LUTC PKT 10-05-20094. OTHER
October 5, 2009
5:30 p.m.
City of Federal Way
City Council
Land Use /Transportation Committee
City Hall
Council Chambers
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PUBLIC COMMENT (3 minutes)
3. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
Action Council
Topic Title /Description Presenter Page or Info Date Time
A. Approval of Minutes: September 21, 2009 LeMaster 2 Action N/A 5 min.
B. SEPA Amendments and Zoning Code Long -Woods 4 Action 10/20/09 15 min.
Ordinance
6. ADJOURN
Amendments
MEETING AGENDA
(Electronic Version)
C. S 352" Street Extension Project 30 Salloum 30 Action 10/20/09 5 min.
Design Status Report Consent
D. 2010 Asphalt Overlay Program Preliminary Salloum 33 Action 10/20/09 5 min.
Project List and Authorization to Bid Consent
E. WA State Department of Ecology Grant Appleton 43 Action 10/20/09 5 min.
(GROSS) Permission to Apply Consent
F. WA State Department of Ecology Grant Appleton 60 Action 10/20/09 5 min.
(Sea Lettuce) Permission to Apply Consent
G. Acceptance of King County Conservation Appleton 62 Action 10/20/09 5 min.
Futures Funding and Acquisition Update
Consent
5. FUTURE MEETINGS /AGENDA ITEMS The next regularly scheduled LUTC meeting will beMonday,
October 19, 2009.
Committee Members City Staff
Linda Kochmar, Chair Cary M. Roe, P.E., Director of Parks, Public Works and Emergency Management
Jim Ferrell Darlene LeMaster, Administrative Assistant II
Dini Duc %os 253- 835 -2701
City of Federal Way
City Council
Land Use /Transportation Committee
September 21, 2009 City Hall
5:30 PM City Council Chambers
MEETING SUMMARY
Committee Members in Attendance: Committee Members Ferrell and Duclos present. Committee Chair Kochmar
excused.
Staff Members in Attendance: Director of Parks, Public Works and Emergency Management Cary Roe, Deputy Public
Works Director Ken Miller, Assistant City Attorney Peter Beckwith, Surface Water Manager Will Appleton, and
Administrative Assistant II Darlene LeMaster.
1. CALL TO ORDER
Committee Member Duclos called the meeting to order at 5:33 PM.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment.
3. BUSINESS ITEMS
Forward
Topic Title/Description to Council
A. Approval of the September 14, 2009, LUTC Minutes N/A
Committee approved September 14, 2009 LUTC minutes as presented.
Moved: Ferrell Seconded: Duclos Passed: Unanimously, 2 -0
B. Resolution for the Formation of a North Lake Advisory Committee 10/6/2009
Consent
Will Appleton presented information on this item. There was no public comment or discussion.
Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented.
Moved: Ferrell Seconded: Duclos
C. Resolution Approving and Confirming a Special Assessment Role for North Lake 10/6/2009
Consent
Will Appleton presented information on this item. There was no public comment or discussion.
Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented.
Moved: Ferrell Seconded: Duclos
D. Ordinance Establishing Time of Payment, Interest and Penalties for North Lake 10/6/2009
Management District Ordinance
Will Appleton presented information on this item. There was no public comment or discussion.
Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented.
Moved: Ferrell Seconded: Duclos
G'\LUTC\LUTC Agendas and Summaries 2009 \09- 21- 09- Minutes.doc
Passed: Unanimously, 2 -0
Passed: Unanimously, 2 -0
Passed: Unanimously, 2 -0
Land Use /Transportation Committee
4. OTHER
There was no further discussion or additional topics addressed.
Page 2 September 21. 2009
5. FUTURE MEETING
The next regular LUTC meeting will be Monday, October 5, 2009, at 5:30 PM in City Council Chambers.
6. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 5:36 PM.
COMMITTEE APPROVAL:
Linda Kochmar, Chair
G.U.UTCLUTC Agendas and Summaries 2009 \09- 21- 09- Minutes.doc
Attest:
Jim Ferrell, Member Dini Duclos, Member
3
Darlene LeMaster, Administrative Assistant II
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 20, 2009 ITEM
SUBJECT: Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 14, "Environmental Protection," to change SEPA
exempt level thresholds; and Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code" for Use Process II, III, IV, and V to add one
decisional criteria to address traffic safety issues.
POLICY QUESTION: Should the City approve amendments to FWRC Title 14 and Title 19 to raise the SEPA exempt level
thresholds to the maximum allowed by state law and add one traffic related criteria to Use Process II. 11I, IV and V?
COMMITTEE: Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC) MEETING DATE: October 5, 2009
CATEGORY:
Consent
City Council Business
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL:
File #09- 102608 -00 -UP
Linda Kochmar, Chair
COUNCIL ACTION:
APPROVED
DENIED
TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION
MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED 02/06/2006
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
Ordinance
Resolution
4
Committee Council
Public Hearing
Other
STAFF REPORT BY: Senior Planner Joanne Long Woods, AICP DEPT: Community Development Services
Background: The proposed amendments are part of the "Economic Stimulus Package" included in the 2009 Planning
Commission Work Program. Three amendments are proposed to Title 14, "Environmental Policy" to raise the SEPA exempt
level thresholds to the maximum allowed by state law. Four amendments are proposed to Title 19, "Zoning and Development
Code," for Use Process II, III, IV, and V to address potential impacts to traffic safety and transportation as a result of raising the
SEPA exempt level thresholds for minor new construction projects.
Attachments: 1) Planning Commission staffreport with exhibits for the September 16, 2009, public hearing; 2) Minutes of the
September 16, 2009, Planning Commission Pubic Hearing 3) Draft Adoption Ordinance.
Options Considered: 1) Adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation as contained in the Draft Adoption Ordinance;
2) Adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation as modified by the LUTC: or 3) Do not adopt the proposed amendments.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: Adoption of code amendments as presented by staff.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Council adopt Option #1, adopt the Planning Commission's
recommendation as contained in the Draft Adoption Ordinance
DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
COUNCIL BILL
1 reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE
RESOLUTION
Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Forward Option #1; adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation as contained in the
Draft Adoption Ordinance to the full Council on October 20, 2009, for first reading
Dini Duclos, Member Jim Ferrell, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION(S):
1ST READINGOF ORDINANCE (10/20/09): "I move to forward the ordinance to a second reading for enactment on the November
3, 2009, consent agenda.
2 READING OF ORDINANCE (11/03/09): "1 move approval of the LUTC 's recommendation to approve the code amendments,
which are contained in the Adoption Ordinance."
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
Doc ID 51656
Ve Way
STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Amendments to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Exempt Level Thresholds in
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 14, "Environmental Policy"
and
Amendments to FWRC Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code"
Use Process II, Use Process III, Use Process IV, Use Process V
Federal Way Files 09- 102608 -00 -UP 09- 102609 -00 -SE
Public Hearing of September 16, 2009
I. BACKGROUND
Amendments to the zoning code (Federal Way Revised Code [FWRCJ) Title 14, "Environmental
Policy" to raise some of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Exempt Level Thresholds, and
Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code" on the Use Process II, Use Process III, Use Process IV,
and Use Process V decision criteria to obtain land use process approval in order to mitigate for
onsite or offsite traffic safety impacts to the transportation system, for all modes of transportation.
The Planning Commission is being asked to review the proposed changes to the zoning code, attached
as Exhibits A -E, and forward a recommendation to the Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC)
and City Council. The following proposed zoning text amendments are addressed in this staff report:
1. Modify FWRC Chapter 14.15.030(1)(a) to change exempt levels for minor new construction for
residential structures from 9 to 20 dwelling units; the maximum allowed per WAC 197-11
800(1)(b) (Exhibit A).
2. Modify FWRC Chapter 14.15.030(1)(c) to change exempt levels for minor new construction for
office, commercial, recreational, service, or storage buildings from 4,000 square feet to 12,000
square feet gross floor area, and from 20 parking spaces to 40 parking spaces; the maximum
allowed per WAC 197- 11- 800(1)(b) (Exhibit A).
3. Modify FWRC Chapter 14.15.030(1)(d) to change exempt levels for minor new construction of
parking lots from 20 spaces to 40 spaces; the maximum allowed per WAC 197- 11- 800(1)(b)
(Exhibit A).
4. Modify FWRC Chapter 19.60.050(2) to. add a new decisional criteria for Process II Site Plan
Approval (Exhibit B), Chapter 19.65.100(2)(a) Use Process III Project Approval (Exhibit C),
Chapter 19.70.150(3) Use Process IV Hearing Examiner (Exhibit D), and Chapter
19.75.130(3) Use Process V Quasi Judicial Rezones (Exhibit E). These modifications will
address potential traffic safety impacts for all modes of transportation that may arise as a result
of changes to the SEPA threshold exempt levels.
5
II. PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS
1. Recommended Modifications to FWRC Chapter 14.15.030, "SEPA Categorical Exempt
Levels Flexible Thresholds"
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) was adopted to establish a set of rules that
agencies could use to determine and mitigate potential impacts to the environment generated by
development projects. Federal Way has adopted these rules as part of the revised code, under
Title 14, "Environmental Policy." FWRC Chapter 14.15.030 lists the exempt levels for minor
new construction. The city has adopted exempt levels for residential, commercial, office,
recreational, service, or storage buildings up to 4,000 square feet, and up to 20 parking spaces.
Also, for parking lots, the current exempt level is 20 parking spaces. WAC 197- 11- 800(1)(b)
lists the maximum exempt levels allowed for each category listed above and allows local
jurisdictions to adopt exempt levels up to these maximum levels. The city now proposes to
amend the SEPA exempt levels to the maximum allowed for the residential, commercial, office,
recreational, service, and storage buildings to 12,000 square feet with 40 parking spaces and
parking lots for up to 40 parking spaces.
2. Recommended Modifications to FWRC Chapter 19.60 "Process II Site Plan Approval,"
Chapter 19.65 "Process III Project Approval," Chapter 19.70 "Process IV Hearing
Examiner," and Chapter 19.75, "Process V Quasi- Judicial Rezones"
The proposed amendments to the above- referenced chapters will add some decisional criteria to
project approvals to address potential traffic safety issues that may arise when smaller projects
are not required to go through a SEPA review process as a result of raising the exemption levels
as noted in item 1, above. Potential traffic impacts for pedestrian safety, access to the site,
signalization, off site improvements, and similar items that previously were mitigated through
the SEPA process are proposed to be addressed by new decisional criteria added to each of the
code sections noted above.
III. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY
On July 25, 2009, the city issued an Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) on the
proposed amendments, with a comment deadline of August 10, 2009, and an appeal deadline of
August 24, 2009. No comments on the DNS were submitted to the city as of the date of transmittal
of this staff report. Public notice of the September 16, 2009, public hearing was published and
posted on August 29, 2009, in accordance with the city's procedural requirements. As of this date,
no comments were received from the public on this proposal.
IV. REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
FWRC Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code," Chapter 19.80 establishes a process and criteria
for zoning code text amendments. Consistent with Process VI review, the role of the Planning
Commission is as follows:
FWRC Code Amendments 09- 102608- 00 -UP/ Doc ID 51422
September 16, 2009, Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 2 of 5
6
1. To review and evaluate whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the
applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan;
2. To determine whether the proposed amendment bears a substantial relation to the
public health, safety, or welfare;
3. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the residents of the city; and
4. To forward a recommendation to the City Council regarding adoption of the
proposed zoning code text amendment.
V. DECISIONAL CRITERIA
FWRC Chapter 19.80.130 provides criteria for zoning text amendments. The following section
analyzes the compliance of the proposed zoning text amendments with the criteria provided by this
chapter. The city may amend the text of the FWRC only if it finds that:
1. The proposed amendments are consistent with the applicable provisions of the
comprehensive plan.
The proposed FWRC text amendments are consistent with the following Federal Way
Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) policies:
LUG2 Develop an efficient and timely development review process based on a
public/private partnership.
LUG4 Maximize efficiency of the development review process.
LUP6 Conduct regular reviews of development regulations to determine how to
improve upon the permit review process.
TG2 Provide a safe, efficient, convenient, and financially sustainable
transportation system with sufficient capacity to move people, goods, and
services at an acceptable level of service.
The City shall develop and adopt policies for the construction,
reconstruction, maintenance and preservation of new and existing facilities.
EDP15 The City will continue to implement a streamlined permitting process
consistent with state and federal regulations to reduce the upfront costs of
locating businesses in the City.
EDP18 The City will periodically monitor local and regional trends to be able to
adjust plans, policies, and programs.
FWRC Code Amendments 09- 102608 -00 -UP Doc ID 51422
September 16, 2009, Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 3 of 5
2. The proposed amendments bear a substantial relationship to public health, safety, or
welfare.
The proposed FWRC text amendments bear a substantial relationship to the public health,
safety, and welfare because they will allow a streamlined development review process for small
projects meeting certain criteria. The proposed SEPA exempt levels are already identified by
state codes to be "minor" construction levels. Raising the exempt levels under SEPA will
simplify the development review process for these minor construction projects with less cost
and a shorter review time for the applicant. Any potential impacts that are identified for these
smaller projects will be addressed through existing codes or mitigated through the land use
process approval as conditions of approval for the project.
3. The proposed amendments are in the best interest of the residents of the city.
Approval of the proposed text amendments would benefit the city as a whole as they would
provide the opportunity for a shorter and less costly review process for proposed development
and/or redevelopment of structures. By increasing opportunities for additional development
within the city, additional revenues would be generated, which would benefit all residents of
the city by providing the city with revenue for vital services to the public.
VI. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Based on the above staff analysis and decisional criteria, staff recommends that the following
amendments to FWRC Title 14, "Environmental Policy" and Title 19, "Zoning and Development
Code" be recommended for approval to the Land Use /Transportation Committee (LUTC) and City
Council.
1. Modification to FWRC Chapter 14.15.030, "Categorical Exempt Levels Flexible
Thresholds."
2. Modifications to FWRC Chapter 19.60 "Process II Site Plan Approval," Chapter 19.65
"Process III Project Approval," Chapter 19.70 "Process IV Hearing Examiner," and
Chapter 19.75, "Process V Quasi Judicial Rezones."
VII. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Consistent with the provisions of FWRC Chapter 19.80.240, the Planning Commission may take
the following actions regarding the proposed zoning code text amendments:
1. Recommend to the City Council adoption of the FWRC text amendments as
proposed;
2. Modify the proposed FWRC text amendments and recommend to the City Council
adoption of the FWRC text amendments as modified;
FWRC Code Amendments 09- 102608 -00 -UP Doc ID 51422
September 16, 2009, Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 4 of 5
8
EXHIBITS
3. Recommend to the City Council that the proposed FWRC text amendments not be
adopted; or
4. Forward the proposed FWRC text amendments to the City Council without a
recommendation.
Exhibit A Proposed Code Amendment:
FWRC Title 14, "Environmental Policy," Chapter 14.15.030(1)
Exhibit B Proposed Code Amendment:
FWRC Title 19, "Zoning and Development," Chapter 19.60.050(2)
Exhibit C Proposed Code Amendment:
FWRC Title 19, "Zoning and Development," Chapter 19.65.100(2)
Exhibit D Proposed Code Amendment:
FWRC Title 19, "Zoning and Development," Chapter 19.70.150(3)
Exhibit E Proposed Code Amendment:
FWRC Title 19, "Zoning and Development," Chapter 19.75.130(3)(b)
FWRC Code Amendments 09- 102608 -00 -UP Doc ID 51422
September 16, 2009, Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 5 of 5
9
EXHIBIT A
FWRC Chapter 14.15
Categorical Exemptions and Threshold Determinations
14.15.030 Categorica! exemptions Flexible thresholds.
(1) The city establishes the foliowing exerrq�t levels for minor new construction defined in WAC 197-
11-800(i)(b) based on local conditions:
{a) For residential structures up to �ti�te 2Q d�velling units.
(b) For agricultural structures covering up to 10,000 square feet.
(c) For office, commercial, recreational, service or storage buildings up to 4� l�,Q�Q square
feet gross floor area, and up to �8 4�Q parking spaces.
(d) For parking lots up to d�Q parking spaces.
(e) For landfills and excavations up to S00 cubic yards.
(Z) Whenever the city establishes new exempt levels under this section, it shall send them to the State
Department of Ecology as required by W AC 197-11-800(1)(c).
(Ord. No. 07-5�4, 5(Exh. A(1)), �-15-07; Ord. No. 04-468, 3, 11-16-D4; Ord. No. 90-40, 1(20.9010,
20.90.20), 2-27-90. Code 2001 18-73.)
K:�2009 Code Amendments�SEPA Exernpt Levels\Planning Commission�Exhibit A.doc
Eachibit A
10 Page 1 of i
fXHiBIT B
FWRC Chapter 19.60
Process il Site Plan Review
19.60.050 Site ptan and community design guidelines approval criteria.
(1) Applicubiliry. The director may approve an application for site plan review and community design
guideline review if it is consistent with the following sets of decisional criteria:
(2) Site plan criteria.
(a) It is consistent with the comprehensive plan;
(b) It is consistent with all applicable provisions of this title;
(c) It is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare;
(d) The streets and utilities in the area of the subject property are adequate to serve the
anticipated demand from the proposal; -a�
(e) The proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal locarion and configurarion for
access; and
Traffic safetv irrmacts for all modes of transportarion both on and off-site are adectuately
mitigated
(3) Community design guideline decisional criteria.
(a) It is consistent with site design standards set forth in FWRC 19.115.050 for all zoning
districts;
(b) It is consistent with applicable supplemental guidelines set forth in FWRC 19.115_090; and
(c) For development applications for remodeling or expansion of an existing development, it is
consistent with those provisions of Chapter 19_ 115 FWRC, Community Design Guidelines, identified by
the director as being applicable.
(Ord. No. 09-594, 44, 1-6-09; Ord. No. 07-573, 17, 12-4-07; Ord. No. 97-291, 3, 4-1-97; Ord No. 90-43,
2(17510(4)), 2-27-90. Code 2001 22-365.)
K:�2009 Code Amendments\SEPA Exempt Levels\Pianning Commission�Exhibit B.doc
11 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit B
EXHIBIT C
FWRC Chapter 19.65
Process Ili Project Approval
19.65.100 Director's decision.
i General.
(a) Coordination with decisions under the State �nvironmental Policy Act. If a SEPA threshold
determination is required to be issued, the threshold deternunation must follow the end of the public
comment period on the project permit application, but precede the director's decision on the land use and
design components of the process III project permit approval. If the SEPA threshold determination is
appealed, the director's land use and design components decision shall be issued sufficiently in advance
of the open record hearing on the threshold determinarion appeal, to allow any appeal of the land use
and/or design review decision to be consolidated and heard with the appeal of the threshold
determinarion.
(b) Timing. The director will endeavor to issue his or her decision on the land use and design
components of the process III project permit approval within 120 days of the issuance of the letter of
completeness.
(i) The 120-day time period does not apply if a project permit application under this
chapter requires an amendment to the comprehensive plan or this ritle; requires approval of a new fully
contained communiry as provided in RCW 36.70A350, a master planned resort as provided in RCW
36.70A.360, the siting of an essential public faciliry as provided in RCW 36.70A.200, or capital facility
projects of the city; or if a project permit applicarion under this chapter is substantially revised by the
applicant, in which case the time period shall start from the date at which the revised project application is
determined to be corr�lete.
{ii) If the decision solely relates to a review of communiry design guidelines of a process
IV application, the director shall issue a written decision within i0 working days after the deadline for
submitring comments.
(iii) Tfie following periods shall not be included in the calculation of the 120-day period:
(A) Any period during which the applicant has been requested by the ciry to correct
plans, perform required studies, or provide additional required inforn�arion. In these instances, the period
excluded from the 120-day calculation shall begin on the date the city notifies the applicant of the need
for additional information and run unril the earlier of the date the city determines whether the additional
inforn�ation satisfies the request for information, or 14 days after the date the informarion has been
provided to the city. If the city determines that the infom�arion submitted by the applicant under this
subsection is insuf�cient, it shall notify the applicant of the deficiencies and the procedures under this
subsection shall apply as if a ne�v request for studies had been �de.
(B) Any period during which an environmental impact statement is being prepared
following a determination of significance pursuant to Chapter 43.21C RCW.
(C) Any period for administrative appeals of the SEPA threshdd determinarion;
provided, that the time period for consideration of such appeals shall not exceed 90 days for an open
record appeal hearing. The parties to an appeal may agree to extend the 90-day period
(D) Any extension of time mutualiy agreed upon by the applicant and the city.
(iv) If the director is unable to issue his or final decision on the land use or design review
components of a process III project permit application as provided in this subsecrion, the city shall
provide written notice of this fact to the applicant_ The notice shall include a statement of reasons why the
decision has not been issued within the 120-day period, and an estimated date for issuance of the notice of
final decision.
E�ibit C 12 Page 1 of 2
(2) Decisional criteria. The director shall i�se the criteria listed in this subsection and the provisions of
this title describing the requested decision in deciding upon the application.
{a) The director may approve the application only if:
(i) It is consistent with the comprehensive plan;
(ii) It is consistent with all applicable provisions of this title;
{iii) It is consistenk with the public health, safety, and weifare;
(iv) The streets and utilities in the area of the subject properry are adequate to serve the
anticipated demand from the proposal;
(v) The proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal location and
configurarion; and
(vi) Traffic safe� irr�pacts for all modes of transportarion both on and off-site, are
adequately miti ag ted
{b) If the application is subject to the requirements of Chapter 19. l l� FWRC, Community
Design Guidelines, the director shall also use the following criteria in deciding upon an applicarion:
(i) It is consistent with the site design standards set forth for all zoning districts in FWRC
19.115.050;
(ii) It is consistent with applicable supplemental guidelines set forth in FWRC 19.115.090; and
(iii) For development applications for remodeling or expansion of an existing
development, it is consistent with those provisions of Chapter 19.1 l� FWRC, Communiry Design
Guidelines, identified by the director as being applicable.
(3) Conditions and restrictions. The director shall include in the written decision any conditions and
restricrions that he or she determines are reasonably necessary to eliminate or minimize any undesirable effects
of granring the application. Any conditions and restrictions that are included become part of the decision.
(4) Contents. The director shall include the following in the written decision:
{a) A statement granring, modifying and granting, or denying the application.
(b) Any conditions and restrictions that are imposed.
(c) A statement of facts presented to the director that support the decision, including any
conditions and restrictions that are imposed
(d) A staxement of the director's conclusions based on those facts.
(e) A statement of the criteria used by the director in making the decision.
The date of issuance of the decision.
(g) A suirunary of the rights, as established in this chapter, of the applicant and others to appeal
the decision of the director.
(h) A statement of any threshold determination made under the State Environmental Policy Act,
Chapter 43.21C RCW.
(i) A statement that affected properry owners may request a change in valuation for property tax
purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
(5) Distribution of written decision. Within five working days after the written decision of the director
is issued, it shall be distributed as follows:
(a) A copy will be mailed to the applicant.
(b) A copy will be mailed to each person who submitted written comments or information to the
director.
(c) A copy will be mailed to any person who has specifically requested it_
{d) A copy will be mailed to the King County assessor.
(Ord No. 09-594, 59, 1-6-09; Ord No. 97-291, 3, 4-1-97; Ord. No. 90-43, 2(145.45), 2-27-90. Code 2001 22-395.)
K:�2009 Code Amendments�.SEPA Exer�t Leveis\Planning Commission�Exhibit C.doc
Exhibit C 13 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT D
FWRC Chapter 19.70
Process IV Hearing Examiner
19.70.150 Hearing examiner's decision.
(1) Cenerul. After considering all of the information and comments submitted on the matter, the
hearing examiner shail issue a written decision. In an agency decision appeal, the examiner shall affim�,
reverse, or modify the decision being appealed based on the hearing examiner's findings and conclusions.
Subsections (3), {4) and of this section do not apply to agency decision appeals.
(2) Timing.
(a) Unless a longer period is agreed to by the applicant, the hearing examiner shall issue the
decision within 10 working days after the close of the public hearing.
(b) The hearing examiner will endeavor to issue his or her decision on the land use and design
components of the process IV project permit approval within 120 days of the issuance of the letter of
completeness issued pursuant to FWRC i9.15.045, except that the following periods shall not be included
in the calculation of the 120-day period:
(i) Any period during which the applicant has been requested by the ciry to conect plans,
perform required studies, or provide additional required information. In these instances, the period
excluded from the 120-day calcularion shall begin on the date the city notifies the applicant of the need
for additional information and run until the earlier of the date the ciry determines whether the additional
informarion sarisfies the request for informarion or 14 days after the date the information has been
provided to the city. If the city determines that the inforn�arion submitted by the applicant under this
subsection is insufficient, it shall notify the applicant of the de�ciencies and the procedures under this
subsection shall apply as if a new request for studies had been made.
(ii) Any period during which an environmental impact statement is being prepared
following a determination of significance pursuant to Chapter 43.21C RCW.
(iii) Any period for administrarive appeals of the SEPA threshold deternunation; provided,
that the time period for consideration of such appeals shall not exceed 90 days for an open record appeal
hearing. The parties to an appeal may agree to extend the 90-day period
(iv) Any extension of rime mutually agreed upon by the appiicant and the city.
The 120-day rime period does not apply if a project pernut application under this chapter requires an
amendment to the comprehensive plan or this ritle; requires approval of a new fully contained community
as provided in RCW 36.70A350, a master planned resort as provided in RCW 36.70A.360, or the siting
of an essential public facility as provided in RCW 36.70A.200; or if a project permit application under
this chapter is substantially revised by the applicant, in which case the time period shall start from the
date at which the revised project application is determined to be corr�lete under FWRC 19.15.045.
If the hearing examiner is unable to issue his or her decision on the land use or design review
components of a process IV project permit applicarion as provided in this subsection, the ciry shail
provide written notice of this fact to the applicant. The notice shali include a statement of reasons why the
decision has not been issued within the 120-day period, and an esrimated date for issuance of the notice of
final decision.
(3) Decision criteria. The hearing examiner shall use the criteria listed in the provisions of this title
describing the requested decision in deciding upon the applicarion. In addition, the hearing examiner may
approve the application only i£
(a) It is consistenf with the comprehensive plan;
(b) It is consistent with all applicable provisions of this title and all other applicable laws;
(c) It is consistent with the public health, safety and welfare;
Exhibit D
14 Page 1 of 2
(d� The streets and utilities in the area of the subject property are adequate to serve the
anricipated demand from the proposal;
(e) The proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal location and configuration for
access; and
�f1 Traffic safety irr�acts for all modes of transportation both on and off-site are adequately
mitigated.
(4) Conditions und restrictions. The hearing examiner shall include in the written decision any
conditions and restrictions that the examiner determines are reasonably necessary to eliminate or
minimize any undesirable effects of granting the application. Any conditions and restricrions that are
itrr�osed become part of the decision.
(5) Contents. The hearing examiner shall include the fo(lowing in the examiner's written decision_
(a) A statement granting, modifying and granring or denying the application.
(b) Any conditions and restrictions that are imposed.
(c) A statement of facts presented to him or her that support the decision, including any
condirions and restrictions that are imposed_
(d) A sta.tement of the hearing e�miner's conclusions based on those facts.
(e) A statement of the criteria used by the hearing examiner in making the decision.
fl The date of issuance of the decision and a sununary of the rights, as established in this
chapter, of the applicant and others to appeal the decision of the hearing examiner.
(g) A statement of any threshold determination made under the State Environmental Policy Act,
Chapter 43.2 LC RCW.
(h) A statement that affected properry owners may request a change in valuation for property tax
purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluarion.
(6) Distribution of written decision. Within five working days after the heanng examiner's w�ritten
decision is issued, the director shall distribute the decision as follows:
(a) A copy will be mailed to the applicant and the appellant.
(b) A copy will be mailed to each person who submitted written or oral testimony to the hearing
examiner.
(c) A copy will be mailed to any person who has specifically requested it.
(d) A copy will be mailed to the King County assessor.
(Ord No. 09-59=t, 91, 1-6-09; Ord. No. 97-291, 3, 4-i-97; Ord. No. 92-133, 3(150.65), 4-21-92; Ord. No. 90-
43, 2(i50.65), 2-27-90. Code 2001 22-445.)
IC�2009 Code Amendments\SEPA Exempt Levels\Planning Commission�Exhibit D:DOC
Exhibit D
15 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT E
FWRC Chapter 19.75
Process V Quasi-Judicial Rezones
19.75130 Recommendation by the hearing examiner.
{1) Generally. After considering all of the information and comments submitted on the matter, the
hearing examiner shall issue a written recommendation to the city council.
(2) Titning_ Unless a longer period is agreed to by the applicant; the hearing examiner tnust issue the
recommendation within 10 working days after the close of the public hearing_
(3) Decisional criteria. The hearing examiner shall use the following criteria for quasi judiciat
rezones:
(a) The city may approve an application for a quasi judicial nonproject rezone only if it �nds that:
(i) The proposed rezone is in the best interest of the residents of the city; and
(ii) The proposed rezone is appropriate because either:
(Aj Conditions in the immediate vicinity of the subject properry have so significantly
changed since the properry was given its present zoning and that, under those changed conditions, a
rezone is within the public interest; or
(B) The rezone will conect a zone classification or zone boundary that was inappropriate
when established;
(iii) It is consistent with the comprehensive plan;
(iv) It is consistent with all applicable provisions of the title, including those adopted by
reference from the comprehensive plan; and
(v) It is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare.
(b) The city may approve an appiication for a quasi judicial project-related rezone only if it finds
that:
(i) The criteria in subsection (3)(a) of this section are met; and
(ii) The proposed project complies with this title in all respects; and
(iii) The site plan of the proposed project is designed to minimize all adverse impacts on the
developed properties in the immediate vicinity of the subject property; and
(iv) The site plan is designed to minimize impacts upon the public services and urilities; and
(v) Traffic safetv im_pacts created by the �roposal for all modes of transvortatian. both on-
and off-site are ade�uatelv mirigated; and
vi The rezone has merit and value for the communiry as a whole.
(4) Conrlirions and restrictions. The hearing examiner shall include in the written recommendation
any conditions and restrictions that the examiner determines are reasonably necessary to eliminate or
minimize any undesirable effects of granting the requested rezone.
(5) Contents. The hearing examiner shall include the following in the written recommendation to city
council:
(a) A statement of facts presented to the hearing examiner that supports his or her
recommendation, including any conditions and restrictions that are recommended.
{b) A statement of the hearing examiner's conclusions based on those facts.
(c) A statement of the criteria used by the hearing examiner in making the recommendation.
(d) The date of issuance of the recommendation.
Exhibit E
i 6 Page 1 of 2
(6) Distribution of written recommendation. The director shall distribute copies of#he
recommendation of the hearing examiner as follows:
(a) After the hearing examiner's avritten recommendation is issued, a copy will be sent to the
applica.nt, to each person who submitted written or oral tesrimony to the hearing examiner, and to each
person who specificaily requested it.
(b) Prior to the meeting where city council considers the application, a copy will be sent to each
member of city council. The director shall include a draft resolution or ordinance that embodies the
hearing examiner's recommendation with the copy of the recommendation sent to each city council
member_
(Ord. No. 09-594, 120, 1-6-09; Ord. No. 02-�24, 3, 9-17-02; Ord..No. 99-337, 2, 3-2-99; Ord. No. 97-291, 3,
4-1-97. Code 2001 22-488.)
K:�2009 Code Amendments\SEPA Exempt Levels\Planning Commission�Exbibit E.doc
Exhibit E 17 Page 2 of 2
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
PLANNING COMMISSION
September 16, 2009 City Hall
7:00 p.m. Council Chambers
MEETING MINUTES
Commissioners present: Merle Pfeifer, Hope Elder, Sarady Long, Wayne Carlson, Tom Medhurst, and Tim
O'Neil. Commissioners absent: Lawson Bronson (excused)_ Staff present: Senior Planner Margaret Clark,
Senior Planner Joanne Long-Woods, Pianning Manager Isaac Conlen, Assistant City Attorney Peter
Beckwith, and Administrative Assistant Tina Piety
Chair Pfeifer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of July 22, 2009, were approved as written.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Mr. Conlen announced that one Commissioner's term expires this month (Lawson Bronson). The deadline for
Planning Commissioner applications was last Friday and we have received one application; from Lawson
Bronson. The next Planning Commission meeting will be October 7, 2009, when we will have a pubiic hearing
on proposed amendments to the Personal Wireless Service Facilities (PWSF) regulations.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
PUBLic HEa�tING Code Amendments to SEPA Exemption Use Processes
Ms. Long-Woods delivered the staff presentation. The proposed code amendments will raise some of the
State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) exempt level thresholds and mitigate for onsite or offsite traffic
safety impacts to the transportation system, for ail modes of transportation. The proposed amendments are
part of the "Economic Stimulus Package" intended to encourage development.
The proposed SEPA exemption amendments will raise the number of dwelling units exempt from SEPA from
9 to 20. It will raise the exempt gross floor area for office, commercial, recrearion, service, or storage
buildings to 12,000 square feet from 4,000 square feet and raise the parking spaces to 40 from 20. In
addition, the exempt number of parking spaces in parking lots will be raised from 20 to 40.
When the proposed SEPA exemption amendments were given to the Traffic Division for review, they
expressed concern that raising the exempt levels rnay impact traffic safety. Therefore, a new decisional
criterion is proposed for Use Processes II, III, IV, and V to require traffic safety impacts (such as pedestrian
pathways, stop lights, etc.) be mitigated
The meeting was opened for pubiic comment. Ms. Piety read the following comment into the record
18
K:�PFuu�umg Commis=_ion\2009Vvteeting Summary 09-16-09.doc
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 September 16, 2009
O'neill
Thank ��ou so much and I would like to submit to you for reading into tonight's record that the
Master Builder Assoc strongly supparts raising SEPA thresholds and encourages the Planning
Commission to pass the draft ordinance before you. Thank you and my apologies for not being able
to attend.
Garrett J. Huffinan, South King Seattle Manager
Master Builders Association for King and Snohomish Counties"
There was no other public comment.
Commissioner Long commented that he believes the proposed amendments are a step forward and will make
it less costly for smaller developers. He asked if the amendments will apply to multi-family development. Ms.
Long-Woods replied that the amendments will apply to multi-family development. Mr. Conlen commented
that the proposed amendments will not apply to subdivisions as they are regulated elsewhere in the code. For
subdivisions, the SEPA exemption will remain at nine lots.
Commissioner Carlson asked if the proposed traffic impact amendments are more of a housekeeping
amendment and will they have any bearing on the proposed Traffic Impact Fee (TIF)? Mr. Beckwi#h replied
they will not have a bearing on the proposed TIF because the proposed TIF is an overall, city-wide issue
while these proposed amendments deal with site-specific developments.
Commissioner Medhurst commented that while reading the proposed amendments he noted places where
different words (endeavor to, shall, and must) are used for the same issue. Mr. Beckwith commented that this
issue is outside the purview of the proposed amendments, but staff will make note of these in order to review
for a possible future amendment_
Cominissioner Long commented that in Exhibit A, he noted that the square feet for agricultural structure
(14.15.030{1)[b]) is not proposed to be changed Why is this not included? Ms. Long-Woods commented that
the city rarely receives an application for an agricultural structure and therefore, staff decided the square
footage did not need to be changed
Commissioner Carison moved (and it was secondec� to recommend adoption of the proposed amendments as
presented by staff. The motion carried unanimously.
The pubiic hearing was closed.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
None
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
19
K:�Piannmg Commissn n�20�9\Meetu�g Summary IN-16-09.doc
ORDINANCE NO. 09-
AN ORDINAIVCE OF THE CITY COUNC[L OF THE CITY OF FEDERAI. WAY,
VVASHINGTON, �'IENDING FEDERAL WAY REVISED CODE TITLE 14,
CHAPTER 14.15.030, RELATING TO STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POL[CY
ACT (SEPA) EXEMPT LEVEL THRESHOLDS, AND AMENDING TITLE 19,
CHAPTER 19.60.050 FOR USE PROCESS [I, CHAPTER 19.65.100 FOR USE
PROCESS [[I, CHAPTER 19.70.150 FOR USE PROCESS IV, AND CHAPTER
19.75130 FOR USE PROCESS V(AMENDING ORDINANCE NOS. 09-594, 07-
573, 07-554, 04-468, 02-424, 00-375, 99-337, 97-291, 92-133, 90-43, AND 90-40).
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need to periodically modify Title 19 of the Federul Wuy
Revised Code (FWRC), "Zoning and Development Code," in order to conform to state and federal law,
codify administrarive practices, clarify and update zoning regularions 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 Use Process VI review, Chapter 19.80 FWRG, pursuant to Chapter
1935 FWRC; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments are part of the "Economic Stimulus Package" included in
the 2009 Planning Commission Work Program; and
WHEREAS, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) was adopted to estabiish a set of rules
that agencies could use to determine and mitigate potential impacts to the environment generated by
development projects; and
WHEREAS, the City of Federal Way has adopted these rules as part of the FWRC Title 14,
"Environmental Polic_y; and
WHEREAS, FWRC Chapter 14.15.030 lists the exempt level thresholds for minor new
construction; and
WHEREAS, the Ciry has adopted exempt level thresholds for residential, commercial, office,
recreational, service, or storage buildings up to 4,000 square feet, and up to 20 parking spaces, and up to
ZO parking spaces for parking lots; and
Otd. No. #09- Page 1, File #09-102608-00-UP Doc ID 51657
20
WHERAS, the City is proposing to raise the exempt level thresholds to the maximum allo�ved
under WAC 197.11.800 for residential, commercial, office, recreational, service, or storage buildings to
12, 000 square feet, and up to 40 parking spaces, and up to 40 parking spaces for parking lots; and
WHEREAS, the City is proposing to amend FWRC Title 19, "Zoning and Development Code,"
Chapter 19.60.050(2) for Use Process II Site Plan Approval, Chapter 19.65.100(2) for Use Process III
Project Approval, Chapter i9.170.150(3) for Use Process IV Hearing Examiner, and Chapter
19.75.130(3) far Use Process V- Quasi-Judicial Rezones by adding an additional decisional criteria to
address traffic safety impacts to the overall transportation system; and
WHEREAS, on July 25, 2009, the city issued an Environmental Determination of
Nonsignificance (DNS) with a comment deadline of August 10, 2009, and an appeal deadline of August
24, 2009, and no comments or appeals were submitted to the Ciry; and
WHEREAS, the draft staff report was electronically forwarded on July 25, 2009, to stakeholders
and interested citizens for review and comment, which resulted in one comment letter submitted by Sam
Pace with the Seattle/King Counry Realtors; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission properly conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the
code amendments on September 16, 2009, and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the City
Council; and
WHEREAS, the Land Use/Transportarion Committee of the Federal Way City Council
considered these code amendments on October 5, 2009, and recommended adoption of the amendments
as presented.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CTi'Y COUNCIL OF THE CTTY OF FEDERAL WAY,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findin�s. The City Council of the City of Federal Way makes the following findings
with respect to the proposed amendments.
Ord. No. #09- Page 2,
File #09-102608-00-UP Doc ID 51657
21
The code amendments are i�� the best interest of the residents of the City and will benefit the
city as a whole by providing a shorter and more economic revie�v time for development
permitring processes for minor new construction projects.
2. The code amendments comply �vith Chapter 36.70A RCW, Growth Management Act.
3. The code amendments are consistent with the intent and purpose of FWRC Title 14 and Title
19, and will implement and are consistent cvith the applicable provisions of the Federal Way
Comprehensive Plan (FWCP).
4. The code amendments bear a substantial relationship to, and will protect and not adversely
affect, the public health, safety, and welfare.
The code amendmen#s have followed the proper procedure required under the FWRG
Section 2. Conclusions. Pursuant to Chapter 193� FWRC, and based upon the recitals and the
findings set forth in Secrion l, the Federal Way Ciry Council makes the following Conclusions of Law
with respect to the decisional criteria necessary for the adoption of the proposed amendments:
1. The proposed FWRC amendments are consistent with, and substantially irr�lement, the
following Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) goals and policies:
LUG2 Develop an efficient and timeiy development review process based on a public/
private partnership.
LUG4 Maximize efficiency of the development review process.
LUP6 Conduct regular reviews of development regulations to determine how to
in�rove upon the permit review process.
TG2 Provide a safe, efficient, convenient, and financially sustainable transportarion
system with sufficient capacity to move people, goods, and services at an
acceptable level of service.
The City shail develop and adopt policies for the construction, reconstruction,
maintenance and preservation of new and existing facilities.
EDP 15 The City will continue to implement a streamlined permitting process consistent
with state and federal regulations to reduce the upfront costs of locating
businesses in the City.
EDP 18 The City will periodically monitor local and regional trends to be able to adjust
plans, policies, and programs.
2. The proposed FWRC amendments bear a substantial relarionship to the public health, safety,
and welfare because they clarify and refine various related codes in order to increase the
efficiency of the deveiopment review process.
Ord. No. #09- Page 3, File #09-t02608-00-UP Doc ID 51657
22
3. The proposed amendments are in the best interest of the public and the residents of the City
of Federal Way as they provide for certainty in the development review process, which
results in contiriued development within the City, thus aiding the local economy.
Section 3. Chapter t4.1 of the Federal Way Revised Code is hereby amended to as follows:
14.15.030 Categorical exemptions Flexible thresholds.
(1) The city establishes the following exempt levels for minor new construction defined in
WAC 197-11-800(1)(b) based on local conditions:
(a) For residential structures up to �e dwelling units.
(b) For agricultural structures covering up to 10,000 square feet.
(c) For office, commercial, recreational, service or storage buildings up to �k@@8 E�Q04
square feet gross floor area, and up to 4Q p��ing spaces.
(d) For parking lots up to �8 �t� parking spaces.
(e) For iandfills and excavarions up to 500 cubic yards.
(2) Whenever the city establishes new exempt levels under this section, it shall send them to
the State Department of Ecology as requiredby WAC 197-11-800(lj(c).
Section 4. Chapter 19.60 of the Federal Way Revised Code is hereby amended as follows:
19.60.050 Site plan and commanity design guidelines approval criteria.
1) Applicability. The director may approve an applicarion for site plan review and community
design guideline review if it is consistent with the following sets of decisional criteria:
(2) Site plun criteria.
(a) It is consistent with the comprehensive plan;
(b) It is consistent with all applicabie provisions of this ritle;
(c) It is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare;
(d) The streets and utiliries in the area of the subject property are adequate to serve the
anticipated demand from the proposal;
(e) The proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal locarion and
con�guration for access; and
Traffic safe i acts for all modes of trans ortation both on and off-site are
ad�uately �ti a� ted.
(3) Community design guideline decisionul criteria.
(a) It is consistent with site design standards set forth in FWRC 19.115.050 for all
zoning districts;
(b) It is consistent with applicable supplemental guidelines set forth in FWRC
19.115.090; and
(c) For development applications for remodeling or expansion of an existing
development, it is consistent wiYh those provisions of Chapter 19.115 FWRC, Community Design
Guidelines, identified by the director as being applicable.
Section 5. Chapter 19.65 of the Federal Way Revised Code is hereby amended as follows:
19.65.100 Director's decision.
{1) General.
(a) Coordination with decisions under the State Environmental Policy Act. If a SEPA
threshoid determination is required to be issued, the threshold determination must follow the end
of the public comment period on the project permit applicarion, but precede the director's
decision on the land use and design components of the process III project pernut approval. If the
SEPA threshold determination is appealed, the director's land use and design components
decision shall be issued suf�ciently in advance of the open record hearing on the threshold
Ord. No. #09- Page 4,
File #09-102608-00-UP Doc ID 51657
23
detetTnination appeal, to allow any appeal of the land use and/or design review decision to be
consolidated and heard with the appeal of the threshold determination.
(b) Tirning. The director will endeavor to issue his or her decision on the land use and
design cornponents of the process III project permit approval within 120 da.ys of the issuance of
the letter of completeness.
(i) The 120-day time period does not apply if a project permit application under
this chapter requires an amendment to the corr�rehensive plan or this title; requires approval of a
new fully contained community as provided in RCW 36.70A.350, a master planned resort as
provided in RCW 36.70A.360, the siting of an essential public facility as provided in RCW
36.70A.200, or capital facility projects of the city; or if a project permit application under this
chapter is substantially revised by the applicant, in which case the time period shall start from the
date at which the revised project application is determined to be complete.
{ii) If the decision solely relates to a review of community design guidelines of a
process IV application, the director shall issue a written decision within 10 working days after the
deadline for submitring comments_
(iii) The following periods shall not be included in the calculation of the 120-day
period:
(A) Any period during which the applicant has been requested by the city to
correct plans, perform required studies, or provide additional required infarmation. In these
instances, the period excluded from the 120-day calculation shall begin on the date the city
norifies the applicant of the need for additional information and run unril the earlier of the date
the city determines whether the additional informarion satisfies the request for informarion, or i4
days after the date the information has been provided to the city. If the city determines that the
infortnation submitted by the applicant under this subsection is insufficient, it shall notify the
applicant of the deficiencies and the procedures under this subsection shall appiy as if a new
request for studies had been made.
(B) Any period during which an environmental impact statement is being
prepared following a determinarion of significance pursuant to Chapter 4321C RCW.
(C) Any period for administrative appeals of the SEPA threshold
determination; provided, that the time period for considerarion of such appeals shall not exceed
90 days for an open record appeal hearing. The parties to an appeal may agree to extend the 90-
day period.
(D) Any extension of time mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the
city.
(iv) If the director is unable to issue his or final decision on the land use or design
review components of a process III project permit application as provided in this subsection, the
city shall provide written notice of this fact to the applicant. The notice shall include a statement
of reasons why the decision has not been issued within the 120-day period, and an esrimated date
for issuance of the notice of final decision.
(2) Decisionul criteria. The director shall use the criteria listed in this subsection and the
provisions of this title describing the requested decision in deciding upon the application.
(a) The director may approve the application only if:
(i) It is consistent with the comprehensive plan;
(ii) It is consistent with all applicable provisions of this title;
(iii) It is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare;
(iv) The streets and utilities in the area of the subject property are adequate to
serve the anricipated demand from the praposal;
(v) The proposed access to the subject property is at the oprimal location and
configuration; and
(vi) Traffic safety impacts for all modes of transt�ortarion, both on and off-site, are
adequateiy miti�ated.
Ord. No. #09- Page 5, File #09-l02608-00.UP Doc ID 51657
24
{b) If the application is subject to the requirements of Chapter 19. I 1� FWRC,
Community Design Guidelines, the director shall also use the follo�ving criteria in deciding upon
an application:
(i) It is consistent with the site design standards set forth for all zoning districts in
FWRC 19.i1�.050;
(ii) It is consistent with applicable supplementai guidelines set forth in FWRC
19_ 115_090; and
(iii) For development applications for remodeling or expansion of an existing
development, it is consistent with those provisions of Chapter 19.11 FWRC, Communiry Design
Guidelines, identified by the director as being applicable.
(3) Conditions and restrictions. The director shall include in the written decision any conditions and
restrictions that he or she determines are reasonably necessary to eliminate or minimize any undesirable
effects of granting the application_ Any conditions and restrictions that are included become part of the
decision.
(4) Contents. The director shalt include the following in the written decision:
(a) A statement granting, modifying and granting, or denying the application.
(b) Any conditions and restrictions that are imposed.
(c) A statement of facts presented to the directar that support the decision, including any
conditions and restrictions that are imposed.
(d) A sta.tement of the director's conclusions based on those facts.
(e) A statement of the criteria used by the director in making the decision.
The date of issuance of the decision
(g) A summa.ry of the rights, as established in this chapter, of the applicant and others to
appeal the decision of the director.
(h) A statement of any threshold determinarion made under the State Environmental
Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW.
(i) A statement that affected property owners may request a change in valuarion for
property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
Distribution of written decision. Within five working days after the written decision of the
director is issued, it shall be distributed as foliows:
(a) A copy will be mailed to the applicant.
(b) A copy will be mailed to each person who submitted written comments or
inforn�ation to the director.
{c) A copy will be mailed to any person who has specifically requested it.
(d) A copy will be mailed to the King County assessor.
Section 6. Chapter 19.70 of the Federal Way Revised Code is hereby amended as follows:
19.70.150 Hearing examiner's decision.
(1) General_ After considering all of the inforn�ation and comments submitted on the matter,
the hearing examiner shall issue a written decision. In an agency decision appeal, the examiner
shall affirm, reverse, or modify the decision being appealed based on the hearing examiner's
findings and conclusions. Subsecrions (3), (4) and (5) of this section do not apply to agency
decision appeals.
(2) Timing.
(a) Unless a longer period is agreed to by the applicant, the hearing examiner shall issue
the decision within 10 working days after the close of the public hearing.
(b) The hearing examiner will endeavar to issue his or her decision on the land use and
design components of the process IV project permit approval within 120 days of the issuance of
the letter of completeness issued pursuant to FWRC 19.15.045, except that the following periods
shall not be included in the calcularion of the i20-day period:
Ord. No. #09- Page 6,
File #09-102608-00-UP Doc ID 51657
25
(i) Any period during which the applicant has been requested by the city to conect
plans, perform required studies, or provide additional required information. [n these instances, the
period excluded from the 120-day calculation shall begin on the date the city noti�es the
applicant of the need for additional information and run untii the eariier of the date the city
determines whether the addirional information satisfies the request for information or 14 days
after the date the informarion has been provided to the city. If the city determines that the
information submitted by the applicant under this subsection is insufficient, it shall notify the
applicant of the de�ciencies and the procedures under this subsection shall apply as if a new
request for studies had been made.
(ii) Any period during which an environmental impact statement is being prepared
following a determination of significance pursuant to Chapter 43.21C RCW.
(iii) Any period for administrarive appeais of the SEPA threshold determinarion;
provided, that the time period for considerarion of such appeals shali not exceed 90 days for an
open record appeal hearing. The parties to an appeal may agree to extend the 90-day period.
(iv) Any extension of time mutually agreed upon by the applicant and the city.
The 120-day time period does not apply if a project permit applicarion under this chapter
requires an amendment to the cornprehensive plan or this ritle; requires approval of a new fully
contained community as provided in RCW 36.70A.350, a master planned resort as provided in
RCW 36.70A.360, or the siting of an essential public facility as provided in RCW 36.70A.200; or
if a project permit application under this chapter is substanrially revised by the applicant, in which
case the time period shall start from the date at which the revised project application is
determined to be cornplete under FWRC 19.15.045.
If the hearing examiner is unable to issue his or her decision on the land use or design review
components of a process IV project pernut applicarion as provided in this subsecrion, the city
shall provide written notice of this fact to the applicant. The notice shall include a statement of
reasons why the decision has not been issued within the 120-day period, and an estimated date for
issuance of the notice of final decision.
(3) Decision criteria. The hearing examiner shall use the criteria listed in the provisions of this
title describing the requested decision in deciding upon the application. In addition, the hearing
examiner may approve the application only if:
(aj It is consistent with the cox�rehensive plan;
(b) It is consistent with all applicable provisions of this ritle and ali other applicable
laws;
(c) It is consistent with the public health, safety and welfare;
(d) The streets and utilities in the area of the subject property are adequate to serve the
anticipated demand from the proposal;
(e) The proposed access to the subject property is at the oprimal location and
con�guration for access; and
f�l Traffic safety im�acts for all modes of transvortation, both on and off are
adequately miti a�� ted•
(4) Conditions and restrictions. The hearing examiner shall include in the written decision any
conditions and restricrions that the examiner determines are reasonabiy necessary to eliminate or
minimize any undesirable effects of granring the application Any condirions and restricrions that
are imposed become part of the decision.
Contents_ The hearing examiner shall include the following in the examiner's written
decision:
(a) A statement granring, modifying and granting or denying the applica.rion
(b) Any conditions and restrictions that are imposed
(c) A statement of facts presented to him or her that support the decision, including any
conditions and restrictions that are irnposed.
(d) A statement of the hearing examiner's conclusions based on those facts.
Ord. No. #09- Page 7,
File #09-102608-00.UP Doc ID 51657
26
(e) A statement of the criteria used by the hearing examiner in making the decision.
The date of issuance of the decision and a summary of the rights, as established in
this chapter, of the applicant and others to appeal the decision of the hearing examiner_
(g) A statement of any threshold determination made under the State Environmental
Policy Act, Chapter 43.21C RCW.
(h) A statement that affected properry owners may request a change in valuation for
property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
(6) Distribution of written decision. Within five �vorking da�-s after the hearing examiner's
written decision is issued, the director shall distribute the decision as follows:
(a) A copy will be mailed to the applicant and the appellant.
(b) A copy will be mailed to each person who submitted written or oral testimony to the
hearing examiner_
(c) A copy will be mailed to any person who has specifically requested it.
(d) A copy will be mailed to the King County assessor.
Section 7. Chapter 19.75 of the Federal Way Revised Code is hereby amended as follows:
19.75.130 Recommendation by the hearing examiner.
(1) Generally. After considering all of the information and comments submitted on the
matter, the hearing examiner shall issue a written recommendarion to the city council.
(2) Timing. Unless a longer period is agreed to by the applicant, the hearing examiner must
issue the recotrunendation within 10 working days after the close of the public hearing.
(3) Decisional criteria. The hearing examiner shall use the following criteria for quasi judicial
rezones:
(a) The city may approve an applicarion for a quasi judicial nonproject rezone only if it
finds that:
(i) The proposed rezone is in the best interest of the residents of the ciry; and
(ii) The proposed rezone is appropriate because either:
(A) Conditions in the immediate vicinity of the subject property have so
significantly changed since the property was given its present zoning and that, under those
changed conditions, a rezone is within the public interest; or
(B) The rezone will correct a zone classification or zone boundary that was
inappropriate when established;
(iii) It is consistent with the co�rehensive plan;
(iv) It is consistent with all applicable provisions of the title, including those adopted
by reference from the comprehensive plan; and
(v) It is consistent with the public heaith, safety, and welfare.
(b) The city may approve an applicarion for a quasi judicial project-related rezone only if
it finds that:
(i) The criteria in subsection (3)(a) of this section are met; and
(ii) The proposed project complies with this title in all respects; and
(iii) The site plan of the proposed project is designed to minimize all adverse impacts
on the developed properries in the immediate vicinity of the subject property and
(iv) The site plan is designed to minimize impacts upon the public services and
utilities; and
�LTraffic safetX irnpacts created bv the proposal for all modes of transnortation
botih on- and off-site are adequately miti�ated; and
vi The rezone has merit and value for the cotrununity as a who�e.
(4) Conditions and restrictions. The hearing examiner shall include in the written
recommendation any conditions and restrictions that the examiner determines are reasonably
necessary to eliminate or minimize any undesirable effects of granting the requested rezone.
Ord. No. #09- Page 8,
File #09-102608-00-UP Doc fD Si657
27
Contents. The hearing examiner shall inciude the following in the written
recommendation to city council:
(a) A statement of facts presented to the hearing examiner that supports his or her
recommendation, including any condirions and restrictions that are recommended.
(b) A statement of the hearing examiner's conciusions based on those facts.
{c) A statement of the criteria used by the hearing examiner in making the
recommendation.
(d) The date of issuance of the recommendation.
(6) Distribution of written recommendation. The director shall distribute copies of the
recommendarion of the hearing examiner as follows:
(a) After the hearing examiner's written recommendation is issued, a copy will be sent to
the applicant, to each person who submitted written or oral testimony to the hearing examiner,
and to each person who specifically requested it.
(b) Prior to the meering where city council considers the application, a copy will be sent
to each member of ciry council. The director shall include a draft resolution or ordinance that
embodies the hearing examiner's recommendation with the copy of the recommendation sent to
each city councit member.
Section 8. Severabilitv. The provisions of this ordinance are declared separate and severable. The
invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this ordinance, or the
invalidity of the applicarion 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 9. Correcrions. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this ordinance are authorized to make
necessary corrections to this ordinance including, but not limited to, the correcrion of scrivener/clerical
errors, references, ordinance numbering, section/subsection numbers, and any references thereto.
Section 10. Ratificarion. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of
this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed.
Section 11. Effective Date_ This ordinance shall be effective five (5) days after passage and
publicarion as provided by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the Ciry of Federal Way this day of
200
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MAYOR, JACK DOVEY
Ord. No. #09- Page 9,
Fiie #09 Doc ID 51657
P� 3
ATrEST:
CITY CLERK, CAROL MCNEILLY, CMC
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY, PATRICIA A. RICHARDSON
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
pRDINANCE NO.:
Ord. No. #09- Page 10,
File #09-102608-00-UP Doc 1D 51657
29
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 20, 2009
ITEM
SUBdECT: S 352" Street Extension Project from Enchanted Parkway South to Pacific Highway South 30°/a Design
Status Report
POLICY QUESTION Shou(d the Council authorize staff to proceed with design of the S 352" Street Extension Project
and return to the LUTC and Council at the 85% design comp(etion for further reports and authorization?
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
COMM[TTEE Land Use and Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
Consent
City Councit Business
i�
Ordinance
Resoiution
MEETING DATE: October 5, 2009
Public Hearing
Other
STAFF REPORT BY: Marwan Salloum, P.E., Deputy Public Works Director DEPT Public Works
Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated October 5, 2009.
Considered:
1. Authorize staff to proceed with the design of the S 352" Street Extension Project and return to the LUTC and
Council at the 85% design completion stage for further reports and authorization.
2. Do not authorize staff to proceed with finalizing the present design of this project and provide direction to
staff.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends forwarding Option 1 to the October 20, 2009 City Council Consent
Agenda for approvai.
1
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ,r� DIRECTOR APPROVAL: ��v'� t
Committee Council Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Place Option 1 on the October 20 2009 Council Consent Agenda for aQproval.
Linda Kochmar, Chair Jim Ferre((, Member Dini Duclos, Member
PROPOSED COL7NC[L MOTION "I move to authorize staff to proceed with the design of the S 352" Street
Extension Project and return to the LZITC and Council at the 8�% design completion stage for further reports and
authorization.
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED B Y CITY CLERKS OFFlCE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
APPROVED COUNCIL BILL
DENIED l reading
TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactmeot reading
MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE
RE V [SED 02/O6/2006 RESOLUT[ON
30
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 5, 2009
TO: Land Use and Transportation Committee
VIA: Brian Wilson, Interim City Manager
FROM• Marwan Salloum, P_E_, Deputy Public Works Director
John Mulkey, P. E., Street Systems Project Engineer 3'flN�
SUBJECT• S 352° Street Extension Project from Enchanted Parkway South to Pacific Highway
South 30% Design Status Report
BACKGROUND
This project consists of the extension of S 352 Street from Enchanted Parkway South (State Route 161)
to Pacific Highway South (State Route 99). This extension includes a three-lane cross-section with a two-
way left turn lane and bike lanes. A new traffic signal is p(anned at the intersection of S 352° Street
and Pacific Highway South. Widening oF the west leg of the intersection of South 352" Street and
Enchanted Parkway South is p(anned to accommodate a new right-turn only (ane. Other improvements
include curb, gutter and sidewalk, planter strips between the curb and sidewatk, utility undergrounding
and iltumination.
The following provides a brief synopsis of the progress on this project to date. Cunently, the project
design is approximately 30% complete, which includes the following completed tasks:
The Topographical Surveys
The Geotechnical Investigation
Preliminary Right of Way Pian
Channelization Ptans
Project Design to 30%
SEPA Approval
Ongoing Tasks Inctude:
Right of Way Requirements {Property Appraisals, Review Appraisals, Negotiation and
Acquisition)
Intertocal Agreement with Lakehaven Utility District for Water and Sewer line
relocation/replacement design and construction
Utility Underground Conversion Design Agreement with Puget Sound Energy within
project limits
The Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) Phase I
WSDOT approval of Channelization Plans
Project Design to 85%
This project is scheduled to go to bid in April 2011 with construction beginning June 2011 if grant
funding from the State Transportation Improvernent Board (TIB) is obtained.
31
Land Use and Transportation Committee
S 352nd Street Extension
October 2009
Page 2 of 2
PROJECT ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES:
Planning and Design
ROW Acquisition
2009 Construction Cost (estimate)
10% Construction Contingency
Construction Management
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS
AVAILABLE FUNDING:
Utility Tax (2009)
Utifiity Tax (2010)
REET {2010)
Mitigation
Interest
TOTAL AVAILABLE BUDGET
525,000
1,600,000
3,700,000
370,000
3 70,000
6,565,000
1,000,000
1,400,000
200,000
52,200
6_700
2,658,900
At this time, staff anticipates obtaining Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) funds for the balance of
the project cost.
32
K:ILUTC12009\10-OS-09 S352nd Street Extension 30% Design Status Report.doc
COIINCIL MEETING DATE: October 20 2009
ITEM
SUBJECT 2010 Asphalt Overlay Program Preliminary Project List and Authorization to Bid
POLICY QUESTION Should the Council approve the 2010 Asphalt Overlay Program Preliminary Project List and
authorize staff to proceed with the design and bid of the proposed ZO10 Aspha(t Overlay Program?
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
Cons.ent
City Council Business
Ordinance
Resolution
MEETING DATE: October 5, 2009
Pubtic Hearing
Other
STAFF REPORT BY: Marwan Salloum, P_E., De�uty_Public_Works Director DEPT Public Works
Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated October 5, 2009.
ions Considered:
1. Approve the list of streets for the 2010 Asphalt Overlay Project as presented_ Furthermore, authorize staff to
bid all or part of the 2010 Asphalt Overlay Project, returning with a request for permission to award the
project within the available 2010 Asphalt Overlay Budget to the lowest responsive, responsible bidder.
2. Direct staff to modify the preliminary list and return to Committee for further action.
3. Take no action and provide direction to staff.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends forwarding Option 1 to the October 20, 2009 City Council Consent
Agenda for approvaL
CJ DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
C[TY MANAGER APP1tOVAL: `�M
Committee Council Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Place Option 1 on the October 20 2009 Council Consent Agenda for approval.
Linda Kochmar, Chair Jim Ferrell, Member Dini Duclos, Member
PROPOSED COUKCIL MOTION: I move approval of the list of streets for the 2010 Asphalt Overlay Project as
presented. Furthermore, I authorize sta f, f 10 bid all or part of the 2010 Asphal! Overlay Project, returning with a
request for permission to award the project within the available 2010 Asphalt Overlay Budget to the lowest
responsive, responsible bidder.
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
APPROVED COUNCIL BILL
DEN[ED I reading
TABLED/DEFERRED/N0 ACTION Enactment readiog
MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE
REVISED-02/06/2006 RESOLUTION
33
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
October 5, 2009
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Brian Wilson, Interim City Manager
Marwan Saltoum, P.E., Deputy Public Works Director
Jeff Huynh, Street Systems Engineer�
2010 Asphalt Over[ay Program Preliminary Project List and Authorization to Bid
BACKGROUND
Public Works staff has developed a list of recommended streets for the 2010 Asphalt Overlay Program. The total
estimated budget for the program is $1,713,267 and is comprised of the foliowing:
2010 Proposed Overlay Budget $1,400,000
2010 Structures Budget $146,267
2409 Carry Forward (estimate) $67,000
Mitigation (estimate) $100,000
TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE $1,713,267
The $146,267 from the structures budget is for the Ciry's annual Sidewalk Maintenance Program, and will cover
the costs associated with the replacement of substandard whee(chair ramps, and repairing existing curb, gutter,
and sidewalks within the overlay project area_
The foilowing is a preliminary list of streets to be included in the 2010 Asphalt Overlay Program. The streets
were seiected using the City's Pavement Management System and were verified by field reconnaissance. The
costs shown are estimated and will be refined as the design of each schedule is completed. A project vicinity map
and more detai(ed area maps are attached for your information.
SCHEDULE DESCRIPTION
A l Way South —S 338` to S 344` Street
B S 317` Street 23"� to 28` Ave
C Milton Road (S 369` to City limit)
D 23` Ave S 319` to S 322" Street
E S 320�' Street 11` Ave to 8` Ave
F S 320�' Street 8` Ave to b` Ave
ESTIMATED SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COSTS:
10% Construction Contingency
Pavement Management System
In-house Design
Construction Administration
City's Administrative Fee
Printing and Advertising
EST[MATED TOTAL PROGRAM COST:
34
AMOUNT
$538,000
$172,000
$286,000
$161,000
$276,000
$210,000
$1,643,000
$164,300
$35,000
$63,000
$115,000
$72,000
$3,500
$2,095,800
October S, 2009
Land Use and Transportation Committee
20t0 AspfialtOverlay Pro�am
Page 2 of Z
The estimated cost of $2,095,800 is a preliminary figure used for estimating purposes only and includes
construction administration, ten percent construction contingency, in-house design and construction management,
printing and advertising. The 2010 Asphalt Overlay Project wilt be awarded within the avaitable overlay program
budget.
Once Councii approves the list of streets for the Overlay Program, staff will begin the final design. The
anticipated date for advertising is February 2010, with construction beginning in May 2010.
k:\lutc\2009\9-21-09 2010 Asphalt Overlay listdoc
35
N
N
1st Way S
S 317th street
Milton ftoad
23rd Ave S
E S 320th Street
F S 320th Street
City of Federal Way
2010 Asphalt Overiay
Preliminary List
N
Federal Way
CityMap
Map Prirrtsd�ep 17 2009 N�e: This map is inAe�Med for use as a g►apidcal rep►esen�nn adY•
Ma� made by crazy bkd iady 3 6 7he CitY d Federal Way malces no w�arraMy as tn ds aoaa�cy.
N
Scheduie A
1 St Way SOUth fede�i wa
CityMap
Mep Priflted�SBp 17 zoos �:,his ►nap is inoended fo. use as a g►s�iaca► �pre�atio�+ o�►r-
M� maa.br 37 �rorr-ede�► wey �es �o w�►ra►�ras ro� eccu�y.
Schedule B
S 317th St
N
Federal Way
CityMap
M� Printed�Sep 17 2009 nrote: 7nis map is;�ed foruse as a grapncal �ep�on oaly.
MaP mede by *cm 3 8 rne c�y orr�� Way m�xes.,o �y ro us acc�acy.
Schedule C
Milton Road S
N
Federal Way
CityMap
Map P�inted-Sep 17 2009 More: mis m� is ir�nded ror use as a rop�eserrtavon a�y.
3 9 The Cay oiFederal Way makes �a wanardy as to rts ac�acy.
N
Map P�intedtiSep 1T 2009
Schedule D
23rd Ave S
Federa! Way
CityMap
Nde: This map is irrtended t� use as a graphk�l �eprese�allon onlY•
The City ofFederal Waymakes ra warranly as to lts ecaaacY•
MaP made b!I'kcm
N
Schedule E
S 320th Street
Federal Way
CityMap
Map Printed-Sea n 2o0s ,vore: rn;s �r,�n �r u�e as a��a�s�� «rr.
Map made bY acem
41 T� �Y of Federal Way makes m wa�My�es to �Ys acaaacY-
Schedule F
S 320th Street
N
Federal Way
CityMap
Map P�inted-Sep 17 2009 Note: This map is intended ta use as a gra�al re�on «�IY-
11�p made bq -i�n+ 4 2 7he C+�r arredera� way makes �o wana►dr es ro ns acaeaay.
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 6, 2009
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
ITEM
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: Department of Ecology Municipal Stormwater Grant of Regional or Statewide Significance
FY 2010-2011
POLICY QUESTION Should the Council authorize staff to partner with the Friends of the Hylebos and submit a
project proposai for the Municipal Stormwater Grant of Regional or Statewide Significance {GROSS) to develop an
environmental curriculum for use within the Federal Wav School District and other school districts within the state?
COMM[TTEE Land Use and Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
0 Consent
Citv Council Business
Ordinance
Resolution
MEETING DATE: October 5, 2009
Public Hearing
Other
STAFF REPORT BY William Appleton, P E. Surface Water Manager DEPT: Public Works
Attachments:
1. Memorandum to Land Use and Transportation Committee dated October 5, 2009
2. FY 2010-2011 Municipal Stormwater Grant of Regional or Statewide Significance (GROSS).
3. Draft project proposa(.
Options Considered:
Authorize staff, in partnership with the Friends of the Hy(ebos, to submit a proposal to DOE for
development of an environmental education curriculum to be funded thru a Municipal Stormwater Grant
of Regional or Statewide Significance (GROSS).
2. Do not authorize staff to submit the proposal.
STAFF RECOMMENDATIOIY Forward Option 1 to the October 6, 2009 City Councit Business Agenda for
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL j��• y /G fJ
I DIRECTOR APPROVAL: �?!�L
Committee Council Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDAT[ON Forward staff recommendation to the October 6 2009 City Council Business
Agenda for approvaL
Linda Kochmar, Chair Jim Ferreli, Member Dini Duclos, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION "I move to authorize staff to submit a proposal to DOE for development of an
environmental education curriculum to 6e funded through a Municipal Stormwater Grant of Regional or
Statewide Sign�cance"
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICEJ
COUNCIL ACTION:
APPROVED COUNC[L BILL
DEN[ED l reading
TA$LED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment readi�
1�IOVED TO SECOIVD READING (ordinances only) ORDINANGE
RE V iSED 02/06/2006 RESOLUTION N
43
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 5, 2009
VIA:
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Brian Wilson, Interim City Manager
FROM: William Appteton, P.E., Surface Water Manager
SUBJECT: Municipal Stormwater Grants of Regiona! or Statewide Significance
BACKGROUND'
On August 25` of 2009, the Department of Ecology announced the avaitabiiity of Municipal Stormwater
Grants of Regional or Statewide significance to support imp(ementation of Municipal Stormwater General
Permits issued in January of 2007. A total of $3.0 million doltars is available to fund this grant program,
and the maximum grant funding amount is $0.5 mi(lion dollars. There are no matching requirements.
The grant program is intended to provide funding for Phase I and Phase II local governments or ports for
projects that benefit stormwater management programs across a region or statewide, and support
implementation of NPDES municipal stormwater permit programs. Project benefits may include, but are
not limited to:
Assists a number of permittees in a region or statewide to implement permit requirements.
Develops a product that is transferrable regionalty or statewide.
Purchases equipment and/or personal services contracts that support activities for multiple
permittees.
Advances regional and statewide access to stormwater management technology or resources.
The Friends of the Hy(ebos, a non profit organization focused on the restoration/conservation of the
Hylebos watercourse, has approached the City Of Federat Way with a grant proposal that meets the
requirements of the Municipal Stormwater Grant of Regional or Statewide significance. The Friends of
the Hylebos would like to partner with the City Of Federal Way to apply for a grant. A summary of their
proposed project is as fotlows:
The project will produce an inquiry based model an environmental science program
for the Public Schools. The model will support the existing science curriculum for
elementary and middle schools by providing guided learning opportunities for students to
apply concepts introduced in the classroom to scientific inquiry in the freld. The field
experience will be managed by Friends of the Hylebos, working closely with the
classroom teacher. The outcome will be an environmental science education program
that includes an outdoor�eld experience in their local community that will demonstrate
the impact of their decisions on the natural environment. This work and curriculum
tivould be coordinated with the Federal Way School District.
The City Of Federal Way would faci(itate the grant application process and Surface Water Staff would
have a project management role in the development of this project and be responsible for biiling and
coordination with DOE. Participation in this project wi(( assist the City in meeting our pubtic education
and outreach goals for 2010 and beyond, while overall the project is viewed as having the potentiat to
have a very positive affect on our environment and the education of our youth.
Staff is requesting authorization to partner with the Friends of the Hylebos and submit a project proposal
for consideration of funding thru the DOE Munici�l Stormwater Grant of Regional or Statewide
significance.
µ;=-°�:«:;tl'�
�s
f >J'
.'.��''�T� �bi= �'r:s$;iE-#�:�ii:i�'f3'd
��4.�� r"!')'J:.�'.i �,J� .)..��.r�n���..�.�V.�_t�"'
�`fi� {�ts3' fifli3 �!>#.:f;)�Z1:3< `�g:� •.fsi r3,t;;E.7'stf� m :3£i#3•
3 3t3. ��t.3:Sff.f83;'�SJf? ��;�u't�' Yfi3't'li.e? °�E>R:ri33?.. i:={f�2 Z::>�JE`F?!.Y> tl�:8:3�.',t11�;' i:<7:; t.cti>£ 1�7�.;` f�.3.<�44A��
FY2010-2011
Municipal Stormwater Grants of Regional or Statewide Significance
Request for Proposals
August 25, 2009
Revised September 8, 2009
Introduction
The Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) is soliciting grant proposais for projec#s of
regional or statewide significance to support implementation of Municipal Stormwater General
Permits issued in January 2007:
Phase I Municipal Stormwater General Permit
Western Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater General Pemut
Eastern Washington Phase II Municipal Stormwater General Pernut
The approximately �3.0 million dollars available for this purpose is carry-forward funding
provided by the Washington Sta#e Legislature to local governments or ports to support
stormwater permit implementation.
This competirive grant program is available only to cities, towns, counties, and ports covered by
a municipal stonnwater permit. Universities, school or drainage districts, state agencies covered
by municipal stormwater permits, or other secondary pemuttees (other than ports) are not
eligible to apply for this funding. For information on local governments covered by the permits
and permit requirements, see Ecology's website at
�tT'�}_'_: lri:c%:i'���� i*i3..� �}i'%�?fc�3,��L3,:T1S_
Funding Program Purposes
This grant program will provide funding for Phase I and Phase II local govemments or ports for
projects that benefit stormwater management programs across a region or statewide and support
implementation of NPDES municipal stormwater permit programs. Project benefits may include,
but are not iimited to:
Assists a number of permittees in a region or statewide to implement pernut
requirements.
45
Develops a product that is transferrable regionally or state��ide.
Purchases equipment and/or persona( services contracts that support activities for
multiple permittees.
Advances regional and statewide access to stormwater management technology or
resources.
Note: Capital construction projects are not eligible for funding_
Total Funds Available
Approximately $3.0 million is proposed for distribution to cities, towns, counties, and ports
covered under the Phase I or Phase II municipal stormwater permits.
Grant Ceiling and Match:
Requests for grant funding must not exceed $500,000. There is no lower limit for proposals.
There are no match requirements.
Eligibility
This is a competitive grant program open to all cities, towns, counties, or ports in Washington
State covered by a Phase I or Phase II Municipal Stormwater General Permit_ Universities,
school districts, drainage dis#ricts, state agencies, or other secondary permittees other than ports
will not qualify.
Partnerships
Project proponents are encouraged to form partnerships to address issues of common concern
and economies of scale. Eligible partners include but are not limited to other permittees,
including secondary pernuttees such as universities, school districts, and drainage districts, as
well as associations, non-profit organizations, and non-permittee local govemments.
Project duration
Grant funds must be fully expended and deliverables met by June 30, 2011.
Program Schedute
August 25 October 14, 2009
October 15 November 2, 2009
November 4, 2009
November 5, 2009 to January 31, 2010
Submit grant proposals to Ecology
Ecology rates and ranks proposals
Ecology issues a funding offer list
Negotiate and sign funding agreements
May 4, 2010 Funding agreements must be signed
46
June 30, 2011
Proposal submittal process
Projects must be completed
Proposals must be submitted both in hard copy and electronically and received at Ecology's
Lacey office no later than 4:30 p.m. on October 14, 2009.
Two Hard-Copv Submittals. Proposals must be submitted on eight and one-half by eleven inch
(8 %z" x 11") paper. The four major sections of the proposal are to be submitted in the order
noted below in Proposal Requirements.
Electronic Submittal_ Proposals must be submitted electronically in the order noted below in
Proposal Requirements. A pdf of the signed Certifications and Assurances form (E�ibit A to
tliis solicitation) will suffice.
Late proposals will not be accepted. Submit the electronic version as an attachment in an email
to Harriet Beale at ��S<:�x�:�zl. u,c��� ����.�;;t>�;,
Submit originai signed paper version to:
U.S. Postal Mailing Address:
Department of Ecology
Water Quality Program
Municipal Stormwater Pernut Program (Attn_ Harriet Bea1e)
P.O. Box 47600
Olympia, WA 98504-7600
Overnight Mail or Hand Delivery Address:
Department of Ecology
Water Qualiiy Program
Municipal Stormwater Pernut Program (Arin: Harriet Bea1e)
300 Desmond Drive
Lacey, WA 98503
The Program Manager of Ecology's Wa#er Quality Program wiil have discretion to allocate
funds for other needed projects. Local governments or ports receiving funding under other
Ecology stormwater grant programs are not precluded from applying for these grants of regional
and statewide significance.
Eligible Projects
All projects must support itnplementation of Phase I and/or Phase II municipal stormwater
programs. All projects must demonstrate benefits to multiple pernuttees across a region or
statewide. Ecology expects the lead proponent for the project to include costs for administering
the contract and managing the project, including coordinating with other partners and
participants in the region�
47
Ecology will distribute the available funds to the highest ranked proposals for projects of
regional or statewide significance that address the activities listed below. However, Ecology
welcomes and will rank any proposats consistent with the Funding Program Purposes.
Stormwater Technical Center A local government or port and possible parhier(s)
scope the development of a stormwater technical center. The project proponent, in
consultation with Ecology and an advisory committee, evaluates models from other areas,
scopes the organizational structure, potenrial partners, goveming framework, finance
strategy, location, and priority tasks for the center. As described in the 2009 authorizing
legislation (ESHB 2222), the center would conduct research, development, technology
demonstration, technology transfer, education, outreach, recognition, and training
programs. It is also authorized to revie�v and evaluate emerging stormwater technalogies.
Coordinate Evaluation of Emerging Technologies A locai government or port
coordinates a technical review process for emerging technologies. The process wili fulfill
the role of the TAPE process, which Ecology eliminated during budget reductions. The
grant funding is used to establish a technical review committee and procedures,
coordinate the committee's activities, and work with Ecology to finalize approval of
emerging stormwater technologies. The process may be designed to be folded into the
Stormwater Technical Center, either now or in the future.
Permittee Training A local government or port conducts training on required permit
elements such as illicit discharge detection and elimination, operation and maintenance,
post-construction inspections, or other training topics called for in the permit The
training program may include but is not limited to classroom training, field training, and
developing training resources such as videos. The program serves staff in a region of the
state such as Puget Sound, southwest Washington, all of western Washington, or part or
all of eastem Washington.
Cooperative Equipment Purchase -A iocal government or port takes the lead for
several permittees in purchasing one or inore large piece(s) of equipment to use in its
stormwater management program, such as a vactor truck, or a sweeper, or equipment for
detecting illicit discharges. The partnering permittees share the equipment cooperatively
and establish an agreement to cover equipment maintenance. Allowable costs include
purchases of equipment needed to implement pernut requirements (such as a vactor
truck) rather than for general use (such as general use pick-up truck).
Regionai Stormwater Pubtic Education and Outreach A permittee leads a project on
behalf of a number of permittees to develop stormwater education materials targeting one
or more target audiences and/or topics called for in the pemut. The lead pertnittee hires a
consultant to apply social marketing techniques to developing and testing stormwater
4
48
Stormwater Program Templates, Models, and Products A local government or port
develops a set of templates or models to assist permittees in implementing pemut
requirements. Examples include preparing tables/models for BMP sizing for small
projects, a list of regionally supported BMPs for certain land uses/operations, or a model
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan for municipal maintenance or storage facilities
required in the permit.
Cooperative Mapping or Recordkeeping System A local government or port
develops and provides other permittees with a model, such as for mapping standards
specific to stortnwater infrastructure or recordkeeping and tracking of stormwater
management program activities. The local govemment provides a training module and
software for the system it develops to permittees in a region of western or eastern
Washington, or statewide.
NPDES Collaboration and Cooperative Efforts Ecology funds a local government or
port to implement a regional approach to NDPES permit implementation. The Lead
Local Government would provide oversight and/or implementation of program elements
where those eiements are benefited &om economies of scale and are feasible to
implement in a broad-based manner. One example is a database/information system for
mapping data that links up several jurisdictions.
Other activities that support stormwater management program implementa.tion and align
with the purposes of this funding program.
Proposat Requirements
Proposals are limited in length to 10 two-sided pages.
A_ Cover Sheet
l. Project Title
2. Loca1 Govemment or Port
3. Tax ID number
4. Staff contact and contact information
5. Project partners
6. Attach Signature and Certification (see E�ibit A attached)
B. Abstract
49
One paragraph (no more than'h page) description of the project and ho�v it supports stormwater
management programs regionally or statewide.
C. Work Plan
Ecology tivill evaluate the work plan for the project based on how clearly the project approach
and organization of tasks is laid out, how clearly it demonstrates the benefits of the project, the
readiness to proceed, the likelihood of project completion, and the effectiveness and skiil of the
project team. Projects that directly benefit multiple permittees are highly desirable.
Proposals must follow the outline below:
l. Purpose of the project
l.l Describe how the project supports municipal stormwater permit programs_
1.2 Describe the regional or statewide benefits of the project, and link to the
eligible projects listed above or provide a rationale for another project that
meets the criteria of the Funding Program Purposes.
2. Project description
2.1 Project objectives
2.2 Project activities/tasks
2.3 Project outcomes Describe the project accomplishments, including short-
term and long-term outcomes. Accomplishments and outcomes should be
measurable where possible.
2.4 Project schedule
2.5 Readiness to proceed
2.6 Deliverables
3. Parinerships List partners and pariner roles and responsibilities. Include staff contact
information for partners.
4. Project Management
4.1 Project Team Structure/Intemal Controls Provide a description of the
proposed project team structure and internal controis to be used during the
course of the project, including any subcontractors.
42 Staff Qualifications/Experience Identify staff who will be assigned to the
potential contract, indicating the responsibilities and qualifications of such
personnel, and include the amount of time each will be assigned to the project.
D. Bud�et
Ecology will evaluate the project budget based on whether the costs aze reasonable and likely to
support the work plan and on how completely and clearly the proposal explains the costs.
Projects that demonstrate an efficient use of resources will receive the highest rating. The budget
must include:
Budget table that itemizes the following in detail:
Salaries (list each position separately)
Contractual (list each anticipated contract sepazately)
Supplies (list in general categories)
Equipment (itemize in general categories)
Travel
Other
0
�7��
Indirect
NOTE: Ecology grants limit indirect costs to a ma�cimum of 25% of salaries and benefits.
2. Budget narrative: Explain each budget item to demonstrate how it is necessary to
accomplish the project_ The budget does not need to show matching funds.
Special Terms and Conditions
In addition to the Scope of Work, recipients wiil be expected to meet the following special
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 Fundin� Reco�nition. 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.
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 iden#ified in Administrative Requirements for Recipients
of Ecolo�,v Grants and Loans (found online at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/9118.htm1).
E. Meetin�s/Li�ht 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. Minoritv 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.
7
51
2_ Assure that qualified minority and women's businesses are solicited whenever they
are potential sources of services or supplies.
3. Divide the total requirements, when economically feasible, into smaller tasks or
quantities, to permit maYimum participation by qualified minority and women's
businesses.
4. Establish delivery schedules, where work requirements permit, 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 sha11 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. Pro�ress Reports. The RECIPIENT sha11 submit quarterly Progress Reports to the
DEPARTMENT's Project/Financial Manager. Payment requests will not be processed
without a Progress Report.
Reporting Periods.
January 1 through March 31
April 1 through June 30
July 1 through September 30
October 1 through December 31
Reporting Due Date. Quarterly Progress Reports are due 15 days following the end of the
quarter.
Report Conten� At a minimum, a11 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 Qualitv Monitorin�. Prior to initiating water quality monitoring activities, the
RECIPIENT must prepaze a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) that follows
Ecology's Guidelines and Specificatlons for Preparing Quality Assurance Project Plans
for Environmental Studies, February 2001 (Ecology Publication No. 01-03-003).
The RECIPIENT must submit the QAPP to tlie DEPARTMEN'I' for review, comment,
and must be approved before starting the environmental monitoring activities.
The RECIPIENT must use an environmental laboratory accredited by Ecolvgy to analyze
water samples for a11 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-yeax rule."
52
Monitorin� Data Submittal Environmental Information Mana�ement Svstem Funding
recipients that coilect �vater quality monitonng data must submit all a�propriate data to
Ecology through the Environmental Information Management System (EIM).
Criteria and Scoring
Application Component Max Points
....................................n........,-.................................... :..:.1lF.v�{ .s.:.�.r...rn. ::.:;v :.•f.. •yL.
..i...... v :v....: .j :t ..�.r ..f�.x�.:i�:.�/.' 1:
w:::::.. ::v•r•.�:. v.�.
:'F.•:�}.., r
y.'�.� :..................:�:ni•::-:>:?i>::}iih::.i:?:ihi?:�:v:vi::?i:p: :.i :v;i.:}ii):{Y;.;i: r
4:Ff.r}l•i� ��;r x.r7'+. :?i
:•f f..:.
i:XLik
ii�f
?:%r. r
f.i�.'-":"
.............ri::::: vn.
:.+.;r._.
v r.
•.:w:.� �::::f.•i:n:. v....::::n
.n
:.:::::::n ......:..::::::}.�.w: :•:.n
�n�i$'f. 'v
.t r
i.
.............41.+�. r :.:'`:`:':::.�:...�:.::..::::.....:�::::�:::::::::.�:::::.�:::::�.:�:::::•;:.;:�:,.:s.••:-;:
-..1: s::: n*��i'. :!::�;'-:•,.'•.'•i:'•:
F....
•ii'Fi'
f.
.'f.•i}i:4i:ii:::::::::::.�:::: :w:::::.:�:: :v:::.�:.�::::::: :vn...
.•t�t•.•v
<��f�!•:-f-:'":''.
n..
:.:::.�::::::::::x:::n :v::::n�:::.� v::::::::::
:vv::::::. ................................................................................n.....................................................
v�: v :�::::::::::::.�::n:�::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.�:::::::::::::::::::::::::::n::::�::::: :w:::.�::::.�::::::::::::::::.�.:_::::rrt3:'i::� :i:�i:•ii'•::.::::'v'. v.;•
�::.�:::::.�:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.�.�::.�::::::::::::::::.�::::.�.�:.�:.._..........::....6•.�':.:.:: >.f......,-,�.,.,f
;�>:`;�;:'�::::%�r:�i:�5:�i:=i:�;::� �i::;%�i:::�i:�;;i:�;:�:�;;:'f•r:�>:;:�;:�>:n;:�;:�:;:�>:-;:�>:�:�::�::�>;:•r:�:o:�>:t.:�;:�;:�;:�;:�:�:�r:.:;�;:o:�::::�>:a;:�;:;-::�:::::::._:�:::::.�::::::::::.�::::::::a.�
B. Project Abstract
n�
4
iiif:?•i:Cv:vv:�.`•i:�:-i:-:::�:::L'{{:i:�S::, �::i?i�ii:J:�'i:i:}i}�:;?r:;:?i:� i
�n};: �v::: v .....................::::::::::::.�:::::i4iiii'FHi�if::ti%:'::}*i}i:-i
...�n:..:.:.....v.-
........yv:v:,t,•.�: x: ....................................n.....:.:.:. -i.�
•�,ti:f... }/.S�r
�i`}i::?if.•....
..E3��:� #3;:.:;a:�;:u:;;•:�i:;�:�:�:.;:�;:.;:-;:�;:;:•�::•;:•::<.::.;:=:.;;::•:••::•::;:ii :;<x::::
:.'i';:;�:..:..:::..•
f�:
:::::::.::::N.i'.�:.i::::f•. :w n.....' u:::.:�::::::.� :v:::n.......::. r:r
::::::_:::x: •.�::n:::::.�::::::::::::::::::.�::::::::::::::::.�.�::::::::.......::�:::::::::.......:::ii%� i:::::::::::::::: :w:: :v::::::i•ii}i}i}:�:: �iv:n r.
...................r ........r...........................w::::::::: :•::::::::.�::::::::x:::::::::::::::::: :v::::::::::::::�:.: :.s:::::: :v.�::.........�::::u:::. r.... f4+v.
"Jf'�'i
�i:'��:i•:•:v�.:�:.
i}f
,{./i��:?S:;i'i
1. Project purpose, including:
Directly benefits multiple stormwater management programs
Supports implementation of NPDES mu�icipa) stormwater permit
programs
Demonstrates regional or statewide significance orvalue (e.g., is
transferable, involves large number of permittees)
2. Clear and concise Project Description 350
Clear project objectives
Detailed description of project tasks, outcomes, schedule
Demonstrates readiness to proceed (e.g., project elements in
place)
Includes specific deliverables linked to project purpose, tasks,
project objectives
3. Strong partnerships 100
Demonstrates strong regiohal or statewide
component/collaboration
Identifies clear, appropriate roles and responsibilities for various
partners
4. Project management 100
Clear team structure and project management
Highly qualified staff, appropriate levels-of-effort and
assignments
y
,,..•>:•;;:.,:,.::>:::»-:;,:r<•.::::�;:
r:}'l.=i:::�:m..�i}:.
<r�
�....rs.x:rv:.:
yr `�"t'�
f.�• �w: :v:::.::::n�:::: .+x::: ��:�n.::.�.v.�: :u�.�:::$. �.i :.:n x
�i�f :iii �•:if:::i:viiiin
�'Yx}��J .n,fi �/r i�^;:J.
v....... :w::::. n:.... n•
.T�Jiii'r iiii?:4i:iiii:i:�:iiifi::i :=:::i:i:iii::i:li:ii:.:: 'r'•:i.•.'•}�.ii:::::.�:.i...': :�iy
::.Y�!•: ..."'•�%o�. y v�. :•¢�f S!•��.�
:n�::n.n........
.......r.�.. r..�....� :::::.:...........n :v.........:...:.....x: ::v: :w::n................. .�:.::t.•. :::.::::t:
,-...n ................F.':.::::::::::: :t�: ;:{:::::::::::::::::.�'v..::::n f•i. i'f
:f:i.'-::ii`•:• rv,.p�,`yrf/ i'F.i'•:.�.
:�ib:�:':�:�:-'r.�`::�::�:�<::%�i:�::�r:�i:�::�;:�;:;t;::=:.:;:�i>::':`=;:�;:-:;;:=i:�;::�;i:«:k•::•;:.::�>:�::�;:�>:-;:�: _n:•:::�r:.r:�::�:;-;;;:;:.::-;;:'.::<: :�:i::.:
.lf
f
:_.:�.:::.::av
r
...................................................................................,-......................:.�:.�::::.::.:.......t•::�::-r::�:>:>.:;i::::;:�;::;.;o:;;.j;.;:._t;::.: n1..::•..
:�ef..: /{+ivv.:S4+��rn
viii:��iii$?:iii:v4ii$i$i:! ii�i}i:�i:i.iiii:�}iiii:<ry:4iiii:hii}i:Jiiii::.::ii:::::._:.� ......n..�...
::�rd.•:r
•vf.•%.�
1. Complete, understandable project budget, consistent with project
work plan.
2. Budget is reasonable.
3. Budget represents a good value for the wo�k product(s).
TOTAL POINTS POSSIBLE 1000
53
EXHIBIT A
SIGNATURE AND CERTIFICATION
I CERTIFY TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE THAT TE� INFORMATION IN THIS
APPLICATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT AND THAT I AM THE LEGALLY
AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY OR DESIGNEE FOR THE SUBMITTAL OF THIS
1NFORMATION ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
Printed Name
Title
10
Signature
Date
54
PROPOSAL TO REDUCE STORM WATER CONTAMINATION
ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION TO REDUCE STORM WATER CONTAMINATION
Public Education and outreach:
"Regional Stormwater Pubtie Education and Outreach A local government
leads a project on behalf of a number of permittees to develop stormwater educatiori
materials targeting one or more target audiences and/or topics called for in the permit. The
lead local government hires a consultant to apply social marketing techniques to developing
and testing stormwater education materials. The grant may also fund activities to distribute
the materials and measure the impacts on changing behaviors to �revent pollution. Ecology
encourages proposals to develop educational materials that permittees can customize and
transfer to other parts of the state."
FRIENDS OF THE HYLEBOS PROPQSAL
A. Cover Sheet (Proiect ti#le,...)
B. Abstract: (one paragraph description of the project and how it supports stormwater
management programs regionally or statewide)
This project wiH directly involve students iearning about #he causes and effects o# storm
water runoff in their own communEties, and it will engage them in finding solutions to
reduce pollution from storm water runoff at home, at schaol, and in their communities.
C. Work Plan
Criteria for judging applications::
1. How clearly the project approach and organization of tasks is laid out
2. How clearly it demonstra#es the benefits of the project
3. The readiness to prviceed
4. The likelihood of project comptetion
5. The effectiveness and skill of the project team
6_ Benefit to mut#ipie permittees
1 Purpose of the p�oiect:
1.1 How does the project support municipal stormwater permit programs?
The project will directly support the City of Federal Way's Public Education and Outreach
program and assist in meetir�� NPDES Phase II permit requirements. There are many
benefits of teaching schc�o�children, key members of our community, about stormwater
impacts. These children will leam about environmental issues early and will therefore
become interested, and perhaps, invoived at earlier ages. Children often tell their
parents what they learn in school therefore educating children is an effective way to
spread stormwater awareness throughout the entire community.
It is also envisioned that once environmental awareness is es#ablished, other stormwater
programs in Federal Way will also benefit. The program will focus on teaching children
about stormwater pollution which can, in turn, have a favorable affect on the City's Illicit
Discharge Detection and Elimination program. It is also expected that this program will
Page 1 of 5
9/29/2009 55
PROPOSAL TO REDUCE STORM WATER CONTAMINATION
establish a new group of young volunteers who woutd be interested and excited to
participate in volunteer events such as stream clean-ups and restoration projects.
1.2 What are the regional or statewide benefits of the project? Link to the
eligible projects listed above (link to regional storm water public education
and outreach)
Because the process of developing this education program is replicable, the outcome
will have regional benefit. The program will serve Federal Way Public Schools, wfiose
boundaries include three permittees: Federal Way, Kent and Auburn. In addition, the
program model will be designed to be easily scaled up to serve a larger, more
widespread audience. Students and teachers will also be encouraged to partner with
other schools and help disseminate the program model.
2. Proiect description:
This project wi11 create an education program model for students K-12 to leam how
natural systems (with an emphasis on watersheds} work, ways in which land use
practices and storm water management can affect naturai systems, and how their local
community is affected by the quaiity of local natural systems. Students wiN learn about
the effects of storm water runoff on their own neighborhoods, their watesheds, their food
supply and recreation. Classroom lessons will be supplemented by real world
exploration and experimentation, ine#uding pa�ticipation in active habitat restoration
projects. They will participate in projec�s that demonstrate the real wo�ld effects of
choices they make and produce iearning outcomes that are meaningful in the context of
their local environment. Tf�e educational materials that are produced as the outcome of
this project will have the ``ownership" of the participants and will be relevant to their own
comrnunities
2.1 Project objectives:
The c�bjective of this project is to create an effective environmental education program
that wilt engage students in finding and implementing solutions to local environmental
issues fhrough inquiry-based experience in their local environment. The most effective
way to change behavior is to engage people in discovery of the effects of their actions
and decisions on the things they value.
The educational materials produced through this program will provide guidelines for
lesson plans and field experiences that can be used in other settings to study the effects
of contaminants and environmental degradation on the local environment and to develop
locally-based solutions. Students will learn how their own choices affect outcomes.
Students will also engage in learning activities that are part of active Hytebos habitat
restoration projects.
Friends of the Hylebos will use elements of this model in designing interactive exhibits
and programming for an Environmental Education Center near the West Hylebos
Wetlands State Park.
Page 2 of 5
9/29/2009 s 6
PROPOSAL TO REDUCE STORM WATER CONTAMINATION
2.2 Project activities/tasks:
The City of Federal Way will work in partnership with Friends of the Hylebos and Federaf
Way PubGc Schools to create, disseminate, test and refine the education processes and
materials for students K-12. The program will be initiated in pilot schools that are
selected based on the commitment of the principal and the teachers to support and
parkicipate in #his program.
Friends of the' Hyfebos will provide an environmental education consultant who will work
with a team of teachers on a monthly basis to develop lesson plans and materials that fit
the curriculum needs and the project goals. The Friends will also provide field sites
where students can measure the impact of storm water contaminants on the locai
environment and (earn methods of reducing the negative impact, as well as participate in
habitat restoration and measure its positive effect on water quatity.
Teachers will create lesson plans and materiats that are aligned with 2010 Washington
State Essential Academic Learning Requirements {EALRs), Science Standards and
Environmentai Education Standards. These lesson plans and materials wiN be replicable
statewide and adaptable to local environmental conditions. Through classroom and
outdoor guided learning experiences, students will learn about the effects of
contaminants on wa#er quaiity and the impact of their decisions on the natural
environment.
Students will participate in creating and testing educational materials under the guidance
of the consultant and their classroom teachers, and will test the effectiveness of the
materials by performing cfassroom and field experiments and measuring the results.
A Project Management team consisting of a representative from Federal Way Public
Schools and the Executive Director of Friends of the Hylebos will oversee the project. At
the end of the initial pra}ect year; this management team wii! formalize the program
design and ma#arials for further dissemination.
2.3 Project outcomes: the project accomplishments, including short-term
and long-term outcomes. (Measurable outcomes, if possible).
The output wil� be an environmental program model and educational materials that will
be disseminated throughout the Federal Way Public Schools and wi11 also serve as a
guide for Friends of the Hylebos to develop a community-based environmental education
program.
In the near term, the outcome will be teachers and students engaged in applying
scientific principles in fieid research and prepared to make decisions that foster
responsible practices in reducing stormwater runoff. Both the process of discovery and
the materials that are produced will serve as a model for other communities. Friends of
the Hylebos witl have first-hand experience in designing education programs for children
and adul#s and will know how to design effective instructional tools.
This program model can also be delivered through neighborhood organizations, such as
scouting organizations, parks departments and environmental education centers.
Page 3 of 5
9/29/2009 5
PROPOSAL TO IZEDUCE S"I'OEZM WATER CONTAMINATION
In the long term, students will be more informed about environmental issues and will be
able to make responsible, fact-based decisions and practice responsible behaviors that
foster sustainability. In turn, they will be able to affect policy in the public and private
sectors.
The long term consequence of this program wi11 be gradually improving environmental
quality, and the creation of healthier cornmunities.
2.4 Project schedule:
TBD
2.5 Readiness to proceed:
TBD
2.6 Deliverables:
Lesson plans for elementary, middle, and high school science classes
Program model for an inquiry based science education program focused on
storm water runoff
Educational materials for elementary, middle and high school level students that
provide guidelines for program development and options for projects that will
reduce stormwater runoff
3 Partnerships List partners and partner roles and responsibilities. Include staff
contac# information for partners.( see above)
Friends of the Hylebos will provide pro}ect management, staff and consulting expertise,
and local environmen#al knowledge as well as experience and expertise in sustainable
resource management. Friends of #he Hylebos will also provide opportunities for
teachers and students to apply scientific skills and processes in the fieid.
4. Project Management see above)
4.1 Project Team Structure/Internal Controls
TBD
4.2 Staff Qualifications/ Experience
TBD
Page 4 of 5
9/29/2009 58
PROPOSAL TO REDUCE STORM WATER CONTAMINATION
D. Budget
Item Cost
Education ro ram coordinator; .5 FTE 40,000
FOH Overhead expenses (office space,
laptop computer, telephone, mileage, office
su {ies 1,500
Curriculum books 2,000
Classroom materiats 2;540
Restoration tools 2,000
Work loves 850
field project supervision Earthcorps
crews 2 da s 3, 70Q
Bus trans ortation 5,000
FOH Restoration staff su ort 4,600
FOH Executive Director 3,300
Teacher training time and administrative
support
TOTAL 65,450
The Friends wi11 use grant funds to:
(a) hire/contract with an education program coordinator who wili convene teachers from
FWPS and potentially other schoois (Highline Community College), train teachers and
work with them io develop appropriate iesson plans,
(b) provide supervisian and guidance for field experience wherein students can apply
science concepts and principles to the scientific investigative process that aims to
answer questions about the natural world, and
(c) create and document a mczdel curriculum that can be disseminated throughout the
Federal Way School District and adapted to other educational settings.
Page 5 of 5
9/29/2009 59
COUNCIL MEET[NG DATE: October 20, 2009
CITY COUNCIL
ITEM
AGENDA BILL
SUB.rECT: Department of Ecology Saltwater Algae Grant FY 2010 Grant Funding Offer
PoLICY QuESTiorr: Should the Council authorize staff to pursue two State Deparhnent of Ecology Saltwater Algae
Grants, totaling up to $70,000, plus a$17,500 Ciry match, one to be used to research the causes of intense algae
blooms in Dumas Bay and the other to be used to address planning for a Beach Management District,
educarion/outreach, algae removal, and permitring issues?
CONII�IITTEE Land Use and Transportarion Committee
CATEGORY:
Consent Ordinance
Council Business
Resolution
STAFF REPORT BY: Wiiliam Appleton, P.E., Surface Water
MEETING DATE: OCtOber 5, 2009
Public Hearing
Other
DEPT Public Works
Attachments: Memorandum to Land Use and Transportarion Committee dated October 5, 2009.
Options Considered:
1. Authorize Staff to pursue two State Department of Ecology Saltwater Algae Grants, totaling up to
$70,000, plus a$17,�00 Ciry match, one to be used to research the causes of intense algae blooms in
Dumas Bay and the other to be used for either planning for a Bea.ch Management District,
education/outreach, algae removal, and/or adressing permitting issues. Also authorize using $17,500
from SWM unallocated funds to meet ma.tching requirements.
2_ Do not authorize staff to pursue the subject grants-
STAF'F RECOM1viEiv�a'r�oN: Forward Oprion 1 to the October 20, 2009 Ciry Council Consent Agenda for
approvaL
CITYMANAGERAPPROVAL: .����n DIRECTORAPPROVAL: iG�
Committee Council Committee Council
CONIlVIITTEE RECOMMEND�TION: Forward staff recommendation to the October 20, 2009 City Council
Consent Agenda for approval.
Linda Kochrnar, Chair Jim Ferrell, Member Dini Duclos, Member
PROPOSED COUNCQ. MOTION "I move to authorize Staff to pursue two State Department of Ecology
Sa[twater Algae Grant, totaling up to $70, 000, one to be used to researeh the causes of intense algae blooms in
Dumas Bay and the other to be used to address planning for a Beach Management District,
educationloutreach, algae removal, and permitting issues, and authorize the use of $17,5�0 from SWM
unallocated, funds to meet matching requirements."
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
APPROVED COUNCIL BILL
DENIED 1sT reading
TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment read'mg
MO VED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE
REVISED 02/06/2006 RESOLUTION
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
60
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 5, 2009
TO: Land Use and Transportation Committee
VIA: Brian Wilson, Interim Ciry Manager h 1/
FROM• William Appleton, P_E., Surface Water Manager
Daniel Smith, Water Qualiry Program Coordinator
SUBJECT: DOE Grant for Saltwater Algae Study
BACKGROUND:
During the summers of 2005 and 2006, an explosive growth of saltwater algae (Ulva) occurred in
neaxshore areas of Puget Sound which negatively affected beaches surrounding Dumas Bay in Federal
Way. The large amounts of accumulated sea lettuce eventually decayed and a release hydrogen sulfide
(H gas occurred. Local residents became concerned due to the obnoxious odors produced, and the
potenrial public health hazards associated with H exposure.
In late 2006 and into 2007, Surface Water Management began coordinating both community meetings
and state agency working meetings to study the problem and discuss solurions. In 2007, the DOE
budgeted $50,000 towards a piiot project to remove excessive sea lettuce in Dumas Bay, the city also
contnbuted $50,000; which occurred during the late siuniner of 2008.
In addition, the State Legislature authorized the formation of Beach Management Districts (BMD) in
2008 as a means to provide a long-term funding saurce to manage problematic sea lettuce accumularions.
Discussions and public meetings with affected communiry residents are currently planned concerning the
BMD option, but district formation is ultimately dependant upon a positive public vote.
In 2009, the Washington State De}�arhnent of Ecology (DOE) developed a Saitwater Algae Program
which targets projects involving the management of sea lettuce accumularions. The Ciry of Federal Way
is eligble to apply for this new funding source. Two grants are available, one for conducting research on
the cause of the algae blooms and the other for planning a Beach Management District,
education/outrea.ch, algae removal, and/or adressing permitting issues. The malcimum amount of each
grant is $35,000, with a matching requirement of 25-percent ($8,750). SWM unallocated funds would be
used to match any grant fiinds obtainecL
Surface Water Management is requesting authorization to submit an application to receive Saltwater
Algae Program funding to research the environmental processes that produce the bloorm and distnbute
the algae_ The research portion of the project will likely be a collaborarion between the City and Seattie
Pacific Universiry, which is actively pursuing addirional grant funding to conduct an extensive sea lettuce
shxdy in the South Sound. The Ciry will also use a portion of the funds to investigate algae removal
alternatives, education and outreach, pernutting issues and planning for a Beach Management District.
61
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 20, 2009
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
MEETI►vG DATE: October 5, 2009
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT Acceptance of King County Conservation Futures Funds and Authorization to Proceed with Land
Acquisition within the South Hylebos Basin.
POLICY QUESTION Should the Council authorize staff to accept King County Conservation Futures Funds for the
purchase of the Enticknap property in the amount of $132,000 and authorize staff to proceed with acquisition of both
the Enticknap and Snyder properties?
COMMITTEE Land Use and Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
Consent
Council Business
STAFF REPORT BY: William Appleton, P.E., Surface Water Mana
C
ITEM
Pubtic Hearing
Other
DEPT: Public WoCks
Attachments: Memorandum to Land Use and Transportation Committee dated October 5, 2009.
Options Considered:
1. Authorize staff to accept King County Gonservation Futures Funds for the purchase of the Enticknap
property in the amount of $132,000 and authorize staff to proceed with the acquisition process for both
the Enticknap and Snyder properties.
2. Authorize staffto accept the Conservation Futures Funds but not to proceed with the acquisition process.
3. Do not authorize staff to accept the Conservation Futures Funds but proceed with the acquisition process.
4. Take no action_
STAFF RECOMMEIYDATION Forward Option 1 to the October 20, 2009 City Council Consent Agenda for
approvaL
CITY MAIYAGER APPROVAL: G�=� DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
Committee Council Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION Forward staff recommendation to the October 20, 2009 City Council
Consent Agenda for approval.
Linda Kochmar, Chair Jim Ferrell, Member Dini Duclos, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION "I move to authorize StafJto accept King County Conservation Futures Funds
for the purchase of the Enticknap property in the amount o, f$132, 000 and proceed with the acquisition process
for both the Enticknap and Snyder properties.
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY ClTY CLERKS OFFlCEJ
COUNCiL ACT[ON:
APPR�VED COUNCIL BILL
DEtYIED Isr reading
TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACI'ION Enactment reading
MOVED TO SECOND READING {ordinances only) ORDINANCE
REVISED 02/O6/2006 RESOLUTION
Ordinance
n Resolution
62
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE: October 5, 2009
TO: Land Use and Transportation Committee
VIA: Brian Wi(son, Interim City Manager
FROM: William Appleton, P.E., Surface Water Manager
SUBJECT: Acceptance of King County Conservation Futures Funding Hylebos Land Acquisition
Update
BACKGROUND•
In June of 1990, the City of Federal Way entered into an Interloca! Cooperation Agreement with King
County for open space acquisition projects. Specifically, open space land means any land area, the
preservation of which in its present use would conserve and enhance natural or scenic resources or protect
stream or water supply, or promote conservation of soi(s, wetlands, beaches or tidai marshes. The City Of
Federai Way has since developed a list of properties considered to have high conservation value within
the South Hy(ebos Basin (Spring Valley), which is provided below and shown on the attached map:
1. Tom Campbell
2. E.K.Kwon (Goldmax Inc.)
3_Jonny Kim
4. Evelyn Casteliar
5. Roy Corrine Snyder
6. Donald Barrovic
In addition to those properties (isted above that were formaliy approved by Council for future acquisition,
numerous other properties in this same area have been identified as potentiai future purchases, including
the Enticknap property in March of 2008. The Enticknap property contains forested wetlands, tributary
streams to the Hylebos and a pond, (See attached map) all of which combine to give this property a high
conservation value. Additionally, the owners have been receptive to the idea of selling their property. As
such, in the spring of 2008, SWM staff applied for King County Conservation Futures Funds specifically
for the purchase of 6.35 acres of wetlands, 5.35 acres of combined wetland buffer and upland and a
conservation easement of approximately 0.75 acres.
King County Conservation Futures Funds for the purchase of the Enticknap property are available in the
amount of $132,000 and have a 50/50 match requirement. Staff is requesting authorization from Council
to accept these funds. The surface water uti(ity has budgeted funds to meet the 50/50 match requirement.
Surface water Management has completed environmenta( assessments and formal appraisals for both the
Enticknap and Snyder properties. Staff is requesting authorization to proceed with acquisition of both of
these properties, bring ariy proposed purchase back before Council for final approval.
cc: Project File
Day File
63
�i
322704 9073
Castellar Jose V;Evelyn B
'no Sde Address'
3.41Acres
3221G5 9033
Parke Wayne Leroy Jr
7006 Johnson Rd NE
4.i5Acres
292104 9110
Corrington Greta
933 s J64th 5t
7.35Acres
29I707 9111
Kane Shauna W
805 s 364th St
9.21 A<res
292104 9118
B�idges David W Lon
56612 Sth ave S
70.i2Acres
322iO4 9069
Foster Ken
no Slte Address'
84 Acres
I
F l
.'�ii
322104 9141
Enticknap Edward L
'no Site Adaress'
5.35Acres
322104 9057
R1orrison Leonard 7tRfchartl D+
Russell JtMichael D
'na Site Address'
4.80Acres
23210i 9C91
Corrington Greta
933 s 36d[h SI
2.C2Acret
292 Oa 991 .m
GOK W II
n S I AdArz55'
7 97 A es
292701 9112
Enficknap E L
no S�ite Address'
1.00 Acres
291104 9141
Ent�icknap E L
36817 12th Fve 5
6.35Acres
322103 9034
Parke Wayne Leroy Jr
7006 Johnson Rd NE
7.98A<res