ORD 09-631ORDINANCE NO. 09-631
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY,
WASHINGTON, AMENDING FEDERAL WAY. REVISED CODE TITLE 14,
CHAPTER 14.15.030, RELATING TO STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
ACT (SEPA) EXEMPT LEVEL THRESHOLDS, AND AMENDING TITLE 19,
CHAPTER 19.60.050 FOR USE PROCESS II, CHAPTER 19.65.100 FOR USE
PROCESS III, CHAPTER 19.70.150 FOR USE PROCESS IV, AND CHAPTER
1,9.75.130 FOR USE PROCESS V(AMENDING ORDINANCE NOS. 09-594, 07-
573, 07-554, 04-468, OZ-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 Federal Way
Revised Code (FWRC), "Zoning and Development Code," in order to conform to sta.te and federal law,
codify administrative practices, clarify and update zoning regulations as deemed necessary, and improve
the efficiency of the regulations and the development review process; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance, containing amendments to development regulations and the text of
Title 19 FWRC, has complied with Use Process VI review, Chapter 19.80 FWRC, pursuant to Chapter
19.35 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 En�ironmental 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; and
WHEREAS, the City of Federal Way has adopted these rules as part of the FWRC Title 14,
"Environmental Policy; and
WHEREAS, FWRC Chapter 14.15.030 lists the exempt level thresholds for minor new
construction; and
WHEREAS, the City 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
20 parking spaces for parking lots; and
Ordinance No.09-631 Page 1 of 10
WHEREAS, the City is proposing to raise the exempt level thresholds to the maximum allowed
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 19.170.150(3) for Use Process N— Hearing Examiner, and Chapter
19.75.130(3) for 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 City; 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 County 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/Transportation 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 CTTY COUNCIL OF THE CITY 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.
Ordinance No.09-631 Page 2 of 10
1. The code amendments are in the best interest of the residents of the City and will bene�t the
city as a whole by providing a shorter and more economic review time for development
permitting processes for minor new construction projects.
2. The code amendments comply with. 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 with 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.
5. The code amendments have followed the proper procedure required under the FWRC.
Section 2. Conclusions. Pursuant to Chapter 19.35 FWRC, and based upon the recitals and the
findings set forth in Section 1, the Federal Way City Council makes the following Conclusions of Law
with respect to the decisional criteria necessary for the adoption of the proposed amendments:
1. The proposed FWRC amendments are consistent with, and substantially implement, the
following Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) goals and 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 regularions to determine how to
improve upon the permit review process.
TG2 Provide a safe, efficient, convenient, and �nancially sustainable transportation
system with suf�cient 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.
Ordanance No.09-631 Page 3 of 10
2. The proposed FWRC amendments bear a substantial relationship to the public health, safety,
and welfare because they clarify and refine various related codes in order to increase the
efficiency of the development review process.
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 continued development within the City, thus aiding the local economy.
Section 3. Chapter 14.15 of the Federad Way Revised Code is hereby amended 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 �4 dwelling units.
(b) For agricultural structures covering up to 10,000 square feet.
(c) For office, commercial, recreational, service or storage buildings up to 4;9� 12.00U
square feet gross floor area, and up to ��0 parking spaces.
(d) For parking lots up to �A 4Q parking spaces.
(e) For landfills and excavati up to SOQ cubic yards.
(2) Whenever the city establishes new exempt levels.under this section, it shall send them to
the State Department of Ecology as required by WAC 197-11-800(1)(c).
Section 4. Chapter 19.60 of the Federal Way Revised Code is hereby amended as follows:
19.60.050 Site plan and community design guidelines approval criteria.
(1) Applicability. 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;
(e) The proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal location and
configuration for access; and
�fl Traffic safety impacts for all modes of transportation, both on and off-site, are
adequatel ag ted.
(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.
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
threshold determination is required to be issued, the threshold determination must follow the end
Ordinance No.09-631 Page 4 of 10
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
determination 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) 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 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.240, 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 N application, the director shall issue a written decision within ]0 working days after the
deadline for submitting 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 information. 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 until the earlier of the date
the city determines whether the additional information satisfies the request for information, or 14
days after the date the information 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.
(B) Any period during which an environmental irnpact statement is being
prepared following a determination of significance pursuant to Chapter 43.21 C RCW.
(C) Any period for administrative appeals of the SEPA threshold
determination; 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 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 estimated date
for issuance of the notice of final decision.
(2) Decisional 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;
Ordinance No.09-631 Page 5 of 10
(iv) The streets and utilities in the area of the subject property are adequate to
serve the anticipated demand from the proposal;
(v) The proposed access to the subject property is at the optimal location and
configuration; and
�vi) Traffic safetv impacts for all modes of transportation, both on and off-site, are
adequatelv mitigated.
(b) If the application is subject to the requirements of Chapter 19.115 FWRC,
Community Design Guidelines, the director shall also use the following criteria in deciding upon
an application:
(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 exisring
development, it is consistent with those provisions of Chapter 19.115 FWRC, Community 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 shall 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 director that support the decision, including any
conditions and restrictions that are imposed.
(d) A statement of the director's conclusions based on those facts.
(e) A statement of the criteria used by the director in making the decision.
(fj T'he date of issuance of the decision.
(g) A summary 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 property 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.
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 information 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. Subsections (3), (4) and (5) of this section do not apply to agency
decision appeals.
(2) Timing.
Ordinance No. 09-631 Page 6 of 10
(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 N 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 calculation of the 120-day period:
(i) Any period during which the applicant has been requested by the city to correct
plans, perform required studies, or provide additional required information. 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 until the earlier of the date the city
determines whether the additional information satisfies the request for information or 14 days
after the date the information 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 deficiencies 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 deternunation of significance pursuant to Chapter 43.21C RCW.
(iii) Any period for administrative appeals of the SEPA threshold determination;
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 agee 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 application under this chapter
requires an amendment to the comprehensive 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, 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 complete 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 N 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 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:
(a) It is consistent 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;
(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 optimal location and
configuration for access; and
Traffic safety impacts for all modes of tran�ortation both on and off-site are
adequatel,y miti a�
(4) Conditions and 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 restrictions that
are imposed become part of the decision.
Ordinance No.09-631 Page 7 of 10
(5) Contents. The hearing examiner shall include the following in the examiner's 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 him or her that support the decision, including any
conditions and restrictions that are imposed.
(d) A statement of the hearing examiner'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 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 properiy owners may request a change in valuation for
property t� purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
(6) Distribution of written decision. Within five working days 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 recommendation to the city council.
(2) Timing. Unless a longer period is agreed to by the applicant, the hearing examiner must
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-judicial
rezones:
(a) The city may approve an application 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 city; 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 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 application 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
Ordinance No.09-631 Page 8 of 10
(iv) The site plan is designed to minimize impacts upon the public services and
utilities; and
Traffic safety impacts created bv the proposal for all modes of transportation
both on- and off-site, are adequately miti�ated• and
The rezone has merit and value for the community as a whole.
(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.
(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.
(6) Distribution of written recommendation. The director shall distribute copies of the
recommendation 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 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.
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 application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall not affect the validity of the
remainder of the ordinance, or the validity of its application to any other persons or circumstances.
Section 9. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this ordinance are authorized to make
necessary corrections to this ordinance including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener/clerical
errors, references, ordinance numbering, section/subsection numbers, and any references thereto.
Section 10. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of
this ordinance is hereby ratified and af�rmed.
Section 11. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective five (5) days after passage and
publication as provided by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this 3` day of November, 2009.
Ordinance No.09-631 Page 9 of 10
A ST:
CITY CLERK, CARO MCNE CMC
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
L��
C TY ATTORNEY, PATRICIA A. RICHARDSQN
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: 10-13-2009
PASSED BY THE CITY COLJNCIL: 11-03-2009
PUBLISHED: 11 Y.I -2009
EFFECTNE DATE: 11 �10-2009
ORDINANCE NO.: 09-631
Ordinance No.09-631 Page 10 of 10
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY