW
b. 34525 27th Ave SW
c. 2702 SW 34ih St
d. 34803 2ih Ave SW
e. 35011 27th Ave SW
2) Install a stop line at the northbound approach on 27th Ave SW to SW 344 St and install c-curbing
down the centerline from approximately 75 feet south to the intersection of 27th Ave SW and SW
344 St.
Staff concurs with the proposed improvements.
In accordance with established NTS policies, staff sent ballots to property owners and occupants within
600 feet of the proposed traffic calming device locations and also to those with the proposal located along
their sole access route. The following table summarizes the ballot results:
Traffic Calming Device Total
Ballots Sent 187
Ballots Returned 63 34%
Returned w/o Response 3
Yes Votes 45 75%
No Votes 15 25%
One of the installation criteria requires a 51 % majority approval of the returned ballots. Based on the
ballot results represented in the above table, balloting criteria received a 75% approval rating.
The estimated cost of this project is approximately $15,000, which falls just within the $15,000 per
neighborhood per year budget limitation policy. Adequate budget currently exists within the NTS
program to fund this proposal.
cc: Project File
Day File
K:\LUTC\2009\9-14-09 Sherwood Forest NTS, 27avsw (sw344st to si'i'1t).doc
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 6, 2009
ITEM #:~
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: Lake Grove NTS - SW 304th Street (8th Ave SW to 1 st Ave S)
POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council approve the installation off our speed humps along SW 304th St?
COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee
MEETING DATE: September 14,2009
CATEGORY:
[gJ Consent 0 Ordinance 0 Public Hearing
o City Council Business 0 Resolution 0 Other
.~:!,_~!'!.~_~Q~!J~~Je~s._~Ji'.':~!!~~~!.t_~.:?_~~~?.r I~~f.Q~J?!!gi~~~f~~____~_~_~:.~~blic_~~:.~______.____
Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated September 14, 2009.
Options Considered:
1. Authorize the installation of four speed humps along SW 304th St between 6th Ave SW and 1 st Ave S.
2. Do not authorize the installation of the proposed traffic calming devices and provide direction to staff.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends forwarding Option 1 to the October 6,2009 City Council
Consent Agenda for approval.
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: t1 ;"."1,,, q/,,!Jwi DIRECTOR APPROVAL: ewt
Committee Council Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Committee recommends forwarding Option 1 to October 6, 2009 City
Council Consent Agenda for approval.
Linda Kochmar, Chair
Jim Ferrell, Member
Dini Duclos, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "1 move to authorize the installation of four speed humps along SW 3041h St
between 61h Ave SWand r1 Ave s."
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
o APPROVED
o DENIED
o T ABLEDIDEFERRED/NO ACTION
o MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED - 02/06/2006
COUNCIL BILL #
1 ST reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE #
RESOLUTION #
113
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
September 14, 2009
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Brian Wilson, Interim City Manager
Rick Perez, P.E., City Traffic Engineer f?f!?'
Jesse Hannahs, P. E., Senior Traffic Engineer )LJl,
Lake Grove NTS - SW 30ih Street (8'h Ave SW to pI Ave S).. !
FROM:
SUBJECT:
BACKGROUND:
Residents in the vicinity of SW 304th Street between 8th Avenue SW and 1st Avenue S submitted a petition
requesting the installation of traffic calming devices to control vehicle speeds and minimize cut-through traffic
in their neighborhood. A traffic study was conducted and the results are as follows:
· Average Daily Traffic (ADT) = 393
. 85th percentile speed = 31 mph
. 5- Year Collision History = 2 Collisions with 1 injury
Based on the current adopted NTS installation criteria (please Table 1 below), the neighborhood scored 3.0 total
severity points. This reaches the minimum 3.0 severity point to qualify for the installation of traffic calming
devices.
Point 85th Percentile Average Daily Location 5- Year Collision History
Scale Speed Traffic (ADT) SchoollPark Total In.jury Fatal
0.0 0-25 0- 1,000 No 1 - -
0.5 26 - 27 1,001 - 1,800 Yes 2 - -
1.0 28 - 29 1,801 - 2,600 - 3 1 -
1.5 30 - 31 2,601 - 3,400 - 4 - -
2.0 32 - 33 3,401 - 4,200 - 5 2 1
2.5 34 - 35 4,201 - 5,000 - 6 - -
3.0 36+ 5,001+ - 7+ 3+ 2+
Table 1
A neighborhood traffic safety meeting was held on July 13, 2009 at City Hall to discuss potential traffic
calming devices that could be implemented along SW 304th Street.
To be effective in reducing speeds along SW 304tb Street and to improve vehicular and pedestrian safety,
the group consensus was to have the City install four speed humps on SW 304th ST between 6th A V SW
and 1 st A V S near the following addresses:
a. 141 SW 304th ST
b. 215 SW 304tb ST
c. 411 SW 304th ST
d. 561 SW 304th ST
Staff concurs with the proposed improvements.
114
Wildwood NTS
January 14,2008
Page 2
In accordance with established NTS policies, staff sent ballots to property owners and occupants within
600 feet of the proposed traffic calming device locations and also to those with the proposal located along
their sole access route. The following table summarizes the ballot results:
Traffic Calming Device Total
Ballots Sent 144
Ballots Returned 42 34%
Returned w/o Response 3
Yes Votes 31 79%
No Votes 8 21%
One of the installation criteria requires a 51 % majority approval of the returned ballots. Based on the
ballot results represented in the above table, balloting criteria received a 79% approval rating.
The estimated cost of this project is approximately $12,000, which falls within the $15,000 per
neighborhood per year budget limitation policy. Adequate budget currently exists within the NTS
program to fund this proposal.
cc: Project File
Day File
K:\LUTC\2009\9-14-09 Lake Grove NTS, sw304st (8avsw to lavs).dol15