Council PKT 10-19-2010 Regular�► �Federal Way
AGENDA
FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
Council Chambers - City Hall
October 19, 2010
7:00 pm
www. cityoffederalway. com
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
3. PRESENTATIONS
a. Certificates of Appointment: Lodging Tax Advisory Committee
b. Certificates of Appointment: Arts Commission
c. WA State Initiative 1100 - concerns liquor (beer, wine and spirits)
d. WA State Initiative 1105 - concerns liquor (beer, wine and spirits)
e. Overview of Centerstage Contract for Services
f. City Manager Emerging Issues / Introduction of New Employees
4. CITIZEN COMMENT
PLEASE COMPLETE A PINK SLIP & PRESENT !T TO THE CITY CLERK PRIOR TO SPEAKING.
When recognized by the Mayor, come forward to the podium and state your name for the record.
PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO THREE (3) MINUTES. The Mayor may interrupt comments
that exceed three minutes, relate negatively to other individuals, or are otherwise inappropriate.
5. CONSENT AGENDA
Items listed below have been previously reviewed in their entirety by a Council Committee of three members and
brought before full Council for approval; all items are enacted by one motion. Individual items may be removed by
a Councrlmember for separate discussion and subsequent motion.
a. Minutes: October 5, 2010 Special and Regular Meeting ...pg 3
b. CB 551: 2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments...pg �2
c. CB 552: Amendments to the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) — Submittal
Requirements for Plats and Commercial Projects...py 4�
d. CB 553: Amendments to the FWRC Clarifying Complete Application and Review
Standards and Housekeeping Amendment...pg ��a
e. CB 554: Residential Off-Street Parking...pq ��5
f. CB 555: Speed Limits — Milton Road South Between South 369 and 376' 20�
g. RESOLUTION: Shoreline Master Program Update — Revisions ...pg 2or
h. 2011 Asphalt Overlay Program Preliminary Project List and Authorization to Bid...pg 223
i. Interlocal Agreement befinreen the County of Chelan, WA and the City of Federal Way,
WA for the Housing of Inmates in the Chelan County Jail. ...pg 233
j. Purchase three new Honda police motorcycles to replace four expired lease Harley-
Davidson motorcycles using Replacement Reserve money allocated for these vehicle
replacements...pg 244
The Council may add items and take action on items not listed on the agenda.
6. COUNCIL BUSINESS
a. 2011-2012 Budget Presented to Council
7. COUNCIL REPORTS
8. CITY MANAGER REPORT
9. EXECUTIVE SESSION
• Collective Bargaining pursuant to RCW 42.30.140(4)(b)
• Property Acquisition pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(b)
• Potential Litigation pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(i)
10. ADJOURNMENT
The Council may add items and take action on items not listed on the agenda.
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010 ITEM #: Sa
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUB,iECT: CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
POLICY QUESTION Should the City Council approve the draft minutes of the October 5, 2010 Special and
Regular Meetings?
COMMITTEE: N/El
CATEGORY:
� Consent
❑ City Council Business
■
�
Ordinance
Resolution
STAFF REPORT BY: Carol McNeillv Citv Clerk
Attachments:
MEETING DATE: N/A
❑ Public Hearing
❑ Other
DEP'r: Human Resources
Draft meeting minutes from the October 5, 2010 Special and Regular Meetings.
Options Considered:
1. Approve the minutes as presented.
2. Amend the minutes as necessary.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approving the minutes as presented.
CITY CLERK APPROVAL: N/A DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: N/fl
N/A N/fi
Committee Council
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I MOVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES AS PRESENTED".
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL #
❑ DENIED 1 reading
❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE #
REVISED — 02/06/2006 RESOLUTION #
UTY OP
, �.... Federal Way
MINUTES
FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING
Council Chambers - City Hall
October 5, 2010 - 6:00 P.M.
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
Mayor Kochmar called the special meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Council members present: Mayor Linda Kochmar, Councilmembers Jim Ferrell, Mike Park,
Jeanne Burbidge, Jack Dovey and Roger Freeman.
Mayor Kochmar excused Deputy Mayor Duclos.
Staff present: City Manager/Police Chief Brian Wilson, Assistant City Attorney Peter
Beckwith and City Clerk Carol McNeilly.
2. COMMISSION INTERVIEWS
• Arts Commission: The City Council interviewed one applicant for the Arts Commission.
• Lodqinq Tax Advisorv Committee: The City Council conducted interviews of finro
applicants for the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee.
3. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The City Council adjourned to executive session at 6:35 p.m. to discuss collective
bargaining pursuant to RCW 42.30.140(4)(b) and property acquisition pursuant to RCW
42.30.110(1)(b) for approximately 25 minutes. The Council adjourned from executive
session at 7:00 p.m.
4. ADJOURN
Mayor Kochmar adjourned the special meeting at 7:00 p.m.
Attest:
Carol McNeilly, CMC, City Clerk
Approved by Council:
City Council Minutes — October 5, 2010 Special Meeting Page 1 of 1
CITY OF
� Federal Way
MINUTES
FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
Council Chambers - City Hall
October 5, 2010 - 7:00 p.m.
1. CALL MEETING TO ORDER
Mayor Kochmar called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Linda Kochmar, Councilmembers Jim Ferrell, Mike Park,
Jeanne Burbidge, Jack Dovey and Roger Freeman.
Mayor Kochmar excused Deputy Mayor Duclos.
Staff present: City Manager/Police Chief Brian Wilson, Assistant City Attorney Peter
Beckwith and City Clerk Carol McNeilly.
2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Federal Way Municipal Court Judge Larson led the pledge of allegiance.
3. PRESENTATIONS
a. Kinq County Proposition No. 1
Mayor Kochmar stated the City Council did not intend to take a position on the ballot
proposition, but wanted a presentation for the public. She stated that representatives from
both the pro and com committees were invited to the Council meeting to speak on this
issue. However, representatives for the con committee were not able to attend the
meeting. She stated that after the presentations the public would have 3-minutes to
comment. City Clerk McNeilly read the ballot title into the record. Assistant City Attorney
Beckwith read the explanatory statement from the voters guide.
• Presentations:
Dwight Dively, Director, King County Office of Management and Budget, provided the
Council with a 2011 King County Proposed Budget Executive Summary. Mr. Dively stated
the proposition on the November ballot is a proposal to raise sales tax 0.2% with 60
percent going to the county and 40 percent going to the city based on population. The
counties money is restricted for criminal justice services and would go towards building a
new juvenile jail.
Pro Committee:
City Council Minutes — October S, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 1 of 7
Maurice Classen, King County Deputy Prosecutor, noted he is the campaign managerfor
proposition 1. Mr. Classen stated this proposition is necessary to maintain victim
advocate, Sheriff's and prosecutor service levels. Without passage of this proposition
these services will experience a severe decline. He stated this proposition is essential to
protect our way of life and quality of government.
Harry McCarthy, King County Superior Court Judge, reviewed some of the cuts that would
occur to the Superior Court without the revenue generated by the passage of proposition
1. Family court services will be cut and the Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA)
program will be drastically reduced. Juvenile probation counselors would also be cut.
Mark Hillman, King County Superior Court Family Law Commissioner, discussed how the
budget cuts King County is facing would impact the Juvenile Court. Family Court Services
would be cut and essential reporting services regarding children's well being will be would
be lost. Mr. Hillman spoke about the issues that are occurring at the current juvenile jail
facility.
Con Committee:
A representative from the con committee was not present.
Mayor Kochmar called for public comment:
Judge David Larson spoke in support of proposition 1, and shared his support for family
court and a new juvenile jail facility.
Mayor Kochmar called for Council comment:
Councilmember Freeman encouraged the public to support proposition 1.
Councilmember povey asked clarifying questions of Mr. Classen.
Councilmember Ferrell thanked everyone for their presentations and spoke in support
of court staffing and public safety.
b. Proclamation: National DECA Week — October 11-15
Councilmember Burbidge read the proclamation into the record and presented it to
Stephanie Kirk from the Decatur High School DECA group.
c. Certificates of Appointment: Planninq Commission
Councilmember Ferrell presented Certificates of Appointments to Planning
Commissioners that were appointed by Council at their September 21, 2010 City Council
meeting.
d. Arts Alive Juried Art Show Winners
Arts Commission Chair Susan Honda and representatives from the Arts Commission
announced the winners of the Arts Alive Juried Art Show held at City Hall. The Jurors
Choice Award was presented to Maryanne Harlow. The Commissioners Award was
presented to Dennis Harrison. The Peoples Choice Award will be presented in December
2010.
e. Mavors Day of Concern for the Hunqry Wrap Up Report
Human Services Manager Lynnette Hynden stated the Mayors Day of Concern was
City Council Minutes — October 5, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 2 of 7
September 25, 2010. There were many participants this year including: Waste
Management, South King County Multi-Service Center, Wal-Mart, Albertsons, Safeway,
Top Foods and Fred Meyers. Ms. Hynden thanked the many volunteers that were part of
this event.
Laura Moserfrom Waste Managementthanked the Council forsponsoring this event. She
reported Waste Management collected over 10,000 pounds of food during their curb
collection. Linda Purlee from the Multi-Service also thanked the Council forthis event and
stated the amount of food collected would fill 69 Costco sized shopping carts.
f. Citv Manaqer Emerqinq Issues / Introduction of New Employees
City Manager/ Police Chief Wilson stated there were no introductions of new employees.
He did report on the following items:
• LUTC Discussion on Siqn Code:
Mr. Wilson stated at last nights LUTC meeting there was a discussion to amend the
sign code to allow portable signs on street side planter strips. Mr. Wilson outlined the
process required and the timeline to have this amendment before Council.
Sound Transit 2011 Proposed Budqet Presentation:
Parks/Public Works Director Cary Roe introduced Rachel Smith and Michael Williams
from Sound Transit. Mr. Williams stated Sound Transits overall revenue is down 3.9
billion dollars with the economic recession. Mr. Williams reviewed the revenue
forecast for the light rail project and noted the South King area was down significantly,
which will affect the development of the project. He reviewed the project proposal and
budget for the expansion of the South Corridor of the transit project. He also reviewed
the next steps for the Sound Transit Board on this project. Councilmember's asked
clarifying questions of Mr. Williams and expressed the need for light rail services in
Federal Way.
Animal Services Update:
Assistant Police Chief Andy Hwang reported on September 29 a police officer was
dispatched to a call and when he arrived, he found five pit bull dogs attacking a
teenage boy on the ground. When the dogs attempted to attack the police o�cer, he
shot five rounds, killing one dog and wounding two others. Mr. Hwang reported the
victim opened a gate and let the dogs out of a secure enclosure. The teenage boy is
expected to make a full recovery.
4. CITIZEN COMMENT
Nancv Combs reported she visited Dumas Bay Park. She stated the park is beautiful and
suggested there be a restroom facility for patrons to use other than the one in the Dumas Bay
Building. She also asked the Police to enforce traffic laws for tailgaters and drivers that
change multiple lanes at once.
Norma Blanchard reported at the September 21, 2010 Council Meeting she feels
Councilmembers were rude to one another, which is unprofessional. She thanked the
Councilmembers that voted against the Twin Development project.
Rov Parke stated that while working on his initiative he was only given 90 days to collect the
necessary number of signatures. He feels the Federal Way Code is too restrictive regarding
initiatives and encouraged the City Council to amend the Code.
City Council Minutes — October 5, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 3 of 7
Betty Tavlor spoke regarding an organization that provides support for kinship caretakers. She
also thanked the Federal Way Korean American Association for providing free meeting space
to the organization.
Sam Pace reported he was here on behalf of the Association of Realtors; he thanked staff
and the Council for considering amendments to the sign code.
5. CONSENT AGENDA
Items listed below have been previously reviewed in their entirety by a Council Committee of three members and
brought before full Council for approval; all items are enacted by one motion. Individual items may be removed by
a Councilmember for separafe discussion and subsequent motion.
a. Minutes: September 21, 2010 Special and Regular Meeting APPROVED
b. Monthly Financial Report APPROVED
c. Vouchers APPROVED
a�oaor,� � nhh�iic� (`nn4ron� Cv4oncinn pulled for discussion
e. State Lobbyist Contract Extension APPROVED
. Conduct Pulled for discussion
g. ILA with WSDOT for Fiber Optic Installation APPROVED
h. 2010 Asphalt Overlay Project — Project Acceptance APPROVED
MOTION: Councilmember Ferrell moved approval of the Consent Agenda.
Councilmember Park second.
Councilmember povey pulled items 5d and 5f.
Vote: Motion to approve consent agenda as amended carried 6-0.
5.d. Federal Lobbyist Contract Extension
The Council discussed the pros and cons of extending the Federal Lobbyist Contract.
Communication and Government Affairs Manager Linda Farmer noted there was a correction
to the proposed motion on the agenda bill. The total compensation shou►d be $140,000 (not
$145,000).
MOTION: Councilmember Park moved to table this item to the Nov. 2, 2010 City Council
meeting. Mayor Kochmar second.
VOTE: Motion failed 3-3; Councilmembers Ferrell, Dovey and Freeman dissenting.
MOTION: Councilmember povey moved to not extend the agreement. Councilmember
Ferrell second.
Vote: Motion failed 3-3; Mayor Kochmar, Councilmembers Park and Burbidge
dissenting.
5.f. CB 550 Criminal Code Update — Lewd Conduct
MOTION: Councilmember Burbidge moved approval of the proposed ordinance
modifying FWRC Chapter 6.45 to add a new section prohibiting lewd conduct.
Councilmember Ferrell second.
VOTE: Motion carried 5-1; Councilmember povey dissenting. Ordinance 90-670.
6. COUNCIL BUSINESS
City Council Minutes — October 5, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 4 of 7
a. Commission Appointments: Arts Commission
MOTION: Councilmember Burbidge moved to appoint Martha Arneson as an
alternate member to the Arts Commission. Councilmember Park second.
VOTE: Motion carried 6-0.
b. Committee Appointments: Lodqinq Tax Advisorv Committee
MOTION: Councilmember povey moved to re-appoint Joann Piquette and Rose Ehl
to the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee with terms expiring October 31, 2012, and
appoint Demetrius Diamond to fill the remainder of the unexpired term through
October 31, 2012. Councilmember Freeman second.
VOTE: Motion carried 6-0.
c. 2011/2012 Human Services General Fund Recommendations
Human Services Manager Lynnette Hynden stated this item was a follow up from the
September 21, 2010 City Council meeting were the Council approved the CDBG
Programs/Capital. She reviewed the criteria for evaluating the funding applications and
well as the agencies that applied for funding. The Commissions recommendation is to
fund a total of 40 programs offered by 28 agencies. Human Services Commission Chair
Bob Wrobleski thanked the Council for maintaining human services funding and stated the
Commission worked very hard to make a recommendation to the Council.
MOTION: Councilmember Burbidge moved approval of the Human Services
Commission 2011/2012 funding recommendations forthe Human Services General
Fund Grants effective January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2012 with total
compensation of $430,000, and authorize the City Managerto sign said agreements.
Councilmember Park second.
VOTE: Motion carried 5-0; Councilmember povey recused.
7. INTRODUCTION / FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
a. CB 551 2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
An ordinance of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to amendmenfs fo the City's
comprehensive plan, comprehensive plan man, and zoning map.
City Clerk McNeilly read the ordinance title into the record.
MOTION: Councilmember Ferrell moved to forward the ordinance to second
reading and enactment on the October 19, 2010 Consent Agenda.
Councilmember povey second.
VOTE: Motion carried 6-0.
b. CB 552 Amendments to FWRC — Submittal Requirements for Plats and Commercial
Proiects
An ordinance of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to submittal requirements for plats and
commercial projects; amending FWRC 18.30.030. FWRC 18.35.050 and FWRC 19.15.040
City Clerk McNeilly read the ordinance title into the record.
MOTION: Councilmember Ferrell moved to forward the ordinance to second
City Council Minutes — October 5, 2010 Regular Meeting � Page S of 7
reading and enactment on the October 19, 2010 Consent Agenda.
Councilmember Burbidge second.
VOTE: Motion carried 6-0
c. CB 553 Amendments to FWRC — Clarifyinq Complete Application and Review
Standards and Housekeepinq Amendments
An ordinance of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to clarifying the complete application and
review standards of the zoning and development code amending FWRC 19.15.045 and FWRC
19.15.030.
City Clerk McNeilly read the ordinance title into the record.
MOTION: Councilmember Ferrell moved to forward the ordinance to second
reading and enactment on the October 19, 2010 Consent Agenda.
Councilmember povey second.
VOTE: Motion carried 6-0
d. CB 554 Residential Off-Street Parkinq
An ordinance of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to residential off-street parking; amending
FWRC 19.05.140; amending FWRC 19.130 Article VII; and repealing FWRC 19.130.230.
City Clerk McNeilly read the ordinance title into the record.
MOTION: Councilmember Ferrell moved to forward the ordinance to second
reading and enactment on the October 19, 2010 Consent Agenda.
Councilmember povey second.
VOTE: Motion carried 6-0.
e. CB 555 Speed Limit — Milton Road South between South 369 and 376`
An ordinance of the City of Federa! Way, Washington, relating to Speed Limits; amending FWRC
8.30.040.
City Clerk McNeilly read the ordinance title into the record.
MOTION: Councilmember Ferrell moved to forward the ordinance to second
reading and enactment on the October 19, 2010 Consent Agenda.
Councilmember povey second.
Councifinember Freeman stated he would like to see the speed timit on this portion of
road posted at 30 miles per hour. The Council discussed the speed limit and asked
clarifying questions of Senior Traffic Engineer Rick Perez.
Councilmember Ferrell called the question.
VOTE: Motion failed 3-3; Mayor Kochmar, Councilmembers Dovey and Freeman
dissenting.
MOTION: Councilmember Freeman moved to adopt a speed limit of 30mph (from
Enchanted Parkway to S. 376 maintain a 20mph advisory posted on the curves,
maintain a name change as outlined in the ordinance, and forward the ordinance to
second reading and enactment on the October 19, 2010 consent agenda.
Councilmember povey second.
Vote Motion carried 5-1; Councilmember Ferrell dissenting.
City Council Minutes — October 5, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 6 of 7
MOTION: Councilmember povey moved to waive the Council Rules and extend the
meeting by 30 minutes. Councilmember Burbidge second.
VOTE: Motion carried 6-0.
8. COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmembers Dovey, Freeman and Ferrell had no report this evening.
Councilmember Burbidge reported the next PRHSPS meeting is Tuesday, October 12.
Councilmember Park reported the Taiwanese Independence Day is October 10.
Mayor Kochmar reported the Challenge Grants would be matched dollar for dollar on
donations made to the Multi-Service Center.
9. CITY MANAGER REPORT
City Manager Wilson reported:
• The City received the COPS Grant;
• Twin Development and United Properties have reached a funding agreement;
• A shooting event over the weekend and the suspects have been apprehended;
• He would be attending a Mayors exchange hosted by AW C that will focus on budget
strategies.
10. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Council adjourned to executive session at 10:09 p.m. for approximately 5 minutes to
discuss:
• Property Acquisition pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(b)
The Council adjourned from executive session at 10:23 p.m.
11. ADJOURNMENT
With no further business before the Council, Mayor Kochmar adjourned the regular
meeting of the Federal Way City Council at 10:24 p.m.
Attest:
Carol McNeilly, CMC, City Clerk
Approved by Council:
City Council Minutes — October 5, 2010 Regular Meeting Page 7 of 7
COUNCIL MEETING DATE :..a��,-�e}o � 1�' �� � TT�M #:�,� hj
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBdECT: 2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
POLICY QUESTION Should the City approve amendments to the te�rt and Map VI-5 (City Facilities) of
Chapter 6— Capital Facilities; the text and Map VII-2A (Boundaries of Planned Action SEPA) of Chapter 7—
City Center; and Map VIII (Public School Facilities) of Chapter 8— Potential Annexation Area; and three
citizen-initiated requests (Request #1— Lloyd/Valiani Request, Request #2 — Song Request, and Request #3 —
ST Fabrication Request) for changes to the comprehensive plan and zoning map designations?
COMMITTEE Land Use/Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
❑ Consent
❑ City Council Business
� Ordinance
❑ Resolution
1VIEETING DATE: September 20, 2010
❑ Public Hearing
❑ Other
STAFF REPORT BY Principal Planner Mazgaret H. Clark, AICP DEPT: Community Development Services
Background: The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on July 7, 2010, at the close of which they
recommended to the council approval of the staff recommendation shown as s#'tice�eegk (deletions) and
underline (new) text with further amendments to Chapter 6— Capital Facilities shown as double strike-out
(deletions) and double underline (additions or corrections). The Planning Commission's recommendation is as
follows: 1) approval of the staff-recommended changes to the text and Map VI-5 (City Facilities) of Chapter 6—
Capital Facilities with a further recommendaxion to remove any reference to Camp Kilworth and to address
inconsistencies with the size and cost of the Performing Arts Center (Planning Commission's changes are shown
on Pages 1 l, 12, 14, and 18 of Exhibit A of the draft Adoption Ordinance); 2) approval of the staff-recommended
changes to the text and Map VII-2A (Boundaries of Planned Action SEPA) of Chapter 7— City Center (Exhibit B
of the draft Adoption Ordinance); 3) approval of the sta.ff-recommended changes to Map VIII (Public School
Facilities) of Chapter 8— Potential Annexation Area (Exhibit C of the draft Adoption Ordinance); 4) approval of
the Lloyd-Valiani Site-Specific Request (E�ibit D of the draft Adoption Ordinance); 5) approval of the Song
Site-Spec�c Request (Extribit E of the draft Adoption Ordinance); and 6) approval of the ST Fabrication Site-
Specific Request (Extubit F of the draft Adoption Ordinance).
Attachments: 1) Draft Adoption Ordinance with E�chibits A-F; 2) Materials presented to the September 20,
2010 LUTC Meeting; 3) June 29, 2010, Staff Report to the Planning Commission with E�ibits A-G and two
public comments; 4) Draft Minutes of the July 7, 2014, Planning Commission Public Hearing; 5) July 7, 2010,
Comment Letter from the Lakehaven Utility District (received July 8, 2010). (Please note that due to their
bt�lk, Attachments 2-5 are not included in the City Covncil packet, but are available in the City Council
Conference Room as part of a complete packet.)
Options Considered: 1} Adopt the Planning Commission recommended amendments as shown in Exhibits A-F
to the Draft Adoption Ordinance; 2) Adopt the Planning Commission recommended amendments as further
amended by the LUTC; 3) Do not adopt the amendments.
STAF'F RECOMMENDATTON Staffrecommends Council approve option #1; adopt the Planning Commission
recommended amendments as shown in Exhibits A-F to the Draft Adoption Ordinance.
CITYMANAGERAPPROVAL:_,,c�.� g,/ �Ilt7 D�'��� DIItECTORAPPROVAL: �
Committee - Council�� 1 '� J �� Committa Council
COMMITTEE RECONII�IENDATION "1 move to forward Option #2 to First ReadinQ October S_ 2010 as amended
to keep Chapter 6 the way it was on the Per�or `ing Arts Center,�' � ' �' �
�
� ;�►
�i ,1— ' � - - // _ � /�� _ �.fi'_
� � � .�•�� - .- � ��..��-- �-,��
PROPOSED COUNCII. MOTION(S):
l READING OF ORDINANCE (1�5/2010) "I move to forward the ordinance to a second reading for
enactment on the October 19, 2010, consent agenda. "
2 READING OF ORDINANCE (10/19/2010: "I move approval of the LUTC's recommendation. "
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BYCITYCLERRS OFFICE�
COUNC[L ACTION:
❑ APPROVED CO[7NCIL BILL # ��1
❑ DENIED l readiag `n ' °� • �'�
❑ TABLEDlDEFERRED/NO ACTiON Enactment reading
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordincmces only) ORDINANCE #
REVISED - 08/12J2010 RESOLUTION #
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to
amendments to the City's comprehensive plan, comprehensive plan map,
and zoning map. (Amending ordinance no's. 90-43, 95-248, 96-270, 98-330,
00-372, 01-405, 03-442, 04-460, 04-461, 04-462, OS-490, OS-491, OS-492, 07-
558, and 09-614.)
0
�
��
�
WHEREAS, the Growth Management Act of 1990 as amended (Chapter 36.70A RCW or
"GMA"), requires the City of Federal Way to adopt a comprehensive plan which includes a land use
element (including a land use map), housing element, capital facilities plan element, utilities
element, economic development element, and transportation element (including transportation
system map[s]); and
WHEREAS, the GMA also requires the City of Federal Way to adopt development regulations
implementing its comprehensive plan; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Way City Council adopted its comprehensive plan with a land use map
(the "Plan") on November 21, 1995, and adopted development regulations and a zoning map
implementing the Plan on July 2,1996; and subsequently amended the comprehensive plan, land use
map, and zoning map on December 23, 1998; September 14, 2000; November 1, 2001; March 27,
2003; July 20, 2004; June 16, 2005; July 16, 2007, and June 11, 2009; and
WHEREAS, the City may consider Plan and development regulation amendments pursuant to
Process VI, under Title 19 (Zoning and Development Code) of the Federal Way Revised Code
(FWRC), chapter 19.80 FWRC, pursuant to chapter 1935 FWRC; and
WHEREAS, under RCW 36.70A.130, the Plan and development regulations are subject to
continuing review and evaluation, but the Plan may be amended no more than one time per year; and
WHEREAS, the Council has considered amendments to the text and maps of the comprehensive
plan, the comprehensive plan map, and the zoning map, specifically, the text and Map VI-5 (City
K: IComprehensive P1an12010 Comprehensive Plan UpdatelLUTCIRecommendationlLaw Comp Plan Amend Ordinance.doc
Ordinance No. 10- Page 1 of S
Rev 1/10 CP
Facilities) of Chapter 6— Capital Facilities; the text and Map VII-2A (Boundaries of Planned Action
SEPA) of Chapter 7— City Center; and Map VIII (Public School Facilities) of Chapter 8— Potential
Annexation Area; and three citizen-initiated requests (Request # 1— Lloyd/Valiani Request, Request
#2 — Song Request, and Request #3 —ST Fabrication Request) for changes to the comprehensive plan
and zoning map designations;
WHEREAS, on June 19, 2010, the City's SEPA Responsible Official issued a Determination of
Nonsignificance on the 2010 Comprehensive Plan Amendments; and
WHEREAS, the City's Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 7, 2010, at the close
of which they recommended to the Council approval of the following amendments: 1) amendments
to the text and Map VI-5 (City Facilities) of Chapter 6— Capital Facilities; the text and Map VII-2A
(Boundaries of Planned Action SEPA) of Chapter 7— City Center; and Map VIII (Public School
Facilities) of Chapter 8— Potential Annexation Area, and 2) approval of the three citizen-initiated
requests (Request #1 — LloydlValiani Request, Request #2 — Song Request, and Request #3 —ST
Fabrication Request) for changes to the comprehensive plan and zoning map designations; and
WHEREAS, the Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC) of the Federal Way City Council
considered the comprehensive plan amendments on September 20, 2010, following which it
recommended approval of the Planning Commission's recommendations as amended by the LUTC
to not include changes related to the Performing Arts Center and Multipurpose Competitive Sports
Center in Chapter 6, Capital Facilities; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, through its staff, Planning Commission, and City Council
committee, received, discussed, and considered the testimony, written comments, and material from
the public, and considered the matter at its City Council meetings on October 5, 2010, and October
19, 2010; and
K: IComprehensive PJan12010 Comprehensive Plan UpdatelLUTCIRecommendationlLaw Comp Plan Amend Ordinance.doc
Ordinance No. 10- Page 2 of 5
Rev 1/10 CP
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to approve the: 1) amendments to the text and maps of the
comprehensive plan; and 2) three citizen-initiated requests for changes to the comprehensive plan
and zoning map designations;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY,
WASHiNGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findin�s and Conclusions.
(a) The proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan maps and comprehensive plan text, as
set forth in Exhibits A-F, attached hereto, are consistent with the Council vision for the City of
Federal Way; will allow development which is compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods,
including adjacent single-family uses; provide convenient goods and services at a pedestrian and
neighborhood scale close to adjacent residential uses; provide for capital facilities and private
utilities to serve both present and projected population; and therefore bear a substantial relationship
to public health, safety, and welfare; are in the best interest of the residents of the City; and are
consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A, the King County Countywide Planning Policies,
and the un-amended portion of the Plan.
(b) The proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan maps and comprehensive plan text, as
set forth in Exhibits A-F, attached hereto, are compatible with adjacent land uses and will not
negatively affect open space, streams, lakes, or wetlands, or the physical environment in general. The
amendments will allow for growth and development consistent with the Plan's overall vision and
with the Plan's land use element household and job targets, and will allow reasonable use of property
subject to constraints necessary to protect environmentally sensitive areas. The amendments,
therefore, bear a substantial relationship to public health, safety, and welfare; are in the best interest
of the residents of the City; and are consistent with the requirements of RCW 36.70A, the King
K: IComprehensive PIan12010 Comprehensive Plan UpdatelLUTCIRecommendationlLaw Comp Plan Amend Ordinance.doc
Ordinance No. 10- Page 3 of 5
Rev 1/10 CP
County Countywide Planning Policies, and the un-amended portion of the Plan.
(c) The proposed amendments to the zoning map, set forth in Exhibits D, E, and F attached
hereto, are consistent with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan and the
comprehensive plan land use map proposed to be amended in Section 2 below, bear a substantial
relation to public health, safety, and welfare, and are in the best interest of the public and the
residents of the City.
(d) The proposed amendments have complied with the appropriate process under state law and
the FWRC.
Section 2 Comprehensive Plan Comprehensive Plan Maps and Zonin� Map Amendments
Adoption. The 1995 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, as thereafter amended in 1998, 2000,
2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007 and 2009, copies of which are on file with the Office of the City
Clerk, the comprehensive plan map, and the zoning map are amended as set forth in Exhibits A-F
attached hereto.
Section 3. Amendment Authoritv. The adoption of plan and map amendments in Section 2
above is pursuant to the authority granted by Chapters 36.70A and 35A.63 RCW, and pursuant to
chapter 19.80 FWRC.
Section 4. Severability. 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 other persons or circumstances.
Section 5. Savin�s Clause. The 1995 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, as thereafter
amended in 1998, 2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2007, and 2009 shall remain in full force and effect
until these amendments become operative upon the effective date of this ordinance.
K IComprehensive P1an12010 Comprehensive Plan UpdatelLUTCIRecommendationlLaw Comp Plan Amend Ordinance.doc
Ordinance No. 10- Page 4 of S
Rev 1/10 CP
Section 6. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of
this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed.
Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days after
passage and publication, as provided by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this 19th day of October, 2010.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MAYOR, LINDA KOCHMAR
ATTEST:
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:
ORDINANCE NO.:
K: IComprehensive P1an12010 Comprehensive P/an UpdatelLUTCIRecommendationlLaw Comp Plan Amend Ordinance.doc
Ordinance No. 10- Page 5 of 5
Rev 1/10 CP
Exhibit A
Proposed Amendments to
Chapter 6, Capital Facilities
(only those pages with proposed amended
language have been included)
FWCP — Chapter Six, Capital Facilities
CHAPTER SIX - CAPITAL FACILITIES
6.0 INTRODUCTION
The City of Federal Way is expected to add 6,188 housing units and 7,481 jobs between
the years 2001 and 2022. This growth will stimulate the local economy and maintain a
diverse and vibrant community. ,� It will also generate a corresponding
demand for new public services and facilities, such as schools, parks, and streets. These
new facilities, and the financial implications they will have for Federal Way and its
citizens, are the subject of this chapter.
The Growth Management Act
The Growth Management Act (GMA) refers to capital facilities planning in two of the 13
statewide planning goals. The two relevant goals are:
1. Urban growth. Encourage development in urban areas where adequate
public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner.
2. Public facilities and services. Ensure that those public facilities and services
necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at
the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing
current service levels below locally established minimum standards.
More specifically, the GMA mandates that the City prepare a capital facilities plan which
contains the following components:
• An inventory of existing facilities owned by public entities, showing the
locations and capacities of the facilities.
• A forecast of the future needs for such facilities.
• The proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new facilities.
• At least a six-year financing plan that will finance such facilities and clearly
identify sources of public money for such purposes.
• A requirement to reassess the Land Use chapter if probable funding falls short.
Revised , , , 2010. Communitv Facilities VI-1
FWCP — Chapter Six, Capital Facilities
In the pages that follow, this chapter complies with the GMA requirements for a capital
facilities plan.
Funding/Financing
Typically, cities and the residents they service would like to have higher LOS standards
than they can afford. Federal Way has worked hard to provide the highest LOS possible
without raising taxes. It is a difficult balance to maintain and the City is currently a�a
..+ ..,�,o,.e ;, ,,, . �,.,..o +„ ,. �;ao.....,;�;.,,. „aa;�;,,,,.,t ,.o e� explorin� ontions to pay
for capital facilities and the associated maintenance and operations costs.
If the City decides to generate additional revenues, there are several sources available.
Some of these revenues are "on-going" in the sense that the City levies the tax and the
revenues are added to the City's general fund on an annual basis. On-going revenues
include property taxes, sales taxes, utility ta�ces, impact fees, and business and occupation
ta�ces. The other category of funds is called "one time" funds because the City cannot
count on having these funds available on an annual basis. These funds include bond sales
and grants such as, TEA-21, IAC, and Urban Arterial Fund money. On-going funds can
be used for either capital facilities or maintenance and operations. However, it is prudent
financial management and adopted City policy that one-time funds be used only for
capital improvements. As is discussed later in this chapter, the City proposed two bond
issues to finance capital facilities in the Fall of 1995. As part of that bond issue, voters
�e�e-�s��e approved a permanent utility tax to pay for the maintenance and operations
costs associated with the new capital facilities.
6.3 PARKS AND RECREATION
Inventory of Existing Facilities
The City of Federal Way adopted the first Park, Recreation, and Open Space
Comprehensive Plan in December of 1991. The City updated the Plan in 1995, 2000, and
2006. This plan, which is now called the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Plan, is
incorporated by reference. The planning area of the 2000 and 2006 Parks Plans are based
only on the City limits of Federal Way, although the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) is
inventoried and discussed. As in previous plans, the Parks Plan has been subdivided into
subareas, referred to as Parks Plan Planning Areas (Map vI-3), for purposes of long-
range planning.
The 2006 Parks Plan updates the inventory to include new parks and properties added to
the City's system. In addition to City-owned parks and open space, the Parks Plan also
lists school district, state, and county facilities, as well as private recreation facilities.
Revised , , , 2010. Communitv Facilities VI-2
FWCP — Chapter Six, Capital Facilities
Map VI-4 depicts the location of major parks and open space within the Federal Way
planning area. Table VI-2 summarizes this inventory as of June 2006.
Table i�I-2
of Existin� Citv Park and Recreation Areas
DEVELOPED PARK LAND CATEGORIES � ACRES
14 Nei hbo�hood Padcs 156.4
5 Communi Pazks 2223
0 Re ional Pazks 0.0
4.2 mi Trails Acrea e 118.0
4 Park Facilities Acrea e 25.8
Total Develo ed Park Land 522.5
Total Undeveb ed Pazk Land 543.5
Total Park Land in Federal Wav 1066.0
When the City incorporated in 1990, there were approximately eight acres of parkland
available per 1,000 population in Federal Way. Since that time, the City has purchased
additional property and developed new facilities. These include the Lake Killarney Open
Space Park, Heritage Woods Neighborhood Park, Wedgewood Neighborhood Park, BPA
Trail I, II, and III, Madrona Park, Cedar Grove Park, Klahanee Lake Community Senior
Center, Dumas Bay Centre, Celebration Park, Steel Lake Annex facilities, and the
Community Center, which opened March 2007. In 2004, Washington State Parks
transferred West Hylebos Wetlands Park to the City. King County has also transferred
several properties to the City in the last six years. These parks and facilities are described
in greater detail in the Parks Plan.
As of 2006, the City is providing 10.9 acres of park land per 1,000 population. The City's
goa( is to maintain a level of service of 10.9 as Federal Way grows in population and
size. In the past, the City has obtained land through plat dedication. The City is also now
considering a Park Impact Fee to provide funds for parks acquisition and development.
In addition to acquiring and developing new facilities, the City has taken administrative
actions to take advantage of other available public recreational facilities. The City
enacted interlocal agreements with the School District to jointly operate and maintain
school recreational facilities. As a result, the City jointly operates and maintains a major
community park in conjunction with Saghalie Middle School. Also, the City has
agreements to provide recreational programs and schedule play fields at several
elementary schools, in addition to middle schools. These facilities are now formally
available nights and weekends, year around for use by local residents.
As referenced above, City residents now have access to 10.9 acres of parks and open
space per 1,000 population. This inventory includes City owned parks and open space
within the City limits. The City currently provides 1066 acres of parkland, which the City
maintains and operates. Of the total 1066 acres, 522.5 acres is developed for recreational
use areas and 543.5 acres is undeveloped.
Note: Washington State Parks has a regional park facitity within the City limits, which
Revised , , , 2010, Communitv FaciliGes V13
FWCP — Chapter Six, Capital Facilities
residents often use. Dash Point State Park is 230 acres of state land, which provides a
regional (statewide) recreation use for camping, swimming, picnicking, walking trails,
and beachfront. The state park land is not included in the City's LOS simply because the
state owns, operates, and maintains this facility. For the purposes of parks planning, the
recommended LOS standard in the City's Parks Plan and this Capital Facilities chapter is
10.9 acres of City owned parkland per 1,000 population.
Forecast of Future Needs
The 2006 Parks Plan states that the inventory of public park and open space land will be
adequate to serve both the current and future projected population within the City and
PAA. However, much of this acreage is un-programmed, undeveloped open space. The
primary deficiency, both now and projected, is in improved trails.
The updated Parks Plan makes recommendations based on five Core Values identified
through an extensive planning process. Four of these relate to capital facilities and include:
Core Value # 1: Improve Existing Facilities and Provide Multiple Functions in Parks
Core Value #2: Develop a Walking and Biking Community Through an Integrated
Trail and Sidewalk Network
Core Value #3: Retain and Improve Our Open Spaces
Core Value #4: Create Community Gathering Place and Destinations
Capital facilities that respond to these Core Values have been incorporated into the Six-
Year CIP. Some of the major efforts planned for this six year period include:
• Design and redevelopment of Lakota and Sacajawea Parks
aaeees
• Introduction of community gathering spaces in neighborhood parks
• Site and building assessments for Dumas Bay Centre
• Trail and Pedestrian improvements
• Upgrade Saghalie Park soccer field to artificial turf
In addition, the City completed a cultural arts survey in 1994. The survey evaluated
several alternatives for a performing arts center and concluded that at some time in the
near future, the City would need such a facility with a capacity of about 1,000 seats. The
City has converted a portion of Dumas Bay Centre into the Knutzen Family Theatre, a
250-seat civic theater facility. This facility will begin to fulfill the identified community
need for a performing arts center.
Locations & Capacities of Future Facilities
Map VI-4 indicates the location of the parks, recreation facilities, and open space subareas
the City will need to maintain the adopted LOS. The Parks Plan breaks the planning area
Revised , , , 2010. Communilv Facilities VI-4
FWCP - Chapter Six, Capital Facilities
into subareas and addresses future facilities at the subarea level. For more details about the
type, size, and cost of these new facilities, please refer to the 2006 Parks Plan. Map VI-4A
shows potential locations of public spaces in the City Center.
Finance Plan
Table VI-3 (Parks Six-Year Capital Improvements Plan, 2006-2012) describes the
proposed parks projects that will be needed between now and the year 2012, together
with cost estimates programmed by year. Table VI-3 also identifies the revenues that will
be available during the same time period to finance these new facilities. Please refer to
Chapter 7, "Implementation," of the 2006 City of Federal Way Parks, Recreation, and
Open Space Plan for information on the finance plan.
The City biennially updates its Parks & Recreation Capital Improvement Plan. These
updates reflect new project priorities, eliminate projects that have been completed, and
add new projects to the program.
Table VI-3
Parks Six-Year Capital Improvements Plan, 2007-2012
(in thousands)
Sources/Uses 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total
Real Estate Excise Ta�c 1,007 344 460 510 507 421 3249
Misc. Transfers 21 21
Grants/Anticipated S�8 500 1,000 �,3�8
�.Q 1S1Q
Grants/Contributions Received
Miti ation Funds Received 110 110
General Fund 0
Total Financing Sources � 344 460 1010 507 1421 �
Park Pro'ects
Pla round 134 134 136 136 137 138 815
BMX/Bike Facili IS 15
�-5:►8 �1�8 8A8 3�438
Communi Gatherin S xes 30 37 108 112 112 126 525
Downtown Public S ace 100 100
Dumas Ba Centre: Buildin 33 193 140 140 140 140 786
Dumas Ba Centre: Site Restor. 137
Lakota Pazk Desi n& Redev. 723 11,000 11,723
Ma'or Maintenance - Park Facil. 110 110 110 110 110 110 660
Panther Lake O en S ce 24 68 92
Pove Ba Master Plan 41 41
Sa halie Pk Soccer Fld - Artif Turf 920 920
Trail & Ped Access Im 'ts 40 130 78 65 67 70 450
West H lebos Boardwalk 1,365 1,365
Subtotal (G) 4�i81� ��A4 ��66 11,672 581 584 �9
2,732 fe44
CJn ndedEndin Balance 0 0 (877) (10,669) (988) (7,582) (20,116)
Revised , , , 2010. CommuniN Facilifies VI-5
FWCP — Chapter Six, Capital Facilities
6.4 Community Facilities
Significant community investments have been made in the last 10 years to implement the
community's vision for Federal Way. In addition to the investments in the surface water,
transportation, and parks areas, the City also acquired and improved a basic set of
community facilities to house City operations and provide space for community
gatherings and recreation.
The City acquired , Dumas Bay
Centre (a conference and retreat facility) in 1993. Strong local support in community
recreation and arts activities translated into the City Council's adoption of a 2% For the
Arts ordinance to provide funding for arts in public places in 1994, and the construction
of the 254-seat Knutzen Family Theatre in 1998. �ke--�ev� City Hall, which consolidates
most City administrative offices, °���� Police, and the Municipal Court in one
facility, was acquired in 2003. "'�� :� �nn� rr:�,. r�,.,,�h, a:.,o�+ea ;+�oi�,.f ..............:n
�
„i., ,. �.,«�.,,,+oa . .:+i. � ��n o ., �,.....,,...a rr�.�.,�+ �,.,a� �rt,o c�;.., „ oa +i.o
�`v`�' czcrrccr�—rrrc c�cTao�o�a:rir .. ...,.�
,-.,+:...,� ..FTIo...�.o+L. i...�.o� D....1 /iITD\ ., „It.
The City began construction of a new 72,000 square foot Community Center in fa112005.
Construction was completed in early 2007. The facility houses Recreation and Cultural
Services staff, and includes athletic and community facilities suitable for a wide variety
of events and programs. T�,e F^:�:*-. .,:" �o�'°�o +�,o Yr rr °n-' u ro� o,..,+:,...� �E
� ,,:i:... . ,:ii i.,, ,.o+,,....oa +,. ��o �oao..,,i u�,.., e„�.,.,,t n:�+,.:,.+ ..,�,,, ,� � +�.e , ,.ao..i..:..,.
�
�
Inventory of Existing Facilities
As of January 2007, the City owns or occupies a number of facilities, as shown in Table
vI-4 and Map VI-S.
Projected Community Needs
The City has identified a number of facilities to help deliver services more efficiently and
adjust to the changing demographics of this community in the future. These projected
needs are beyond the City's ability to fund within the six-year planning horizon.
However, in order to keep the community's vision alive, we purposely did not exclude
any of these community projects. The City Council will periodically review and priaritize
these projects and provide funding when available. A description of these facilities with a
summary list is provided in Table VI-S.
Revised , , , 2010. Communitv Facili6es VI-6
FWCP — Chapter Six, Capital Facilifies
Table VI-4
Summary of Existing Community Facilities
Building Name � Use Sq. ft/Occupancy
City Hall Own City operations not otherwise listed 88,085/approximately 300 FTE and
Council Chamber
Police Evidence Own Police evidence room
iti„�.,,,eo r ............:...i be�se�
��e�e� e�e�ieas
�se� �,. .,:.., ,.i
Federal Way Community
Center
Steel Lake Annex
Steel Lake Maintenance
Shop
Own Community recreation center with
gym, pools, senior lounge, pre-school,
and educational classrooms and
multipurpose room with kitchen.
Recreation staff offices.
Own
Own
Dumas Bay Center
(DBC)
Knutzen Family Theater
(at DBC)
Daycare, arts and crafts programs
Maintenance operations, outdoor
equipment and material storage
Own Public park, meeting/banquet/
overnight lodging
Own 254 seats performing arts theatre and
reheazsal hall
6,000/2 FTE
11,200/13 FTE, gym, kitchen, etc.
72,000/13 regulaz FTE and
approximately 20 part-time temporary
personnel
Opened in 2007
1,161/program only
4, I 10 office and maintenance bay/32
FTE
approximately 90 sq ft storage yard
and approximately additional 1.5 acres
available for future expansion
6 meeting rooms, 70 overnight rooms,
12 acre park ground
Miscellaneous Outdoor Leased Street maintenance material and park 10,000 material storage
Storage equipment storage 2,000 equipment storage
Miscellaneous [ndoor Leased Spare office equipmenUfacility 260 sf. ft.
Storage parts/records 2,160 cubic ft boxes stored offsite in a
document storage facility
Table VI-S
Projected Community Facility Needs
2007 — 2013
Type of Facility I,ea�. Size Cost
(sfl (millions)
1. Indoor Competitive Sports Facility 2015 75,000 $10 —$12
2. Performing Arts Centre 2015 SQ000 $35 —$40
3. Maintenance Facility 2009 120,000 yard $1.0
6,500 office
4. Public Parking Facilities 2010 200 — 400 sta $ to $10
TOTAL $51 — $63
Revised , , , 2010. CommuniN Facilities VI-7
FWCP — Chapter Six, Capital Facilities
Municipal Facility (General Government Police, and Court Operations)
The City acquired the current City Hall in 2003 and consolidated its police, court, and
general governmental operations under one roof. About 10 percent or 8,000 of the total
88,500 square feet of space in this building is currently available for future expansions. In
addition to the City Hall parcel, the City also acquired two vacant lots to the north which
is the location of the Police Evidence facility and overflow parking for the City Hall/
Municipal Court.
..
�� �
Y. .
Pursuant to an interlocal agreement, the Cities of Auburn, Burien, Des Moines. Federal
Way, Renton, SeaTac, and Tukwila Washington have a re�jointiv develop
construct, maintain, and operate a consolidated correctional facility to be located in Des
Moines, Washington, to provide correctional services essential to the preservation of the
public health, safety, and welfare serve for these cities. As �art of this agreement, an
autonomous public a e�ncy was formed, the South Correction Entit,�(SCORE) with
representation from the cities of Auburn, Burien, Des Moines, Federal Way, Renton,
SeaTac, and Tukwila. Collectively, the cities represent almost 340,000 citizens in South
King Countv.
As a result of the shortage of jail beds, King Countv notified the cities in 2000 that they
would no longer be able to house misdemeanant inmates after 2012. Many cities have
contracted with other jail facilities in Eastern Washington to house inmates as an interim
measure. However, these contracts expire even sooner, in 2010. While these contracts have
provided short term relief for the jail crisis, they are not a long-term solution and additional
capacitv must be built. Far example, the SCORE cities are currentiv using approximately
350 jail beds everv dav. However, the Renton and Auburn jails can only house 100
inmates, leavin� a need for an additional 250 beds. This is the current deficiency. As the
population in the re i� o,_ n expands, the shorta e�of jail beds will become even rg eater•
All of the King Countv cities participated in a lon -t� jail needs studv in 2006. This
study is known as the Ricci-Greene Studv. The stud�sugg,ested that two sub-re i�
jails be constructed. The study revealed that 1,440 beds would be needed byall the cities
bv 2026. Of the 1,440 beds, 700 of them are needed in South Kin� County. After the
Ricci-Greene Study was completed, the SCORE cities completed a separate feasibilitv
study to determine if the cities could provide equivalent jail services at a reduced cost.
The feasibili . study revealed that SCORE could provide the same services at a reduced
rate, benefiting the tax pavers of the SCORE citizens.
The $80.5 million facility will be a sin lg e-stor�building with a housing mezzanine
constructed on a sited owned bv SCORE located in Des Moines, Washington. The facilitv
Revised , , , 2010. CommuniN Facili6es VI-8
FWCP — Chapter Six, Capital Facilities
will be ap�roximately 137,000 square feet with associated parking and site improvements
on a 15.613-acre collection of parcels. The site is near Des Moines Creek Park where
South 208� Street intersects with 18`" Avenue South. The facilitv is desiQned to house up
to 822 inmates. There will be ap�roximately 120 emplovees at the facilitv. The majority of
those will be corrections officers, followed by medical staff and administrative personnel.
Ownership and the financial commitment to SCORE are prorated based on the city's
2007 average daily_prisoner ponulation—for Federal Wav that is 69 operational beds, or
18 percent of the project.
Maintenance Facility
The Parks and Public Works maintenance facility is located at 31132 28` Avenue South.
The entire site is approximately 1.4 acres, with 1,060 square feet of office space and a
61,000 square foot fenced storage yard. The City acquired two adjacent parcels, for a
total of 2.25 acres, to the north of the facility in 2003. Today, the maintenance facility
contains around 3,500 square feet of office space and 90,000 in fenced storage space,
with an additional 1.5 acres of land area available for future expansions.
Parks Maintenance operates seven days a week, two shifts per day. The space needed for
the maintenance operations includes a front counter/reception area, crew quarters
(including an area for daily time cards, breaks, and crew meetings/training, etc.), as well
as a locker room. Public Works streets and surface water maintenance operations have
similar needs for office space; operating Monday through Friday, year round, one shift
per day. Both Parks and Public Works maintenance operations tend to intensify during
the summer months and require up to 15 part-time, seasonal workers at any given time.
��� ���
� ��� , ���
,:�t� �L.� C`,..,+L. '217� A..o,,...o o.,+o.�.�:.,,�. .,,-.,l T C A....o�� D.,..�.,. A.a.�l;�;..,�. D..� o,.+ :� :
�
«�:,.:..,.�0,7 �1,.,+ r1.o �:re . .,l,a l.o � .,:F:,..,..�1., ..1� ,.*o,l 1.., +L,o ,....L.� �,F « e,7� .....d
� � � � � � l�:R'�!S'J.!'}.'*.T1
�
Revised , , , 2010. Communitv Facilities VI-9
FWCP — Chapter Six, Capital Facili6es
Conference/Performing Arts Center
In 1994, the City of Federal Way, through the Arts Commission, asked AMS Planning
and Research to conduct a feasibility study of a cultural arts facility to serve the City.
Under the guidance of a 27-member steering committee, AMS conducted a survey of
local arts organizations, analysis of existing cultural and meeting facilities, market
research with residents of the City and surrounding communities, interviews with key
community leaders representing government and business, and meetings and workshops
with the steering committee, all of whom provided base information. The study
recommended a performing arts center to seat 1,000 patrons and a visual arts gallery.
The performing arts center proposed in this study included design criteria that
incorporated multi-level seating to accommodate as many as 500 — 600 people on an
orchestra level, while still achieving intimacy for audiences.
The construction cost for a performing arts theater was estimated in the 1994 report to be
between $190 —$240 per square foot. Adjusted to 2007, the per square foot cost can
easily be $400 —$500, or $25 to $30 million for construction. Site requirements called for
a minimum of five acres; two acres for the facility and three acres to provide for surface
parking and to meet additional code requirements. Alternatively, two to two and a half
acres would be needed if structured parking is used. The additional cost for structured
parking would be $5 to $8 million. Based on these assumptions, the full developmental
cost is expected to be $35 to $40 million.
Maintenance and operation costs for a facility of this size were estimated to be $750,000 per
year. Projected revenues (using a 171 event day schedule) was $390,000, (eaving a net
operating cost of $360,000 to be generated through fundraising or an operating endowment.
Conference/Performing Arts Facility Recommendation
• 50,000 square foot facility
• Two-acre site
• $35 — $40 million
Multipurpose Competitive Sports Center
The City of Federal Way enacted a�-% one percent lodging tax and formed the Lodging
Tax Advisory Committee (LTAC) in 1999 to promote and enhance the local tourism
industry. The committee has commissioned a feasibility study for an indoor competitive
sports facility that will increase visitors' stay in local hotels and complement the Aquatic
Center and Celebration Park, two other regionaUnational amateur sports facilities in the
City.
A number of development concepts have been considered, one of which is a facility for
basketball and volleyball tournaments with an athletic club for training/conditioning to
generate on-going usage and revenue. One of the considerations for such a facility would
Revised , , , 2010, Communitv Facili6es
vi-�o
FWCP — Chapter Six, Capital Facilities
be its ability to be financially self-sustaining. It would also ideally be developed and
operated by the private sector, with minimum or no public participation.
Conference/Performing Arts Facility Recommendation
• 75,000 square foot facility
• Five-acre site
•$10 —$12 million development and construction only, to be funded by private
developer
Public Parking Facility
The existing city center development is currently near or at capacity with the required
surface parking to business-space ratio. To intensify the development, such as the multi-
story mixed-use developments envisioned by the community, additional parking space
will be needed. These additional parking spaces would most likely be achieved through
structured parking, consistent with the multi-story mixed-use business space.
These structured parking facilities are likely needed in order for each of the super-blocks
to regain grounds for redevelopment. With the construction cost of structured parking at a
premium when compared to land cost, some public/private partnership would likely be
needed for them to be financially feasible. The partnership may be in various forms, but
the essence is consistent that public funds are invested to secure certain amount of
parking spaces in an otherwise private-business parking facility.
Public Parking Facility Recommendation
200 to 400 designated public parking spaces in conjunction with privately developed
parking structures for redevelopment projects located within the City Center.
Between $5 —$10 million total. Investments will vary depending on the need and
type of redevelopment projects at each location. City funding sources would be a
combination of the City's economic development incentive fund and other state and
federal economic development, and/or infrastructure funding sources.
Financing Plan
It is desirable to have all theses facilities in the community as soon as possible. However,
unless they are funded with private or voter-approved funding sources, the City's projected
revenues will not support either the development or the required operating and on-going
maintenance of these facilities.
TL.e �:...,..,.:.... ,.F....,;.,+o...,,...o F ,.;l:r., : o,.r� ;� 1:Lol., *., � �......,.e,�l . ,:rL.
Future facility additions would depend on future voter approval to raise additional capital
and maintenance funds.
Revised , , , 2010. Communiri Facili6es VI-11
FWCP — Chapter Six, Capital Facilities
The City updates its capital improvements program every other year in conjunction with
its biennial budget process. These updates will reflect new project priorities and funding
availability.
Revised , , , 2010. CommuniN Facili6es VI-12
City of Federal Way
Comprehensive Plan
City Facilities
Capital Facilities Element
Legend:
Q Federal Way City Limits
�_ � Potential Annexation Area
City-Owned Facilities
O City Hall
Q Dumas Bay Centre
Q New Community Center
O Steel Lake Annex
City-Leased Facilities
Q Klahanee Lake Center
0 Police Substation - The Commons
Q Police Substation - North Center
Q Police Substation - Westway
� Scale:
0 0.5 1
N Miles
Idap Revised. OctoLe 2006. Source- Ciry of Fede�el Way. Klny County
� Federal way MAP VI-5
Note: This map is intended tor use as a grephical representation only.
The City ot Federal Way makes no warranty as �o its accuracy.
REPLACED BY MAP DATED JUNE 2010 - SEE NEXT PAGE
City of Federal Way
Comprehensive Plan
�ity Facilities
� Caprfal �Facilities Element
Leeend:
� Federal Way City Umits
�_ J Potential Annexation Area
Gity�rned Facilities
� City Hall
� Dumas Bay Centre
� Federal Way Community Certiter
� Steel Lake Annex
Q Police Substation - The Commons
� Police Substation - VYestwaiy
Scale:
� D O.a 1
N Miles
� ti.�e in. m�a � c4 �•.�rrv�rr. �►v:•wr�
LI�• JI
�.� ._ Federal �Vay MAP VI-5
Nohe: Th� rrt�p Is rber3tletl iQ usr as a�tYml repeseYaflm rnt�.
The Cqr of Federal Way ma�ez ra we�rarrry ss Ca IK aooirac�.
REVISED MAP - REPLACES MAP DATED OCTOBER 2006
Exhibit B
Proposed Amendments to
Chapter 7, City Center
In April 2010 the City Center Planned Action Area was expanded to add approximately ten acres
and five�arcels The added area coincided with Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) Number
1068 Its boundaries are South 317 Street to the north South 320 Street to the south, 23`
Avenue South to the west and the eastern boundar�s rou�hly in ali�nment with 25' Avenue
South The amended Planned Action sub-area is shown on Map VII-2A. �Only this para�raph
and M� VII-2A were revised in 2010. J
Infrastructure
Most of the existing facilities and infrastructure were inherited from King County. In 1998, the
City adopted new streetscape guidelines related to roadway profiles, streetlights, sidewalk widths,
and street trees. In 1999, South 312"' Street between Pacific Highway South and 23` Avenue
South was widened to five lanes, and new sidewalks, street lighting, and street trees were added,
as well as traffic signals at 20 Avenue South and 23 Avenue South. In 2001, South 320 Street
was improved with streetscape elements between 11`� Place South and 30 Avenue South. In
2002, the remainder of South 320 Street also was improved and 23` Avenue South was widened
to five lanes with sidewalks and streetscape elements. New traffic signals at South 316�', South
317 and South 322 Streets were installed.
Pacific Highway HOV Lanes, Phase I constructed in 2002-2004, widened Pacific Highway South
with an HOV lane in each direction from South 312"' to South 324`�. The project also added
sidewalks, center medians, landscaping, and utility undergrounding. This project was the City's
first of five to improve the Pacific Highway/International Boulevard corridor and was a
continuation of the revitalization of the City Center.
7.2 VISION STATEMENT
By the end of the comprehensive planning horizon, the Federal Way City Center will have
evolved into the cultural, social, and economic center of the City and fulfilled its role as one of
Puget Sound's regional network of urban centers. This role will be reinfarced by pedestrian-
oriented streetscapes; an efficient multi-modal transportation system; livable and affordable
housing; increased retail, service, and office development in a compact area; a network of public
spaces and parks; superior urban design; and a safe, essential, and vibrant street life.
The City Center is responsive to the needs of the City's residents. In addition to general services
that draw people from outside the region, such as retail, office, and hotel uses, the City Center is
the primary commercial area providing local goods and services to the surrounding
neighborhoods, and to residents and employees within the center area.
Private development and City initiated actions will have resulted in a balanced
transportation network that accommodates automobiles, public transportation, high
occupancy vehicles, pedestrians, bicyclists, and integrated parking. Pedestrian and
bicycle circulation is emphasized along with other travel modes. The downtown urban
fabric includes smaller blocks, lending itself to efficient and pleasant travel. Concentrated
City of Federal Way Boundaries of
Comprehensi�e Plan Planned Action SEPA
City Center
Element
Map VII-2A
1_��ti�� �;
'�L-'us�er� ,
- ,, .-
Pa villivns
Center
j �
S 3i2th St
�rr��
N
Walmart �
a
L
0
N
I � r ° i��i1' ..
� S 312th St
� �
Hillsrde m a
Pr�Za Q 5teel Lake a
� Park ~
� �
H N
N
Top
Foads
�
�
x
�
�
S 320th St a
Ce/e6ratlon
� Center
a Safeway
y
�
�
.``_ `. . . _. _
�ah
Celebration
Pa rk
S 316th St yarry Truman
Federal Wa H/gh Scboo!
N Tiansit
d
Q Cenier
Gateway
� Center
S
N
SeaTac o, Pa � dO
1/F!lage Q World
w Plaza
N
The Commons a�
Federa! Way
• •
S 320tfi St
N
w
n
D
<
�
�
S 32�ift St
Park & Ride
�
v
h
m
�
ti
�
'�
�
Legend
Q Planned Action SEPAArea
Surface Water
Park
Building
Street
This map is acoompanied by NO warranties.
Ciry Center Core
City Center Frame
Map Qate: March, 2007
� Scale:
N 0 500 1,000 Feet
i � i
ri�vn�
� Federal Way
Map prepared by the City of
Federal Way's GIS Division.
REPLACED BY MAP DATED JUNE 2010 - SEE NEXT PAGE
City of Federal Way Boundaries of
Comprehensive Plan Planned Action SEPA
City Center
Element
Map VII-2A
f U�i� ; �,; � ' __
r ..,� � ;
�+,, �USf4��- j �
� * _ 1 � � –
� ��� ��
�
�' �_� �� ,,;� � �-
_, �
�� c i �
;� — .
_ �� i �ti �
� _ __ _._ _ __ . . ;
. ( , ,-i_ .I 't �, • . o'� i� ::.� i, �-..�
r
I __ y � , " ' ��, � � �
�
-- S 312th Si '
S 312th St
• f FavJ�lfans
i ";` , f /`�� ` Center
, � +
„
, ,°
�;� i f �
a �r i�J �
._ ', L`�. �.
�_ '� ,
_ . :v :
_. I
�: .�� _. _
?, , .._. - -, .� r ,
J_. ��: x:
—r—_�.:_ — .
i r .. �. -.3, k�r'.'1:.,�_r.�-T: �.. �� �
� J_� i — '�.:J_L 1 � .
H
a
�
u
�
�
S 32Qth St �
Celebra�on
� ce�rer
a sar�way
�
�
�
: , _
�� J 4 ' � —
U]
{�{�a�R17ff �
Q
� Hillside
° Pfaza
rop
Foods '
S 318th St
Federa! Wa
� 7'rarrsit
�
a Center
L
S
SeaTac d Pa
VFllage Q' �
.. Plaza
�
N
The Commons at
Federa! Way
N y
� Steel Lake a
�° Pa rk �
� ;
� N
H
Harry Truman
Hlgh Schoof
� Gateway
Center
_ �,%;-
/�
J�t _.—�_
� — — +
a '�
� '� � r��
y �i 1 .
S 32Uth Sf
Park 8 Ride
� ,* , >
>, �� :
�, � . � I l � , . ,,$�,; :irz �r�; �, a - � ri.s., �_ _,;.
Celebratian
Park
� � tiL: 'Jt;Y.? �Yk 1 C r^�„ :,:' -
�. r �
j ''' �' �' �`
� � I ;� i � .� ��,�,' :.a v
I , - . �rty.cfr -r�� t,,;; ,-�
�`,, ,�� ri,.•r '� , . ''�
, y
�
�ro
m
1
Legend
Q Planned Action SEPAArea
Surface Water
Park
Building
Street
This map is acoompanied by NO warranties.
City Center Core
City Center Frame
Map Date: June, 2010
� Scale:
" 0 500 1,000 Feet
C /Y O/
�... Federal Way
Map prepared by the City of
Federal Way's GIS Division.
REVISED MAP - REPLACES MAP DATED MARCH 2O07
Exhibit C
Proposed Amendments to
Chapter 8, Potential Annexation Area
. �, _ . _ __ ___ _ . _ _. ___._.,..
` b Z�2nd �T ' � �
ly... _ _ . « � . $ _
� ��� � �� �
' >; �
� , r
��� � `
;t � .� �
-�'� � � � � �
a � �
/ -'` . .. , , �
� a 1 Ken1
�' , . � SchoO!
� Dlslricf
a.2a�+n sr s:eau� sT. .�. t
� h �
� � y �� �
`�a � `
_
O ', ` yO w
t�� ,� _
� � � �
^.� � �...
8 �04th 9T � , , � M
� - ' ' —__��--
� � t ��e '.
!
� a s�sn, sr _�j f'c: M
s� ' i �
r • �
� ;�� i federal rvay �
� �= ; - StAOO,WsmN C �
u�. S 32QIh 9T � � `
��aa� j
� �2�th�T � r
, �
!� FQ�eral ���1 Atlberrn .
��'�` SC�00/
� ,: r �
' fedraral Way rt ;a DJsMCI
� ScADQFWshICt ►.�' ��' � 9
� i.< <w � �t `,
! �¢ � � + l -.--.M5IY7�
k/ �
i � - .
� �. . Y����� ?�
': P�er:
,
���
�
�
� l. r , � 1 � �
�+, ' � �
,! - "�� � �� i �
� � �
1, t � �
� ' ' �.«.
� ..».. 1
--'_ '� . ' p �_�� °
� . 1 y���
.�. � ���
.� �
- 1 p
, � � �
� ��
�
� ' �� � ��� ' �
v �
�' i �
W � � �
� � ,��
� :
�
`� 1l " . ty ;,.
� .'' � ri ��1i�� ,' ���
�. *� � .�, � , �
` s�..w.�! ---- �`.
, t , � g
� .�..s.� �/' PatitiG�
� ; � «��
-, t � i_
Ciry of Federal Way
Comprehensive Plan
Public Schaol
Facilities
Potentlal Annexadon
Area Element
�o�:
,N scnoa o�t�a sommn
� E�„�y s�aoa
� ,�wo� won saba
Smla Hiph School
PoteM�1 Arx�xauen Mn -
Commin�r Lwd SuEaraar.
snr Lyu (Nortl�eactl
Camebt (Noro�uct)
Jo,AV �souMscv
l�kM�ne csouM.asq
ia� (Sad1�aW
Oq�a Ar�eac
fncorporated Aret
Uninootporri�d An�
Soura: FadK�l Way Schoal QaiiR.
Gy ol fadenl Way 61S Drykia►, 2001
_ -
/fDlAI
wir
� � I
Sca�e:
0 i�2 Mile
�
Map Refom�7ted: tD12006
Cdy of Fedual Wsy,
33325 Mh Aw 5.
Fea�.� w wn �009
(sss� eas'�doo
MAVN d�y01f�d0IMNry.00R1
�
N
Pbease Nola:
TTys m�p is Inlr+ded lor uce
�s � hiul repracantstion
o�r�'�ne cn�r or Feaeti
w�r m�ka no wur�nty
u to Itt aocuncy.
�' �`'`�"'"�'' Map Vill-14
�r.�e.sarw.�ee�.�e.ro..�+�e.��
REPLACED BY MAP DATED JUNE 2010 - SEE NEXT PAGE
, . ._�_m,��
272nd S'
u,�w rw.��
EMmentary
N i- `�� ' '�.` .
� � ,,.' -=;
':_ - - � _
U , 4 -:-.:�..
� "' � .... .�, . ,
a �
��..
�
.��
; _ �i l
, �..-.°--_-.. ,_ i
�, __. _— f a . � —
T.� � - -- � ---1-��
� �, �
� y . _'�lll' � ' �
' Ken1
� .�n�u�
S 288th S j� Disr�ic:r
I. , 7� I �� r '}'� }�� f{, � i�
, �' _ ; � , 1 �� Y � ,
(_! - l��.-, _ _� � � �
� - -- i _� , �
r.r.►.i w.Y
Nf�h Sehwl
Ttrma�
x�n s��
S 320th ST '
� �._,,,�..�� -
_ . . .' �; -�
, � F `�? ��
Q � ����
a _ , ��
lat� OdbH �N� N�
Elemanlarq Ifi� EI�°�t�ry
u�aa.
Scboal
Eaergreen Hdfqhts
Elwn�nla�y
. �
�
w
f-
�
�
�
ti
�
, e:;�:!,,
i"�' �7;i--�
�, : _
�� I � 1 -� '
1 �;uh�.rr � I
� � Aubu►►r
— ��, Sci►adu!
,-, ,� ..
Uisrric r
City af Federal Way
Camprehensive Plan
Public School
Facilities
Potentlal Annexatron
Area Element
Legend
Public School Facilities
- — School Distrid Boundary
School LocationS
�
Potential Annexation Area
Cammunity Level Subareas:
Camelot (NoM East)
`,1
Javita (South East�
Lakeland (South Easq
Parfcwway (South East)
Star Lake (North East)
Other Areas
Inoorporated Area
Unincarporated Area
.` f i i i"—� �`,. 1MY f8.
I. u.a_
t _ _� �_ , _'?�+,
h ST — I �, j '� - --�
T ' i _ ` ,f - � 7 1
_ I �'� �'`� � � ` �
� • ��f� � � I '-
-t ; � cn 1 ,
�� — , ,�� � a , . i
,_ __ ' �__•,. __ } l�,
�! `�''��� � I /� , �_ � � _. � �I
:� _
� �.�� - � � , � .1 ���� I � r �
; __ r �
i�� -- �
j I �
� f�l �fli i � � fJl't:' �� I
I '� , �w , � f _ '�
h � �
q. 'l.� I � i Q � ' r J
� �� � ', j �' �
� �� � � . �H � � � � f �
, � � � � I T � #
r , Y� ' _ - � � _ ... _ �� i ti _ � J.`.�-, �;.
i�` '� a► �; ,� . � 1
'~T ' ---'r
- --� / '�r' . . � t - --
, � _ A �' I � , � 1 _ ; _ . � �
_ � - ' �4: ' '� I 1 � ���Qt�oWj � � , �
r�
Map
0 025 0.5
� Mile � N
Map Relormatted O6J2010 This map �s intended
C�ry of Federel Way, for use as a graph�cal
33325 8th Ave S, representation ONLY
Federal Way, WA. 98Q03 The Crty ot fetleral �Nay
(253) 835-7000 makas ruo warcanty to
www cityoHederalway.com its accuracy
� �Federal Way
Map VIII-14
REVISED MAP - JUNE 2010
Exhibit D
Vicinity Map
Site-Specific Request #1
Lloyd/Valiani
�
�— �
= ca�mn�a
Parkway Px �� k V eanx
Center Fbwers �
�� �, a BC
S 336TH ST S 336TH ST
BC
CE
CE
/ y Pattlson's
r � CE
�
Mesto
��
R:\erike\cd\Com
� BC
� � ��ce
�n ����
_
U
LL
U
a
BC
BC
N
Q
_
�
�
3600
RM3
Existing Designations
Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Enterprise (CE)
Zoning: Commercial Enterprise (CE)
a
Requested Designations
Comprehensive Plan: Multi-Family
Zoning: RM3600
Christian
Faith Center
RM 600� �
N
s sai sr sT �
CE
Sunrise Self Storage
CE „
a
�
w Cash &
Q Carry
x
�
� � ....�.. ..�
N
Q
IC� I
uests�2010\ssr1 2010.mxd
Trinity
CE
S 341
CE
s
>
a
_
N
Lloyd
Baden
h
� ~
Q
N �
� //.
�
Z
� City of Federal Way
Q 2010
L Site Specific Requests
, for Comprehensive Plan and
� Zoning Designation Changes
Lloyd / Valiani
Site Specific Request #1
Legend
Site Specific Request
Buildings
Streets
�--- - Streams (City Survey)
Wetlands (1998 City Survey)
CP• � Zoning Boundary*
Note: An asterix (') next to a zoning
designation indicates the property is
governed by a development agreement.
CP•1* �
N 0 250 500
Feet
GITV OF
�. Federal Way
This map is accompanied by no warranties,
and is simply a graphic representation.
Exhibit E
Vicinity Map
Site-Specific Request #2
Song
City of Federal Way
2010
Site Specific Requests
for Comprehensive Plan and
Zoning Designation Changes
Song
Site Specific Request #2
Legend
Site Specific Request
Buildings
Streets
Streams (City Survey)
Wetlands (1998 City Survey)
� Zoning Boundary�`
Note: An asterix ('`) next to a zoning
designation indicates the property is
governed by a development agreement.
�
N 0 250 500
Feet
GTV OF
� Federal Way
This map is accompanied by no warranties,
and is simply a graphic representation.
R:\erike\cd\Com
Exhibit F
Vicinity Map
Site-Specific Request #3
ST Fabrication
City of Federal Way
2010
Site Specific Requests
for Comprehensive Plan and
Zoning Designation Changes
ST Fabrication
Site Specific Request #3
Legend
Site Specific Request
Buildings
Streets
Streams (City Survey)
Wetlands (1998 City Survey)
� Zoning Boundary
�
N 0 250 500
Feet
CITV OF
� Federal Way
This map is accompanied by no warranties,
and is simply a graphic representation.
uests�2010�ssr3 2010.mxd
COUNCIL MEETING DATE:—�A��A i
� ITEM #:,
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 18 and Chapter 19 regarding submittal
requirements for plats and commercial projects.
POLICY QUESTION: Should the City of Federal Way approve amendments to Federal Way Revised Code
(FWRC), Chapter 18 and Chapter 19, that establishes submittal requirement checklists and submittal requirement
standardization for plats and commercial projects?
COMMITTEE: Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC)
CATEGORY:
❑ Consent
� Ordinance
❑ City Council Business ❑ Res
STAFF REPORT BY: Deb Barker, Senior Planner
MEETING DATE: 09/20/2010
❑ Public Hearing
❑ Other
DEPT Community Development Services
Attachments: (1) Draft Adoption Ordinance; (2) Staff Report to the Planning Commission for the August 25,
201 D,Public Hearing; and (3) Draft Minutes of the August 25, 2010, Planning Commission Public Hearing.
Options Considered: (1) Adopt the Pdanning Commission's recommendation as shown in the Draft Adoption
ordinance; (2) Adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation as modified by the LUTC; (3) Do not adopt
the amendments,: or 4 Re er the back to the Plannin� Commission or�e�roceedin�. __
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council approve Option #1; adopt the Planning Commission's
recommendation reflected in the Draft Adoption Ordinance.
�310 /�,,,�
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: .(„h� ��yf� lJ� Iw. /OI�� DIRECTOR APPROVAL: �'1' �_
�,..,,..,:,.00 r�„„n�;t Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION I move to forward the proposed ordinance to First Reading on October S
2010. /1 _
_!
Committee Chair
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION(S):
Member
1 READING OF ORDINANCE (10/OS/2010): I move to forward the ordinance to a second reading for
enactment on the October 19, 2010 consent agenda.
2 ND READING OF ORDINANCE (10/19/2010) I move approval of the L UTC recommendation to approve the
code amendments, which are reflected in the Adoption Ordinance. "
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CIT�' CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION: �
❑ APPROVED ' COUNCILBILL# ;_)�Z.
❑ DENIED 1sT reading ((� ' S' ��
❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO AC'I'ION Enactment reading
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ardinances only) ORDINANCE #
REVISED - 08/12/2010 RESOLUTION #
Council Meeting Date: October 5, 2010
City Council Agenda Bill
Attachment #1
Draft Adoption Ordinance:
Amendments to F WRC Chapter 18 and Chapter 19 regarding submittal
requirements for plats and commercial projects.
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating
to submittal requirements for plats and commercial projects;
amending FWRC 18.30.030, FWRC 18.35.050, and FWRC 19.15.040.
(Amending Ordinance Nos. 09-610, 09-594, 07-554, 98-309, 97-291,
and 90-41)
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need to periodically modify Title 18 and Title 19 of the
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC), "Zoning and Development Code," in order to conform to state and
federal law, codify administrative practices, clarify and update zoning regulations as deemed necessary,
and improve the efficiency of the regulations and the development review process; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance, containing amendments to the text of Title 18 FWRC and the text of
Title 19 FWRC, has complied with Process VI review, chapter 19.80 FWRC, pursuant to chapter 19.35
FWRC; and
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest far the City Council to adopt standards for submittal
requirements that allow the application submittal process to be more straightforward within the City of
Federal Way; and
WHEREAS, Stakeholder groups indicated that subdivision applications require too much
information too early in the process; and
WHEREAS, staff found that although requested submittal items are needed in order to review
applications, some discretion can be applied to those initial submittal requirements that are listed in the
FWRC; and
WHEREAS, standardizing submittal requirements and technical handouts for plats and
commercial projects makes the submittal process less complicated for the applicant; and
WHEREAS, locating necessary submittal requirements into a checklist format allows staff to
request only that information that is necessary to review; and
WHEREAS, use of a standardized submittal checklist allows increased flexibility as technology
evolves; and
Ordinance No. 10 - Page 1 of 9
WHEREAS, the directar may continue to waive any submittal requirements determined to be not
reasonably necessary; and
WHEREAS, the Proposal. is categorically exempt from environmental review under the State
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(20); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission properly conducted a duly noticed public hearing on these
code amendments on August 25, 2010, and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the City Council;
and
WHEREAS, the Land Use/Transportation Committee of the Federal Way City Council
considered these code amendments on September 20, 2010, and recommended adoption of the text
amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section l. Findin�s. The City Council of the City of Federal Way makes the following findings
with respect to the proposed amendments.
(a) These code amendments are in the best interest of the residents of the City and will
benefit the City as a whole by clarifying what constitutes a complete application.
(b) These code amendments comply with Chapter 36.70A RCW, Growth Management.
(c) These code amendments are consistent with the intent and purpose of Title 18 FWRC and
Title 19 FWRC and will implement and are consistent with the applicable provisions of the Federal Way
Comprehensive Plan.
(d) These code amendments bear a substantial relationship to, and will protect and not
adversely affect, the public health, safety, and welfare.
(e) These code amendments have followed the proper procedure required under the FWRC.
Section 2. Conclusions. Pursuant to chapter 19.80 FWRC and chapter 1935 FWRC, and based
upon the recitals and the findings set forth in Section l, the Federal Way City Council makes the
Ordinance No. 10 - Page 2 of 9
following Conclusions of Law with respect to the decisional criteria necessary for the adoption of the
proposed amendments:
(a) The proposed FWRC amendments are consistent with, and substantially implement, the
following Federal Way Comprehensive Plan goals and policies:
LUP4 Maximize efficiency of the development review process.
EDPI S 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.
HP9 Maximize efficiency in the City's development review process and ensure that
unnecessary time delays and expenses are eliminated. Continue to provide streamlined
permitting processes for development that is consistent with the FWCP and FWCC,
and that has no adverse impacts.
(b) The proposed FWRC amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health,
safety, and welfare because it standardizes submittal requirements to clarify what constitutes a complete
application in order to increase the efficiency of the development review processes.
(c) The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the public and the residents of the City
of Federal Way because clarity in the application process results in continued development within the
City thus aiding the local economy.
Section 3. FWRC 18.30.030 is hereby amended to read as follows:
18.30.030 Content and form of application.
All short subdivision applications must at the minimum provide the information contained within
Citv of Federal Wav Department of Communit�Development Services Bulletin #010, Short
Subdivision Submittal Requirements. The submittal requirements are not intended to determine if
an a�lication conforms to city of Federal Wa_y codes. Thev are used onlv to determine if all
required materials have been submitted. A code related review will occur after a complete
application has been submitted. The director may waive any sections determined to be not
reasonably necessar�
Ordinance No. 10 - Page 3 of 9
�1 � n 1• +• 4' 1 f'.. �L.,�.�r �„t„7;.,;�;,,« �t,,,lt 1.0 ,,,�ao +,. +t,o ,ao....,-f.,-,o.,+ „F
..., .,�
'�.. ,7e.,ol,�,..,..o.,+ � .� F .-.�,� �,...,;�L.o,] 1.�. +l,o �.;+ A,��.1;,...+;,,,..� �L..,11 b,o „,.,.ao
�..........,..�) ..� ..... ��. . .� �.. '.,:" .....,.., �....,..,..�... .,� .,.._ �..� .
o,�ro,a ;,� 41�a �....1;...,+;�,,,
�
��F��
�
' - "
�
�� �
��
�
' - -
- • � - ' -
�
. - -
- �� - - -
� _ _ -
�
!+l T< .,1 ,. ..,a.. ..+' /a �+:.� . ,. 0�1
/ \ T + 1 �'tl. '+ 1 ++ ,7 +,. „ o.,+;,,,.. ,�4'.,,..., l.,t� f,-��.t� „�l�.o,-
> > �
�A13�
! \ A 1 .a .7 4' .a 1 � .a„o �., +l.o ,,. �4'�.,-�t;�..t .. o ..t,,,7;.,.,.-
° ° .. .,� ..,...,..... �.... �� '.....»......
e > > > >
,-o,a 1�.. ..,-;+;,..,1 „ „1.,�;,.,��
Ordinance No. 10 - Page 4 of 9
. -
. - -
_ . . . � � -
! \ Tl. C o�+..L.l;..l-,o,] 1-.,. +L.o ,.;+.. Tl,o ., ..1:...,*;.�.. �L..,71 ,�,�f L.o .. o,�.+0,7 , ,,.lo�� ;+ :
.... �.......,.. ... ..,
oa 1... �L.o .- 0�40�] 400
(,a.a\ A,],a;4:.,...,1 ;,,F ,-,�,.,f:�,., ., ,-o,a .,t 41�0 .7;�.,.,-o*;.,., �,4'tciic-a.rcl'r��°r
Section 4. FWRC 18.35.020 is hereby amended to read as follows:
18.35.020 Content and form of application.
All preliminaryplat applications must at the minimum provide the information contained within
Citv of Federal Wav Deparhnent of Communi Development Services Bulletin #037,
Preliminarv Plat Submittal Requirements. The submittal rec�uirements are not intended to
determine if an a�plication conforms to city of Federal Way codes. They are used onlv to
determined if all required materials have been submitted. A code related review will occur after a
complete application has been submitted. The director mav waive any sections determined to be
not reasonably necessarv.
..,.o ,- „+oa ;r +�,o „ r�;,,.,�;,,�
i�� rrw c�,�, a �.a� „a � ,-..+;,,., „�*i.o ,.i�� �k�n �.o �.,..ae i..,
° ........, .,, , .
,
r,„+;�r ,.� i.,,,a� .,,.�,,,,ii., � .oa
«� -ri.o .. ..i;,.,.�;,,� �i..,ii �.e ., oa �,...�.o � �i,,,,,;,,,, ;,,� ,-m.,.;,,r.
! \ T „+� „I'�L.o o,] ,. ol; ..1.,� ,a,- „ �., �lo ,�4'„ ..1, ,-o ..��
u.v ..� ...... ....... ...
(;l D,-,,,.,,�o.a ,-, ,�f' �L,o .,1.,�
!;;\ 7.. .,�;.,,, 1... �o,.�;..,, �.,...«...L.:,�. o ,��7/.,,- 1,.. �.�1,0,- lo...,l u�
> > Y � � ..t,..,�....
l;;;\ T.T.,..�e ..,],a,-o..� ,�,7 ,.L.,.,�o .. ,v,l.o,- .,4'�0..ol�Y,o.�
> > •
/;..\ T�T.,,�.o ..,7,7,-0�� �..] ,.L...,�e ,� ,�.1.0,- �,4' o��.?, .. o
> > ^ °.-.-.� v v. i.v. .
l.,l AT., o..,7,],-0 ..,7 ,�L,,, ,..,L.o .,4',- �*o o,a t..,,,1 0
� ° � :�ui .. j'�� .
`� \ e...y],g ..,�..7 .,,,,-+l. ,. .�♦
� �.�.�.
/ "l .' +' � L. 4'+t, 1.. .a ;«,];....+o,a L... ,. ,��.,,,,-� �4'f:,.,. F;..,+;.�te.-.,.,1.,
F,- �1.�..e� lo�� +1�....-. 1 G.. ,,.� .,...7 �;.,o f'�.,.� ;,,.�o,-.,.,1� 4'.,,- �1..,�,o� �F 1 G., o,,.+ ., o..+e,-
0 0 ° av....� ..� g. ........
i: ;� n,. ,.+o aoi; o„�;� „� �i„ o nn„ rf ,. ou��a.
!' 1 T .,�'„ .1 � + � � :4:,. ,�� ,,.,+„ .,i 40.,+„ ,,,a . oa;.,rol.
"-'v .7
• 7 1 1
f
n4oa 1�.,,�4�vn n4�� �.4 4ti.o s� oa v�ro�.m+rnn� r��n4
Ordinance No. 10 - Page 5 of 9
._ _
. � . - - - - �
_ �� - -
� , - - -
.
• - - - -
- - �� -
- - - .. --
. -
! -
_ �
i � � � '
� _ •� - -
Ordinance No. 10 - Page 6 of 9
!'\ A.a.7'+' i ' �' t' e .-0.7 ..t �l,o .7;�..,-o+;.�,. �Ft1�o �7:,-0�+.,.-.,f',....v.,v.,,,
. ... ... .................�
`lo ol,� .,� �
�
�
Section 5. FWRC 19.15.040 is hereby amended to read as follows:
19.15.040 Development application submittal requirements.
All useprocess I, II, III and N applications �etee�s '�� '� ° °��'°+°�`°''„�+'^~ +^''° ""`�°"'
*� �-,��*��� � ���*� � r�:��*;�� ��� ��°� � must at the minimum provide the
information contained within City of Federal Wav Department of Community Development
Services Bulletin #053 Development Requirements for Process I, Bulletin #054, Development
Requirements,for Process II or Bulletin #001 Development Reguirements Handout for Process
III or IV depending on the particular Use Process being applied for. The submittal requirements
are not intended to determine if an application conforms to city of Federal Way codes. They are
used only to determine if all required materials have been submitted. A code-related review will
occur after a complete application has been submitted. The director may waive any sections
determined to be not reasonably necessary.
i�� n,..,t;,,.,+;,,r � o.. ., ..o� �„+ :.. +t,o .,a„r�oa_ f o,.,.a:.,.,., o
I1V�.
�Z� ��v��r ��iiv��or���ir�R r���+ `+v �iv�r' ��iirhr � Av�c_ o��v�
rnuF,.
> >
irrt�� " �crrrrr.rl'��iD!'' !''.,,..�..�,,,,�.;+-.. Tlo�,�.,-. (�!,,;.aol;.��_
� •
/'71 T...,� ,. „F,.,.,-.-o,�.+ �;�lo ,- ..,-* 4:.,- �„1.:0�.4 ,�,�-
'� 1 1',�.;,-....-.. �7,-..;,�..,,.o .,.,..] ...�.,,7;,-... ..1.,.. .. ,�.4 4� T�'\x7D!'' 1 � i�n nnn
> e .,........ .., � . . � � �. . � . . ...., .., . .. �
• • � f
r.�nv.�. . n.�n�.�o nf 41.o ao.�.n.-M.�ov.�
�
) f
,.io „c,,.,o ; ,.�. ,. �,� �n � o�
�� Tc�+i. ,a i + i�. .,i„o ,.� e�c nnn „ o.,�o,- �t,o �;*a �,,,..,o„ �;+e ,.i,.r
-� . �..� ...� . �...1........� 1.....i...�..,..... ,......, .. .......� ..� w .. �....., ..`� b ' ».�. � ___ ...._ ..�- ' -> > --- r
> > >
� v > > >
. �
i,.,,a� ...i„ „� �.o 0 oa �.. �z�„��.;r,.+„ c���o i; o oa i.,ra�� °�.�::.�.�+.
., � ,...,,, ,.,. r.... . ., .. ,. r � ,.,,r ,,,.
��r ��
--- r ---- = ----=- -= r -.+ -- � � - - ----- - u �
� v �
�l.o ;�o .,1.,
(1(1\ �" L.+ 4'�b. lo+ ,a o.7 .,,] ,7..�el1 C�DA ..1,o�L1�
> > ......,�..., �.
Ordinance No. 10 - Page 7 of 9
.. _
- � -
_ �• - -
• - - - -
•. .
� - - - - - - - -
._
- _ ..�
�- „ ��� -
�_ _ _ •��
■ „
.
y
Section 6. 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 ardinance, or the validity of its application to any other persons or circumstances.
Section 7. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this ordinance are authorized to make
necessary corrections to this ardinance including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener/clerical
errors, references, ordinance numbering, section/subsection numbers and any references thereto.
Section 8. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this
ardinance is hereby ratified and affirmed.
Section 9. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective five (5) days after passage and
publication as provided by law.
Ordinance No. 10 - Page 8 of 9
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this day of
20
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MAYOR, LINDA KOCHMAR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK, CAROL MCNEILLY, CMC
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY, PATRICIA A. RICHARDSON
FILED WITH THE CTTY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTNE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.:
Ordinance No. 10 - Page 9 of 9
City Council Agenda Bill
Attachment #2:
Staff Report to the Planning Commission:
Amendments to FWRC Chapter 18 Subdivisions, and Chapter 19
regarding submittal requirements for plats and commercial projects.
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
�
C1TY OF �
Federa! U1lay
STAFF REPORT TO THE PLANI�iING COMMISSION
Planning Commission Meeting of August 25, 2010
Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18 — Subdivisions,
Chapter 19.15.040 — Devetopment Application Submitta! Requirements,
Chapter 19.15.045 — Completeness ofApplieations, and
Chapter 19.15.030 — Review Processes for improvements and additions to developed sites.
SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR PLATS AND COMMERCIAL PROJECTS
Federat Way File No. 10-10213Z-00-UP
Report prepared by Senior Ptanner Deb Barker
I. PURPOSE OF AMEI�TDMENT
As part of the 2010 Planning Commission Work Program, City sta.ff proposes amendments to the
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) to address issues identified by the City Council and the City's
Stakeholder Group. At this time, staff is proposing to clarify which projects are subject to
comp(eteness standards, and is further proposing that the submittal requirements for plats and
commercial projects be standardized, to the extent possible, in order to assist developers in the
application process, to ensure consistency in project comp(eteness, and to provide data necessary for
the annual Buildable Lands l�eports required by King County. One housekeeping amendment is also
proposed.
II. BACKGRUUND
The City of Federal Way Stakeholder Group has conducted annua.( meetings to review City codes
and procedures since 2006. One concern was that plat applications are too deta.iled and require too
much information too early in the process. Staff has reviewed the requirements for various projects
and found that for the most part, submittal items currently requested are needed in order to review
plat app(ications, but some discretion can be applied to initial submittal requirements that are
currently listed in the FWRC. Staff also identified the need to clarify language regazding
comp(eteness standazds for Process I, II, III, and N land nse review processes. A housekeeping
amendment is also pmposed.
III. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CODE AMENDMEIYTS
To effectively communicate the submittal requirements and clarify the objectives for review, staff
proposes to relocate submittal requirements from the FWRC into standardized submittal requirement
checklists and/or technica! handouts (see attached exhibits)_ Standardizing submittal requi�ements
checklists and technical handouts will make the submittat process more straight forward for the
applicant when preparing an application, and will support their ability to submit a complete
application. [n this time of changing technoiogy, some rypical requirements become outdated. A
checklist allows customization and provides flexibi(ity as technology evotves. In addition to the
standardized submittal requirements, this code amendment clarifies that Use Process t, [I, III, and N
are subject to completeness review. The following is a summary of the proposed amendments:
(a) Short Subdivuions — Chapter 18.30.030 Content and form of application
FWRC 18.30.030 (ists the standards for the application for a short plat. This tanguage is also
used for applications for binding site plans. EWRC 1830.030(2) lists thirty separate items that
must be depicted on a submitted short p(at drawing or submitted with the formal app(ication.
The purpose of this amendment is to eliminate this section and replace it with language that
cefers to the checklist that is maintained by City staff. See EzhibitA — FWRC l8.30_030
Content and form of application and F.�chibit B— Bulletin #101, Short Subdivision.
(b) Preliminary Plai — Chapter 18.3�. 020 Content and form of application
FWRC 1835.0201ists the standards for a preliminary p(at application. FWRC 1835.020(2)
lists over thirty separate items that must be depicted on submitted dra.wings or inc(uded with the
formal apptication. The purpose of this amendment is to eliminate this section and replace it
with language that refers to the checklist that is maintained 6y staff. See Exhibit C— FWRC
18.35.020 Cvntent cmd form of application and Exhibit Q— Bulletin #037, Preliminary Plat
Subrrcittal Requirements.
(c) Permits and Review Processes — Chapter 19.1 S. D40 Development App[ication Submitta[
Requirements
FWRC 19.15_040 tists the standards for a cocnmercia( project application which require a
detecmination of completeness. FWRC 19_ 1�.040 lists over thirty separate items that must be
depicted on submitted drawings or provided with the application, but does not clarify which
applications are subject to compieteness review. The purpose of this amendment is to ctarify
that Process I, Q, QI and IV projects are subject to compteteness review. The amendment also
eliminates the list of submittal requirements and reptaces it with Language that refers to
checklists that are maintained by City staff. See Exhibit E— FWRC 19. I.i.040 Development
Application Submittal Requirements, Exhibit F— Bulletin #OS3, Development Requirements for
Process I, Exhibit G— Bulletin #0.54, Development Requirements for Process II, and Exhibit
H— Bulletin #001, Development Requirements for Process III or Il!
(� Permits and Review Processes — Chapter 19.15.045 Completeness of Applicatioru
FWRC t9.15.045 identifies the timing and steps that the city must take when an application is
determined to be complete. Although state regulations. dictate notice of complete application for
specific procedural actions, the current code does not distinguish how different land use
processes are treated with respect to completeness. The purpose of this amendment is to clarify
that Process I, II, QI, and N land use processes are subject to completeness standards.
In addition, this amendment is intended to clarify compteteness review procedures_ Use Process
I and Process II receive expedited completeness review at the time of application intake and the
Planning Co��iou Staff Repat
K:�2009 Code AmendmentslSubmival requirements�Staff ceport\Curreat statFrepoR with exhibitslSTAFF REPORT current with housekeeping unendmen�doc Page 2
applicant is provided with a"notice of completeness" at intake. However, Process III and [V
applications ceceive completeness review during Devetopment Review Committee (DRC)
deliberations that are scheduled within 28 days of receipt of the application. The applicant is
mailed a letter oPcompleteness following DRC review. See Exhibit I— FWRC 19.15.045
Completeness of Applications_
(e) Permits and Review Processes — Chapter FWRC 19.15.030(1){� Review Processes for
improvements and additions to developed sites
A housekeeping amendment is being proposed to replace the term "sensitive" areas with the
term "critical" areas and eliminate references to the term "significant tree." The term
"sensitive" area was changed to "criticat" area in a 2004 code amendment. The term "sensitive"
area currently found in FWRC 19.15.030(1)(� was not changed as part of that 2004 code
amendment; this amendment corrects that oversight. Also, the term "significant tree" was
eliminated as a result of the 2009 code amendment for "Clearing, Grading and Tree and
Yegetation Retention. " The proposed change e(iminates this term from FWRC 19.15.030(1)(�
as it is no tonger used in the FWRC. See Exhibit J— FWRC 191.i, 030 Review processes for
inzprovements and additions to developed sites.
IV. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY
TUe Project is proceduratly exempt from State Environmental Po[icy Act (SEPA) review under
WAC t97-1 i-800(19) (Procedural Actions). Public Notice of the August 4, 2010, public hearing
was published and posted on July L 7, 2010, in accordance with the City's procedural requirements.
There were na public comments_
V. DECISIONAL CRITERIA
FWRC 19.80.130 provides criteria for zoning text amendments. The foltowing section analyzes the
comptiance of the proposed zoaing text amendments with the criteria provided by FWRC i9.80.130.
The City may amend the text of the FWRC only if it finds that:
1. The proposed amendments are coosistent with the applieable provisions of the
comprehensive plan.
The proposed FWRC zoning text amendments are consistent with the following goals and
poticies contained in the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan �FWCP):
LUG2 Deveiop an efficient and timely development review pmcess based on a public/private
partnership.
LUP4 M�imize efficiency of the development review process.
EDPI� The City will continue to implement a streamlined permitting process consistent with
state and federal cegulations to reduce the upfront costs of locating businesses in �e
City.
EDP18 The City will periodically monitor local and regional trends to be able to adjust plans,
policies, and programs.
HP9 Maximize efficiency in the City's development review process and ensure that
unnecessary time delays and expenses are eliminated. Continue to provide streamlined
permitting processes for development that is consistent with the FWCP and FWCC,
and that has no adverse impacts.
Ptaaning Commission Staff Rep«t
[C�2009 Code AmeadmentsLSubmittal requiremeotslStaff repoR\Cwrent staff re�wR with exfubitslSTAFF REPORI' cucrent wit6 housekaping ameodmentdoc Paga 3
HPIO Encourage community input, where appropriate, into the development permit process
by providing thorough and timely information to the public.
HP11 Continue to assist deve(opers with housing proposais at the earliest possible
opportunity, including preapplication meetings, to produce projects that can be
reviewed quickly and maximize their ability to receive permits.
2. The proposed amendment bears a substantiat retationship to public health, safety, or
welfare.
The proposed FWRC text amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public
hea(th, safety, or welfare because it standardizes development regulations to provide
ctarity about what constitutes a comptete application; defines completeness e(igibility;
and refines various retated codes in order to increase the eff'iciency of the development
revtew process.
3. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of t6e residents of the City.
Approval of the proposed code amendment would benefit the City as a whole as it provides
c(arity about what constitutes a complete application, which resutts in continued development
within the City, thus aiding the tocal economy and the housing market.
VI. PLANNING COMMISSLOIY REVIEW AND ACTIOIY
Pursuant to EWRC 19.80.050(b}, the City CounciE may review City-initiated changes to the text of
the zoning code from time to time at the Council's discretion. The Ptanning Commission is being
asked to review the proposed changes to the zoning code and forward a recommendation to the City
CounciL Chapter 19.80 FWRC, "Process VI Review," establishes a process and criteria for zoning
code text amendments_ Consistent with Process VI review, the role of the Planning Commission is to
review and evaluate the zoning code text regarding any proposed amendments; to determine whether
the proposed zoning code text amendment meets the criteria provided by FWR.0 19.80. L30; and to
forward a recommendation to City Council regarding adoption of the proposed zoning code text
amendment. Consistent with the provisions of FWRC 19.80.240, the Pianning Commission may take
the following actions regarding the proposed zoning code text amendments:
1. Recommend to City Council adoption of the FWRC text amendments as proposed;
2. Modify the proposed EWRC text amendments and recommend to City Council adoption of
the FWRC text amendments as modified;
3. Recommend to City Council thax the proposed FWRC text amendments not be adopted; or
4. Forward the proposed FWRC text amendments to City Counci( without a recommendation.
VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATIOIY
Based on the above staff analysis and decisiona( criteria, staff recommends that the fol(owing
amendments to FWRC Title 18 Subdivisions, and to Chapter 19.15 FWRC Permits and Review
Processes as outlined in Section III above be recommended for approval to the Ciry Council.
1. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit A, to FWRC 18.30.030, Content and form of
application. �
2. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit C, to FWRC 1835.020, Content and form of
app(ication.
planniag Commission Staff Repoa
K12009 Code AmeodmentslSubmival requiremeotclStaff repoa\Current staff repoR with e�cMbits�STAFF REPORT cunent with housekeeping amendmentdoc Page 4
3. Amendments as set forth in E�ibit E, to FWRC 19.15A40, Development Application
Submittat Requirements.
4. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit I, to FWRC 19.15.045, Compteteness of
Applications.
5. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit J, to FWRC L9_ 15.030, Review processes �or
improvements and additions to developed sites.
EXHIBiTs
Exhibit A, FWRC L 8.30.030 Content and form of app[ication (Short subdivision)
Exhibit 8, Revised Shod Subdivisioa F-Iandout
Exhibit C, FWRC 1835_020 Content and form ojapplication (Preiiminary ptat)
Exhibit D, Itevised Prel'iminary Plat Submittal Requirements Handout
E�chibit E, FWRC t9.15.040 DevelopmentApplicationSubmittal Requirements
Exhibit F, Checklist for Development t�equirements for Process I, Director's Approval
Exhibit G, Itevised Checklist for Development Requirements for Process II, Site Plan Review
Exhibit H, ttevised Checklist for Development ltequirements, Process III (Project Approval) or
Process IV (Hearing Fxaminer Approva!)
Exhibit t, FWRC 19.15.045 Completeness of applications
Exhibit J, FWRC 19.15.030 Review processes for improvements and additiorrs to developed sites
Plaiuting Commission Staff RepoR
K�2009 Code Amendments\Submitial requirem�tslStaff repat\Cutrent staff repoR with exhbits�.STAFF REPORT curteot with housekeepi�g amendmentdoc Page i
EXHIBIT A
PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18.30, "Short Subdivisions"
18.30.030 "Content and form of application"
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
Exhibit A
18.30.030 Contenf and form of application.
All short subdivision applications must at the minimum provide the information
contained within Butletin #010 Short Subdivision Submittal Requirements. The
submittal requirements are not intended to determine if an application conforms
to citv of Federal Wav codes They are used only to determine if all requi�ed
materials have been submitted A code related review will oecuc after a complete
a�plication has been submitted The director mav waive any sections determined
to be not reasonably necessarY.
�I�e-a�p�+satiep-
�r.+���r� 1�� .+ n le� �f n»o ir�nL� ror�re er�� C.(� fo�} �r I'+ri+er �a�'1 �h.,� �I.�I ho
���..� _" _"_. "'_" ' _r _-__-__ _ _ - - v -
ivu�v
f f t
�T�� ' .
i + '
t � �
l 1 �
/ 1 '
� � t f
I � 1
���
1 1 �
"Ciria�T ."..nr1 \/one}�fivn �e�on4:�n
.. . � .��.�
> > �
. �
- - - - � - - -
.
.
.
. _
.
.
��-.-.«<-�o.o.� .�,:.-�-�.,..=,:.�� :.�� ..._ a.��-.=��. e.:�::...:�.e.�,:.�...:.
� rQi�°"��:
���,�� n rr� r� � �� n n � n ���. � G9�e�Ld C-k1eC-k����r
��hc�r re�n� �ire�I or�virr+nmer�}�.I rinni �mon}�+}i�n
(�±t�\ TF��e� I��he.�l h.. fhe '.i}�t T4�� �.��i���•+ll n��G�LQ
�....� ... r� ...�
��nlo�� i� i� ���.�mnnr�i�.-1 hv �ho ra�r� �oc���r! foo
vv •� �v wvw• �Mu� ��vM ur �� �V � laL'lAtaJGtaY
(Ord. No. 09-610, § 3(Exh. A), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(2)), 5-15-07;
Ord. No. 97-291, § 3, 4-1-97; Ord. No. 90-41, § 1(16.150.10 —16.150.30), 2-27-
90. Code 2001 § 20-83.)
K12009 Code AmendmentslSubmittal requiremenulSraf}'reportlCurrent staf}'rcpoa with tcf�ibits�Exhibrts � B, C, D1�hibic A 18.30 short plaz.doc Page 2
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT TO PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18.30, "Short Subdivisions"
Bulletin O10 - Short Subdivision
(City File No. 10-102132-00-IJP)
CITY O� '� �
Fe�eral 1l11a�
DEPART�[EYT OE COMMUNTtY DEVELOPMEPIT SERVICES
3332� 8`� Avenue South�
PO Box 97 l8
Eederal Way WA 98063-971$
2�3-83�-2607;Fax 2�3-835-3609
www.c itvo ffedera(way. co m
SHORT SUBDIVISION
PURPOSE
A short subdivision {i.e., short plat) is the division or re-division of land into nine or fewer lots for the
purpose of sate, lease, oc transfer of ownership. A short subdivision may be a conventional or cluster
subdivision, cottage housing, zero-lot (ine townhouse development, or small lot detached development of
nine or fewer lots, as welt as a binding site p(an_ A short subdivision must be approved and recorded
before newly created lots may be legally sold.
HOW TO APPLY
The applicant (owner or owner's appointed agent} files a complete app(ication with the Department of
Community Development Services using the Master Land Use Application form available at the
department (and on our website, ww�v.cityoffederalway.com). The applicant also provides any information
or material as specified in the provisions of the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) describing the
decision applied for and any additional information or material that the�director determines is reasonab(y
necessary for a decision on the matter. Please refer to the following "Submittal Requirements" section to
determine the materials that must be submitted to complete your application for a short subdivision.
PREAPPUCAflON CONFERENCE
?tpplicants are encouraged to schedule a preapplication conference to become familiar with FWRC
requirements, poticies, and regulations_ [t is also an opportunity to coordinate with City departments and
obtain their comments on the proposed subdivision_ Refer to the City's preapp(ication conference handout
for information on preapplication conferences_
WHO MAKES THE DECiSION
The director will malce the decision on the short subdivision. The application is processed under the
provisions of Chapter 18.30 FWRC, "Short Subdivision Plats." Your application will be evaluated on the
basis of the information you provide, the criteria listed in the pertinent sections of the City's regulations,
and inspecrion ofthe property_ Short subdivisions shali be designed to the standards of FWRC 18.55.010
through 080, and 18_60.030 through 120. Upon determining that the short subdivision application is
complete, the director (or his/her designee) shalt distribute a notice of comptete application.
COMPLIANCE WITH SEPA
Short subdivisions aze usually exempt from the Washington Sta.te Environmentat Policy Act (SEPA).
EIowever, a SEPA checklist and corresponding fee wiil be required if any of the following is associated
with the short subdivision: 1) the site is subject to critical azea review; 2) the short subdivision requires
stormwater, sewer, or water lines larger than eight inches in diameter, 3) the short subdivision occurs on
K�2009 Cade Ama`dma�cdSubmitW requv�eatslSnff reportlCurtent snff teport wi[h exlubiu�Exhibits � B. C. D1Ex6bit B- Bulleun Oi0 Short Sub&viaoadoc Page 1
land covered by water; or 4) the short subdivision is a further subdivision of a previous(y exempted short
subdivision. The director will determine the scope of the environmental review required by the app(ication
in order to comply with SEPA. For a detailed exp(anation of the City's environmenta( policy, refer to
FWRC Titte 14_
CRITICAL AREAS
Projects that involve work within critica( areas (e.g., wetlands, streams, steep s[opes, and lakes) may
require that the City contract out for expert technical assistance. Pursuant to FWRC 19.150.030, the
applicant is responsible for providing any information, mapping, studies, and materiats, and for paying for
inspections or review by a qualified professional acceptabte to the City. You witt be advised at an early
point in the process ifyouc project will be subject to these types of expenses.
SHORELINES
Short subdivision that are within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of Puget Sound, Steel Lake,
North Lake, or Lake Kitarney require review under the city's Shoreline Master Program. Applicants should
speak with department staff for further information regarding shoreline regu(ations prior to submitting a
formal appiicarion.
TRAFFIC-RELATED RfQUIREMENTS
All short subdivisions are subject to transportation concunency and Traffic Impact Fee requirements. Refer
to Concurrency Application Information and Tr�c Impact Fee handouts for additional information.
APPEALS
Any decision issued by the director can be appealed. The City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner decides
appeals of shoct subdivision decisions after a pub(ic hearing. See EWRC t 8.30.140, et seq. for detailed
info�nation regarding appeals of short subdivision decisions.
RECORDING
The City records atl approved short subdivisions with the King County Division of Records and Elections.
A copy of the documents (referred to as a short piat), stamped with the recording number, is then
distributed to the applicant, file, and King County Department of Assessments. Ali fees for such recording
must be paid by the applicant before recording.
Butletin #O10 —lune 7, 2010 Page 2 of � klHandouts�Short Subdivision
SHORT SUBDIVISION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
A complete apptication is required before the City can proceed with technicai analysis and make an
informed decision on your application. Following is a list of materials that mast be submitted with your
applicarion. Please do not turn in your app(ication untii att items on the list that appiy to your proposal
have been utcluded. Consult with the Deparlment of Community Development Secvices if you have a
question_ At[ application materia(s become public information.
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
tt ired Submitted
>;' A_ Completed Master Land Use Application form inctuding signature of persons with
�; t Q:� : ownerstup interest in the property_ Agent authorization is required if applicarion is not
� 5._
`` }=� �� '� �::` si ed b owners of all sub'ect arcels.
~� � � �;��� -� B. All application fees
-��-,...<:� �� � -
� �' ` C. Two copies of a computation sheet (with surveyor's seal) that provides the square footage
� �z ; �'x �r ;.
� k�� �,�� � of all streets, individua! lots and tracis, and total azea contained within the subject parcels,
���,_: � ������'-;': i.e. lot dosure calculations.
'�'£``� :�� P P J P P nY, P P Y g
x�`�,�� �-�� ���` '; D. Two co ies of a ritle re ort for the sub�ect ro e re aced within 90 da s, includin
- , �,� d �
any easements or reshictions affecting the properties with a description, purpose, and
��� �� �_� reference by auditor's fcle number and(or recording number; parties of interest; and any
�<
.��� ,.�� �.��.�',x..� ;::;; restrictions or covenanks runnin with the ro e
{¢'�"� ��` �}� = E. A copy of the current county quarter section map for the area. (These maps can be found at
�= :,s '
� _ - _- � metirokc. ov.
r�.` � _ �� -'' F. Vicinity map on separate 8%2 x 11 sheet
��,
`"�' ° : G. Two copies of certificate of water availabitity, signed within a year of the date of
�� `' =� I a lication onl re uired for vacant ro erty).
�- ���. E-I. One copy of certificate of sewer availability, si�ed within a year of the date of
�. ��� `'=' application, unless the site is to be served by an on-site septic system. One copy of the
_ Seattle-King County Health Department approvat of the proposed subdivision is required,
- if the ro'ect is to be served b on-site se tic s stem
x � I. Site photographs from each compass point (north, east, south, & west) referenced
�� �
� S on the site lan
�'i �° :� � � v ;` J. Two copies of prelun�nary engineering drawing showing the tocation and size of atl
C�� `= �;`. ditches, culverts, catchbasins, and other parts of the design for the control of surface water
- - draina e. T'his is a se arate sheet &om the short iat ma .)
�' '` ' -: = K. Two copies of a preliminary ciearing and grading and tree/vegetatioa retention plans_
E� ` Q consistent with Chapter 19.120.040 FWRC, Clearing, Grading and Tree and Vegetation
_ ,_
- Retention_
��� � F ,�,�� �� Y L_ Two copies of a preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR), if required per the
;,�' �� :�. _�'� .,__..:;::. Kin Coun S aee Water Desi n Manua! KCSWDM}.
`�'� `� �'� � M. Additional information as required by the Community Development Services and/or Pubtic
.�-
� �'� � t '���;"= Works De aztrnents.
--� ���' �,�a ��� :_ N. Seven Cull size prints of the proposed short plat as specified be[ow as well as one copy of
_ �� ;:�� �� 8-1/2 by l 1 inch paper_ Oae set of reproducible mylac drawings will be required after the
� �� - short lat is a roved, rior to si in� and recordina.
Bulletin #0 t0 —June 7, 2010 Page 3 of 5 k:�ElandoutslShoR Subdivision
SEVEN COPIES OF FUII SIZE PLANS (ASSEMBLED IN SETS AND FOLDED TO 9 X 12'�)
The drawing sha(( be 18" x 24"in size, drawn to a scate of 1"=50' or larger on the City's standard short plat
title b(ock form, and must comply with the provisions of RCW 58_09 and WAC 332-130. T'he drawing
shall include, but is not (imited to, the foltowing information:
l. Proposed name of the short subdivision. (You
may wish to check with the City to make sure the
name of the short plat has not been taken yet.)
2_ Location by section, township, ranDe, and/or
other legal description.
3_ Name, address, and phone number of developer.
4. Name, address, and phone number of each
property owner.
5_ Name, address, and phone number of reDistered
land surveyor.
6. Scale of drawing, north acrow, and date
(subsequent resubmitta(s must have a revision
date).
7. Existing topography of the land indicated 6y
contours of two foot intervals for stopes iess
thau 15 percent and five foot iatervals for slopes
of IS percent or greater. Vertical Datum
(NVGD-29 or KCAS).
8. Location and extent of significant naturai
featiues on and icnmediately adjaceat to the site_
Such features shall include but aze not timited to
streams, wetlands, views, stands of trees, and
water bodies to the extent that significant natural
features and/or their associated buffers affect the
short subdivisioa
9. Comprehensive plan and zoning classification of
the proposed short subdivision site and adjoining
properties.
10. Adjacent ownerships and the land or lot divisions
of adjoining properties not in common
ownership for a distance of at Ieast 100 feet
around the perimeter of the property proposed
for subdivision. A separate list of names may be
used for clarification purposes_
1 i. Locatioa, widths, and names of eacisting or prior
streets, railroad, or utility rights-of-way or
easements, access easements, pazks and other
pubtic spaces, and existing permanent structures
to be retained within and adjacent to the
proposed short subdivision_ Where the property
has been previously subdivided, the original lots,
blocks, streets, easements, etc., shall be shown
by dotted lictes. Show distance between existing
structures to be retained and property lines._
(Show pavement widths, planter strips,
sidewaiks, utility poles, etc.)
i2. Existing and conceptualty proposed water, sewer,
and drainage faciliries on, uader, oc over the
land showing size, �ades, and locations.
13. Location and widths, and names oP proposed
streets, utility right-of-ways, and easements.
t4. Layout, number, (ot sizes, and dimensions of
proposed lots. Include the square footage of each
(ot.
1�_ Parcels of tand intended to be dedicated for public
use, or reserved for use of owners of the property in
the short subdivisioa
16_ A statement explaining how open space shall be
provided. Eor a conventiona( shoR subdivision,
open space in the amount of t� percent of the �oss
land area of the subdivision site is required to be
provided if the City determines that the location,
quality, or extent of the required open space would
not fulfill the intent or purpose of useful common
open space, a payment of an equivalent fee-in-lieu
of the requ'ued project open space shall be paid
pursuant to FWRC 18.5�_060(2),
17. Total acreage of the site platted, prior to creation of
any tots, tracts, or other dedications.
18. Acreage prec[uded from development due to the
presence of criticai areas, including: wettands,
streams, steep slopes, and otfier features (atong with
buffers), broken out by category, covered by critical
areas re?ulations_
l9. Acreage dedicated Eor public rights-of-way (for both
new(y created streets and expansions of existing
streets), as wet! as private tracts, alleys, and in�
e�ess and utilities easement created for the purpose
of providing access to lots within subdivisions.
20. Location and acreage of tracts (or other areas)
dedicated for retentioo/detention/drainage facilities,
open space and parks, or other on-site public
facilities, broken out by category.
2l_ Calculation of net plat azea, which is �oss p(at area
minus critical areas, righks-of way, private open
space, and public pucpose lands_'
22. Building setback tines.
23. Typical roadway sections including streetli�ts and
street trees (existic� and proposed).
24. Vicinity map with labe(ed streets and north arrow.
25_ Basis of bearing, statement of equipment and
procedures used, indicatioa of perimeter boundary,
lot, and right-of-way lines with a notation of
bearings or azimuth from the nocth, distances, aad
curve data, as wel! as the location and description of
all monuments, both Eound and set_
� Open space requitemertts for cottage housing, zero-lot tine town house
devetopment, and sma(l lot detached developmeat can be foand in
FWRC L8.�5.060.
= Public pu�pose lands mean acreage of tracts (or other areas) dedicated
for retention/detentioa/ drainage facilities, open space and puks, or
otheron-site public facilities.
BuUetin #010 August 18, 2010 Page 4 of 5 k:�F{andoutslShoR Subdivision
26. Statement oEequipment and procedures used_
27. Existina addresses, if app(icable.
28. Indication of perimeter bouudary, lot, and right-
o� way tines with a notation of bearings or
azimuth &om the nocth, distances, and curve
data.
29_ Location and description of all monuments, both
found and set
30_ The City's fi(e numbec will be assigned upon
application. Inciude the file number on subsequent
resubmittals_
Bulletin #0 (0 —August 18, 20 t0 Page � of � k_�I IandoutslShort Subdivision
EXHIBIT C
PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18.35, "Preliminary Plat"
18.35.020 "Content and form of application"
(Ciry File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
Exhibit C
18.35.020 Content and form of application.
All prelimi�ary plat applications must at the minimum provide the
information contained within Bulletin #037. Preliminarv Plat Submittal
Re4uirements. The submittat requirements are not intended to determine if an
aqplication conforms to city of Federal VVay codes. They are used only to
deteRnined if all reuuired materials have been submitted. A code related review
wili occur after a com�lete application has been submitted. The director may
waive any sections determined to be not �easonablv necessaN.
_rer+re+ner��arl in f�e nr�r��i...�Fii+n
r �
1�h�1� i� i�. .� }r��e �n� i+�rrer� rer�rac�nr���}i�n �f �f�o I.+r�rl� .+ni�r�.���� e���nr��ierl
cr .
� � �
�ennrir+�inn
� f •
r � •
/v\ Al.+mo nrlrlroc�� .�nr) n{��r�o n� �mhar �F ronic�l�ore�rl I�niJ c� �n�a�tnr_
r r -
� (�ii\ Cn�la nf r�l�� i-ln�� �ni-) n�r�h r�.�i.-�L
i � •
/�iiii\ /��.+� �r�}o �olinor.ii�n �f ��von �Inna� A!1 nernent i�r r�ra��ar
l�T.'T��"�'cc' '
� � a r
,..C1C(�::rv�ir� n��} .
�+. v
�+�'.S'��.7�'.�C�Tri7tt�bttd'�t°�-� r�Ain.-� �ni-1 Troa oncl
> > i
�I\/ene�.�Fi�n Delenfir�n
� - -
- - �� --
��--- - -- - - --
� - - - - - -
.
• - -
� - - - - - - - - - - - -
� - - - -
� - - - -
. ._ - - _ -
� - - - -
� - - - - - - -
�. -
- - - - !� --
K�2009 Code Ame�meocslSubmittal requvemencs�Staff roport\Currart staff rcport with ez6ibits�Exl+ibits � 8. C. D1Fxhibit C- I6.3i.020 Preliminary Pla �bmitnl ceq.doc
��
i
r�oc�nrihorl in n�ihe�on�ir+n /`21/n\ �f+l-�ic canFi�n
.............. ... ...,......�..,..,.. �—i� -- ----- °°°—°°-°
�
. �
.
0
f
(Ord. No. 09-610, § 3(Exh. A), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(2)), 5-15-07;
Ord. No_ 98-309, § 3, 1-6-98; Ord_ No. 97-291, § 3, 4-1-97; Ord. No. 90-41,
§ 1(1fi.50), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 20-111.)
K:�2009 Code AmendmattslSubmittal �aNitementslStafF�epo�t\Cutrmt staff apoct with exhibitc�Exhibits .� B. C, D�fxhibit C- 1835.020 Preliminary Pla �brtirtd «q.doo
EXHIBIT D
EXHIBIT TO PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18.35, "Preliminary Plat":
Bulletin #037 - Preliminary Plat Submittal Requirements
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
This page has been intentionally left blank.
�
CITY OF �
��dera� Uilay
DEPaILT�[EIVTOECOhL�[UYfi'Y DEVELOPbiE�IT
SERVICES
3332� 8 Avenue South
PO Box 97 ( 8
Eedera! Way WA 98063-9718
253-835-2607;Fax 2�3-83�-2609
www.citvoffederaiwaYcom
Preliminary Ptat Submittal Requirements
PURPOSE
A preliminary piat apptication allows the division or re-division of land into ten or more lots for the
pucpose of saie, lease, or transfer of ownership. A preliminary plat may be a conventional or cluster
subdivision, cottage housing, zero-lot line townhouse development, or small tot detached development of
ten or more lats. A final p(at must be approved and recorded before newly created lots may be legally sold.
(Refer to Final P1ats Submittal Requirements handout for information on final plats.)
HOW TO APPLY
The applicant (owner or owner's appointed agent) files a complete application with the Department of
Cocninunity Development Services using the Master Land Use Appticaxion form available at the
department {and on our website, www.cityoffederalway.com). The applicant also provides any information
or material as specified in the provisions ofthe Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) describing the
decision applied for and any additional information or materia( that the directoc determines is reasonably
necessary for a decision on the matter. Please refer to the following "Submittal Requirements" section to
determine the materials that must be submitted to be considered a complete preleminary ptat application.
PREAPPUCATION CONFERENCE
Applicants are required to schedule a preapplication conference to become familiaz with FWRC
requirements, policies, and regulations. It is also an opportunity to coordinate with City departments and
obtain their comments on the proposed subdivision. Refec to the City's preapplicatioa conference handout
for information on preapplication confe�nces_
WHO MAKES l'HE DECISION
The City Council makes the decision on the preliminary plat based on a recommendation from the I-�earing
Examiner, who holds the pu6lic hearing. The preliminary plat apptication is processed under the provisions
of Chapter 18.3� FWRC, "Preliminary Plat" Your application will be evaluated on the basis of the
information you provide, the criteria (isted in the pertinent sections of the City's regutations, and inspection
of the property. Preliminary plats shall be designed to the standards of FWRC 18SSA10 to 080, and
18_60.030 to 120.
COMPUANCE W1TH SEPA '
Pretiminary plats are subject to the Washington State Bnvironmental Po(icy Act (SEPA}. Foc a detailed
explanation of the City's environmental policy, refer to FWKC Title 14.
CRITICAL AREAS
Projects that involve work within critical areas (e.g., wettands, streams, steep slopes, and lakes) may
require that the City coniract aut for expert technical assistance. Pursuant to FWRC 14_150.030, the
appticant is responsible for providing any inforcnaxion, mapping, studies, and materiaLs, and for paying for
inspections or review by a qualified professioc�al acceptable to the City. You will be advised at the eazliest
possibie point if your project will be subject to these types of expenses.
SHORELINES
Subdivision that are within 200 feet of �te ordinary high water mark of Puget Sound, Steel Lake, North
Lake, or Lake Kilarney require review under the city's Shoreline Master Program. Applicants should speak
with deparh�ient staff for further information regarding shoreline regulations prior to submitting a formal
application.
K�2009 Code AmrndmentslSuban[tal requvaneatclStsft'rryoct�Curtat sta$'report with afiibitslFxMbits e� B. C. D�Exhbit D- Bulletin 03l P�dimioacy Placdac
TRAFfIC RELATED REQUIREMENTS
All preliminary plats are subject to transportation concurrency and Traffic Impact Fee requirements. Refer
to the concurrency information and Traffic Impact Fee handouts for additional information.
APPEALS
Any decision on a preliminary p(at can be appealed to King County Superior Court. See FWRC 1835210,
for detailed information regarding appeals of preliminary plat decisions.
PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
A complete application is required before the City can proceed with technical analysis and make a
recommendation to the Hearing Examiner on your application. All checked items must be submitted to
constitute a complete application. Please note that a comptete application does not imply compliance or
conformance with applicable codes. Please do not turn in your application until all items on the list that
apply to your proposal have been included. Consult with the Department of Communiiy Development
Services if you have a question. All application materials become public information.
PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
Required Submitted
i
!
■
■
.� :
:a
E. One 11 x 17 reduced copy of the preliminary plat map.
F. Notice of availability from the purveyor(s) of sewer and water signed within a year of the
date of preliminary plat application.
�. �� Q. �:1 �
� �■
�
Copy of the preapplication summary letter.
H. Four copies of the project's Preliminary Technical lnformation Report (TIR) per the 2009
King County Sz�rface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). The TIR mttst include a Level I
downstream analysis and must address relevance of the 8 Core and 5 Special Requirements
of the KCSWDM.
I. Four copies of critical areas sta�dies, (i.e., geotechnical study, wetland delineation, wetland
mitigation, stream delineation, classification, critical aquifer recharge and wellhead
vrotection areas inventorv. etc.)
Four copies of a School Access Analysis.
K. Four copies of special studies or requirements as requested in your preapplication
` � � �ti £� ���� � summa letter.
�� '�� �� L. Four copies of Trip Generation or Traffic lmpact Analysis (T7A), prepared by an engineer
�,�-:��, ,�'<; licensed in the State of Washin on, as re uired b the Traffic Division.
$ulletin #010 — August 18, 2010 Page 2 of 4 k:�-Iandouts\Short Subdivision
A. Completed Master Land Use Application form including signature of persons with
ownership interest in the properiy. Agent authorization is required if application is not
siQned bv owners of a(1 subiect parcels.
B. All application fees including preliminary plat and SEPA fees.
r° C. Two copies of a current title report or ptat certificate, prepared within the last 90 days,
" (including any easements or restrictions affecting the properties with a description,
� purpose, and reference by auditor's file number and/or recording number; parties of
interest; and anv restrictions or covenants runnin with the ro e.)
D. A copy of the current King County Assessor's quarter section map for the area identifying
= Q" all properties within 300 feet of the proposed subdivision. (These maps can be found at
metrokc.gov.)
���-t. "�' '� .��'' M_ Seven copies of a landscape plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect identifying
�`�, �� ``� e�cisting wooded areas, meadows, rock outcroppings, proposed and required buffers, open
_ �° _ :�_.�
�- �, spaces, street trees, omamental landscaping, other landscape features, and stands of trees
`�.,�;.°:�-� . and rotection tectini ues as ma be r uired er the FWRC.
� N. Seven copies of a pretiminary clearing and grading and treelvegetation retention plan
consistent with Chapter 19. t20.040 FWRC, C{earing, Grading and Tree and Vegetation
Retentioa
" �� O. Seven copies of a property survey in conformance with FWRC 1835_020(2), stamped by a
' _ , ticensed land surve or.
y, P. Seven copies, as applicable, of a phasing plan showing divisions of the plat and a proposed
timetable for construction oPeach division.
' Q. Seven copies of a proposed preliminary plat drawn to scale of 1" = 100' or larger (1:�0 is
preferred), which inciudes the Pretiminary Plat Drawing Requirements listed on Page � of
�-� ' - this handout.
Y R. Additional information as required by the Community Development Services and/or Pubtic
- - Works De artments_
Notice Requicements
- ` Preliminary Plat - A tist of the names and addresses of all owners of real property, as shown
by the records of the county assessors tocated within 300 feet of any portion of the boundary
of the proposed subdivision and any adjo'ming real properties owned by the owners of the laad
proposed to be subdivided. if the owner of the property which is proposed to be subdivided
_ owns adjacent property, the addresses of ownen of property located within 300 �eet of any
�'� - portion of the boundaries oEsuch adjacently located parcels must also be provided. Two sets
of stamped enveiopes with address labeis for atl owners described above.
SEPA — Provide one set of self-addressed, stamped business sized envelopes (with City of
�r,y"` � y Federa.l Way return address) of persons receiving property tax statements for all properties
F"`' within 300 feet of the boundary of the subject property. [nclude a separate list of the addresses
� �`
�� '°`�� with their pazcel numbers and an assessor's map showing the 300-foot boundary_
.. � • a �'-. -
�� - 3
- l '_ ..-. 9' � .A �,'"
� � � �"
�"'� '�� �° IMPORTANT — Please do not submit metered envelopes. The Federal Way Post
�:� - -� �.:
�;.� f . .�� Office may refuse such envelopes_ In addition, you ace highly encouraged to use the
�� � � �� � Forever stamps.
� ,-. .�,�.. �.� :
��-�.�;�.� �� ;��
Butletin #010 — August 18, 2010 Page 3 of 4 k:�EIandouts\ShoR Subdivision
PRELIMINARY PLAT DRAWING REQUIREMENTS
The preliminary plat drawin� shal( include, but is not timited to, the fottowing informarion:
l. Proposed name oPsubdivision. (You may wish to
check with King County to make sure that the
name of your plat has not yet been used.)
2. Locariou by section/cownshiplrange and legal
description.
3. Name, address, and phone number of the
developer_
4_ Name, address, and phone number of each
property owner.
5. Name, address, and phone number of registered
tand surveyor.
6. Scale of plat, date, and north arrow (subsequent
resubmittaLs must have a revision date).
7. Existing topography of the land indicated by
contours of two-foot intervals for siopes less than
1� percent and five-foot intervals for slopes of t5
percent or greater. tdentify all slopes 40 percent or
greater on or within 2� Eeet of the site.
8_ Location and extent of significant natural features
on and adjacent to the site_ Such featiues include
streams, wetlands, views, stands of trees, water
bodies, to the extent that the significant natural
feature andlor their associated buffers affect the
proposed pla�
9. Comprehensive plaa and zoning classifications of
subject and adjoining properties.
10. Adjacent common ownerships and the land or tot
divisions of adjoining properties not in common
ownership for a distance of at least 100 feet around
the perimeter of the property proposed for the
subdivision. A separate list of names may be used
for clarificarion purposes.
11_ Location, widths, and names of existing or prior
platted streets; railroad, or utility rights-of-way or
easements; parks or other public spaces; and
existing permanent structures to be retained within
and adjacent to the proposed subdivisioa Where
the property has been previously subdivided, die
ori�inat (ots, blocks, street easements, etc., shatl be
shown in dotted lines in scaie with the proposed
subdivision. Show distance between existing
structures to be retained and property lines. (Show
pavement widths, p(anter strips, sidewallcs, utitity
potes, etc.)
i2. Existing and conceptually proposed water, sewer,
and drainage urilities on, under, or over the land
showing size, grades, and tocatio�
l3_ Locations and widths of proposed streets, uti(ity
rights-of-way and easements.
14. Layout, number, and dimensions of proposed lots.
Inctude the square footage of each lot
l�. Parcets of tand intended to be dedicated forpublic
16.
17.
18_
19_
20.
21
22.
23.
24.
25_
area.
26_ List the height of all retaining walls and rockeries.
27. The City's file number witt be assigned upon
application_ Include the file number on subsequent
resubmittals.
' Open space requirements for coGage houSing, zero-lot line town
house devdopmenk and small tot derached devetopment can be found
ia FWRC 18_5�_060_
Z Public purpose lcmds meaa acreage of tracts (or other areas)
dedicated for retention/detention/drainage fac�ities, open space and
parks, or other on-site public facilities. -
use, or reserved for the use of owners of the
property in the subdivision.
Building setback lines_
The tocarion of all ditches, cutverts, catch basins,
and other parts of the design for the control of
sucface water drainage.
Typical roadway sections, existing and proposed,
inctuding streetlights and street trees.
A sta.tement explaining how open space shall be
provided. For conventional subdivisions, open
space in the amount of IS percent of the gross land
area af the subdivision site is required to be
provided. If the City determines that the location,
quality, or extent of the required oQen space would
not fulfill the intent or purpose of useful common
open space, a payment of an equivalent fee-in-lieu
of the required project open space shall be paid
pursuant to FWRC 185�.060(2).�
Total acreage of the site platted, prior to crearion
of any lots, tracts, or other dedications.
Acreage precluded &om development due to the
presence of critical areas, including: wetlands,
streams, steep slopes, and other featiues (along
with buffers), broken out by category, covered by
criricai areas rea larions.
Acreage dedicated for public rights-of-way (for
both newly created streets and expansions of
existing streets), as well as private hacts, aileys,
and ingress/egress and uritities easement created
for the purpose of providing access to lots within
subdivisions.
Location and acrea�e of tracts (or other areas)
dedicated for retention/detention/drainage
faciliries, open space and parks, or other on-site
public facilities, broken out by category.
Net ptat area, which is gross plat area minus
critica! areas, rights-of-way, private open space,
and public purpose lands.
Vicinity map with labeled streets and north arrow
showing the proposed subdivision's relation to the
Bulletin #0 t0 — August 18, 20 t0 Page 4 of 4 k:�E{andoutslShort Subdivision
EXHIBIT E
PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (F WRC) Chapter 19.15 "Permits and Review
Processes"
19.15.040 "Development application submittal requirements"
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
Exhibit E
- --- - _ _ ._-- - - ---- - - - ------ -. . __ __ . _
19.15.040 Development application submittai requirements.
All use process i. II. II1 and iV applications pfAf2�S w#i
s�r�ed must at the minimum provide the information contained within Builetin
#053, Development Requirements for Process l. Builetin #054. Development
Revuirements for Process ll or B�iletin #401 Development Requirements
Handout for Process 1l1 or lV dependinct on the pa�ticular Use Process beinq
a�plied for. The submittal requirements are not intended to determine if an
application conforms to city of Federal Way codes. They are used only to
determine if all required materials have been submitted. A code-related review
will occur after a compfete application has been submitted. The director may
waive any sections determined to be not reasonably necessary.
.�F tvr�c°Av�fAf�:
/'7\ A r�r�lii..+�i�r� foe� .+n e�e� �� �4 in ��e �+r�nr�foe� fee n�v{in�nr_�� �.
r �
�
. +�ItlC1�
}he r+r�.�ori» .�ri}b�in �ho I.�rner nre�
t "• "�.."'�
/71 T �i� r.�r�iec+ �F r� �rren+ �i�Io ror��rf f�r c�� �hion+ r�rnr�othL
r i
i
> > .
n� ��� �.�i • r�l�r�e y + e�h�� �li-1 he f�l�orl � o�7cQnr1 nno h.+lf ��s '1'1 i�,�r c I�A�±vim��m
: r ...�..�. .. ..................
n�+nFer++ .+f o�+nh ..F+ho�o r+l�ne. i� .�+v�+il�+l�le n} �he rlon�rFmcn�_
� �
.�f .srr enrrirsoarinr� nF
, +
. , � � �
. ,
, , � �
K�2009 Code.�madmmce�Submittai requirement.�Staff aport�Cufrau saffleport wich ado'biME�ddbits E. F G. H. [ aod nFxhibit E- revised l9. t5.040.doc
c�tf6�}i�26�:
., � • , -- . � "
m� t� he rof���na�rJ�ho e`iF� r+�
� . �
� µ �
1
�
Di+linv Anf ie. ron��iroe�
� '
�ct�t��:
�
/L�\ C�rc+nm rloline�+1'i�n
(Ord. No. 09-610, § 3(Exh. A), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 09-594, § 18, 1-6-09; Ord. No.
97-291, § 3, 4-1-97. Code 2001 § 22-33.) _
(C12009 Code Ame�meircs�Submittal requirements\Staff teportlCurrent staff �eport with erzhibitslExhibiu E, F G. H. 1 and J1Exhibit E- reviud 19.I5.040.doc
EXHIBIT F
EXHIBIT TO PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (F WRC) Title 19.15,
"Permits and Review Processes"
Bulletin #053 -
Development Requirements for Process I— DiYectors Approvcrl
(City File No. 10-i02132-00-UP)
i�
CiTY OF
������� ���
DEPARTMENT OF COMMtTi 1ITY DEVELOPMEN'1' SERViCES
3332� 8`� Avenue South
PO Box 97t8
Fedeca( Way WA 98063-97L8
2�3-83�-2607;Fax 2�3-83�-2609
�vevw. citvoffederatwav.com
DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR PROCESS !
Director's Approval
Project Name: _
Pro}ect Description:
Applicar�fi/Agenh
File No(s):
• This form is to be used by an applicant as a guide in determining what constitutes a complete
apptication for Process I, Directors Approval.
• All checked items must be submitted to constitute a complete appiication.
• Process I appticaxions that contain atl checked items wil( be determined complete at intake.
The applicant or agent wilt be notified immediately if an application is considered comptete.
• A complete app(ication does not impty comp(iance or conformance with app(icable codes.
��1�riPF�� �'P�.I�t��IO1� ��1"FE: _
How To APPtY
The applicant (ownec or owaer's appointed agent) must file the fo(Lowing items:
a a
❑ Q
Q �
�` �.
A. Master Land Use Application, with owner's signature
B. A detai(ed narrative description of the project, on a separate 8'/Z x 11 sheet
C. S ix (folded) copies of the site pian
D. Apptication fees
If the project invotves a new structure or changes to the exterior of an existing structure, also provide:
R uired Submitted
� ❑ E. Six (fo(ded) copies of existing and proposed building elevations
� � F. Co(or & materials indicatocs (color photos or coior boazd and materia(s sample)
[C�20Q9 Code Amendments�.Submittal rec}uirementslStaff repoR\Current staff report with exhibitslExhibits E, F G, H, t and
.i�Exhibit F- Butietin 0�3 Process I Devetopmeat Requirements_doc
WHEN USE PROCESS I IS USED
Reference to Process I is found in various p(aces in the Federal WayRevised Code (FWRC), indicating
that certain deve[opment, activities, uses, or interpretations are permitted onty if approved using Process I.
Any Process I application that is not exempt from the requirements of the State Errvironmental Policy Act
(SEPA) will be reviewed using the procedural requirements of Process CII. See FWRC Title 19, Chapter
55, for a detailed explanation of Process L
WHO MAKES THE DECISION
Under Process I, the Director of Community Deve(opment Services makes the decision based on review
and analysis of decisional criteria and the o�iciat file. See FWRC 19.55.010 for decisiona( criteria.
APPEALS
Any decision issued by the director can be appealed. AppeaLs of Process I, Director's Decision, are decided
by the City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner after a pubiic hearing. See FWRC L9.55.050 for detailed
information regarding appeals of Process I decisions.
�I � --��: �' �: ��.�.,� r . � -�- , i -� �-=�
, � �„�.` - �-�f
�����������-�.�. a����s�_��r�.�e'��a���R .� .��:�
_' Ptease ec�gsictect�is as a Norice of Completeness..
As�af' :�..�a� ;>��iis Pt T=�p�t�ho�ts dete�nEned'te 6e
compte�a �sed oc� .�G.e m�nimi�m sub�itt�� req�irerneuts -
I�e�iew �f the p�ojeet wt��- begin uga�r aPPticatlon assignmen� The Cit� of �eder�t t�Va�r �itt
�e ac��Fro� �e apigt�c�tian ugc� �e detercni�tatio�t t�iat att app[icabte rec���ements �re _
' _.-_ . . "t ..., _.� .- �. , ..��.. ... . . ... _.- ti . , rr'" �._'1J'c"�.�.�t_
Bulletin #0�3 — August t 8, 2010 Page 2 of 2 klHandoutslProcess [ Development Requirements
�v....-:a. v.wiv::uv.�.r....M .. �.........' ' ..� " '_." _'. ; J _' - ,
Itl��k'f���IQEl �;:. . - � �
EXHIBIT G
EXHIBIT TO PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19.15,
"Permits and Review Processes"
Bulletin #054:
"Development Requirements for Process II — Site Plan Review"
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
�
CiTY OF
�'e�eral V�a�
DEPART�IEYT OF COrih[UNITY DEVELOPNtENT SERVICES
3332� 8`� Avenue South
PO Box 9718
Fedecai Way WA 98063-97 ( 8
2�3-83�-2607;Fax 2�3-83�-2609
www.citvoffederalway.com
DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR PROCESS II
Project Name:
P�oject Description:
Applicant/Agen�
File No{s):
SrrE P�►N REViEw
• This form is to be used by an appticant as a guide in determining what constihrtes a complete
application for Process II, Site Plan Review.
• All checked items must be submitted to constitute a complete application.
• Process Q appticaxions that contain all checked items will be determined complete at intake_ The
applicant or agent will be notified immediately if an a.pptication is considered complete.
+ A complete application does not imp(y compliance or conformance with applicabie codes.
Process II Submittal Checklist
KVA09 Code Ammdmrnts�Submival requicemmtslSnff repoMCu¢em �aff 2poa wirh exlu'bitstExlubics � F G. H. I and 1�E�cl�ibit G- Proccss Q Developawrt Keqs poor fo�maz.doc
General Plan Standards for Process II
• Eight comptete and fo(ded sets of drawings (folded to 9 x 12 inches).
• Minimum plan sheet size shall be 24 x 36 inches_
• Plans must be drawn at an engineering scale that allows the entire plan to fit on one sheet
• Minimum scale is 1:20 unless otherwise authorized.
• All information is to be (egible.
• Plans shall be prepared by a certified professional (licensed in the state of VVashington) untess
otherwise authorized. Note: If the deve(opment �ro[�osal has a vatue of $75 OOQ or areater, the si
survey siteplan pretiminarv dra.ina�e �rading, right-of-wav olans and buitdin� elevation plans shail_
be preQared bv a certified vrofessional licensed in the state of Washin�ton The su shall be_
preQared by a cectified land surv�or• and ttte site �lan draina�e r� adin� nQht-of-wav plans, and
bui(ding, elevations bv a certified azchitect or engineer Re�ardless of the value of the development,
landscape plans must be,pre�ared bv a Washin�ton State licensed tandscape architect
:Q ��'��
j
f t:T �
H. Topographic survey
• Project name, p(an date, and/or revision date(s)
• Name, phone number, and license stamp of preparer
• North arrow and bar scale
� Site area
• Property lines, utilities, easements, sidewallcs, street edges, existing structures, parking
and site improvements (e_g. drainage systems with pipe sizes, invert and rim
elevations)
• Structures and driveways within t 50 feet of subject site (on both sides of street)
• M'inimum two foot contours for slopes less than 1� percent and five foot contours for
slopes 15 percent or greater, datum shall be King County Aenal Survey or NGVD-29
• Delineate slopes �eater than 40 percent grade on or within 25 feet of the site
• Delineate streams, ponds, wetlands, natucat drainage courses, and other surface water
features on or within 200 feet of the site per Federa! Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title
14, Chapter 30, "Critical Areas"
• Identifv trees defined by FWRC l9_0�_200
Bulletin #0�4 — August 18, 2010 Page 2 of 6 k_/HandoutslProcess ti Development Requirements
Kl?009 Code Am�rrslSub�tW rcquiremrntslScaff reportlCurtarc �atl"rrywc .virh adubics�Exlnbics E, F G, E( [ a� 1�F.xhibit G- Process Q Devdopmenc ![eqs pa�x fo�mudoc
- � _ I. Site plan
` Q - _�E ."' + project aams, p(an date, and/or revision date�sl
= • Name and phone number of owner/a�ent
=- • Name, phone number, actd (icense stamp of preparer
= =' - • North arrow and bar scale
_ _ �
• Vicinity map
� ` ��� • Site acea
� _ _ • Total parking statl count
; ?-r = � Total gross floor area of all proposed floors or leve(s
'�� - - �'� � • Location and d�c►ensions of existing/proposed structures, property lines, sidewalks,
- easements, parking layout, street edges, mechanical equipment, trash enclosures,
= outdoor uses, storaoe areas, fencing, rockeries, and retaining walls
• Existing streams, ponds, wetlands, natural drainage courses, and other surface water
-`; features on or within 200 feet of site per FWRC Title l4, Chapter 30, "Critical Areas"
_ - • Location ofstands of trees as defined by FWRC t9A5Z00
�-: = • Existing and proposed utilities including utility poles and boxes, water, storm sewer,
sanitary sewer, and fire hydrants
�� • Structures and driveways within 150 feet of sabject site (on both sides of street)
' � �' � �' °� ` • IBC construction type and occupancy classification
� r �� � _
�:u ;: • Location and square foota.ge calculations of any on-site pedestrian areas (i.e., plazas,
_ - courtyards) or open space areas
" '-� • Show tocarion and calculate acrea�e vrec(uded from development due to the presence
- � s of critical azeas includin�: wetlands streams. steep slopes. and other features (alone
=� °�' � with buffers) broken out by categorv covered bY criticat areas regulations. as
" �� t
�' _ �plicable.
• Show location and calculate acreage dedicated for �ublic riQ ts-of-way (for both aewlv
- created streets and ex�ansions of existin� streets) as well as private tracts, allevs. and
in�ess/e�ess and uti(ities easement broken out bv cateQorv.
-- • Show location and calcutate acreaye of tracts (or other areas) dedicated or set aside for
retention/detention/drainaye facilities o�en s�ace or other on-site public facilities.
broken out by cate�ory,
• Provide net site area which is aross area cninus critical areas, ri�hts-of-way, private
. o en s ace and ublic u ose lands.'
' J. Preliminary drainage, grading, and right plan
�I �I :;_ ";. • Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
• Name, phone number, and (icense stamp of preparer
• North arrow and bar scale
• Preliminary storm drainage system in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface
Water Design Manua! (KCSWDM) as amended by Federal Way
• Preliminary �ading plan with fmished contours; minimum two foot contours for slopes
less than 1� percent and five foot contours for s(opes l� percent or �eater, datum shall
`� - be King County Aerial Survey or NGVD-29
• Preliminary right-oE way isnprovement ptan, as required by the Public Works Dept
• Approximate cut & fill quantities of site earthwork
, • Total existing and proposed impecvious surface area
- • Existing and proposed utilities inctuding: utility poles and boxes, water, storm sewer,
- _ sanitary sewer, and fire hydrants
� Pubfic pwpose lands mean acreage of tracts (or other areas) dedicated for retentioo/detenrion/drainage facilities, open space and
parks, oc other on-site public facilities.
Bulletin #0�4 — August 18, 2010 Page 3 of 6 kJHandouts/Process tt Development Requiremeats
K�2009 Code A�ondma�cs�Submittal mquircnarts�Staff rcport�Curteai stafftepo[t with e�ibictlF�dtibics E, E G. H, [ and PExhibit G- Process Q Devdopmen[ R qs pcwr fomut.doc
K. Preiiminary landscape plan
C� 0- • Project name, p(an date, and/or revision date(s)
� • Name, phone number, and license stamQ of preQarer
• North arrow and bar scale
- • Specific location, type, size, and number of trees to remain and to be removed
• Plant schedule with the scientific name, common name, size, spacing, and quantity of
each
• Specific tocation and square footage ca(cu(ations of drought toterant (andscaping
�- (document that a minimum 35 percent is provided per FWRC l9.12�A40[6])
- • [rrigation plan for lawn areas
_ • Specific tocation, square footage calculations, and tota( squaze footage of each parkin�
- lot landscape istand per FWRC l9_ 12�.070(2)(a)
• Screening of outdoor facilities such as: trash/recyclin� enclosures, outdoor stora�e,
drive through facilities, stocmwater faciliries, and �ound based mechanical equipment
_ • Building wa(t area (andscaping per EWRC 19.12�.040
-- • Specific tocation of street trees in the right-of-way
�� ;: • [denti erimeter landsca e e as I, II, or tII
�
`` l ' L. Building elevations
'� ";:.� � • Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
�� • Name, phone number, aad license stamp of preparer
_' x -
-"�' • Bar scale
`' f = • Statement of architecturat design intent, finish materials, and colors
_ :; �.,,��g� ; • Front, rear, and side (labeled as north, south, east, and west) building elevations of
; �„ - proposed structures
�-S .' y_ .�' .
= .� u' Y �� • Exterior watl openings
�` • Exterior materials and cotors board
_ • Garbage/recycling facility screen details
+ Roof-top and ground based mechanical equipment screen details
• Buitdin� hei t catculation
� M. C(earin� and adin�,plan
� CI , • Project name, n(an date. and/or revision date(s).
- + Name, phone number. and license stamp of p�arer_
� • North arrow and baz scale.
_ • [dentification oPexisting slope depictin�: areas with 0% to 1�% slope: areas with L�%
__ to �t0% slope: and areas of 40% or �eater slope_
• Proposed �ades.
'' + Location of all existin� and/or proposed structures, drivewavs, riQht-of-wav
improvements, utilities. and easements on the subject propertv.
• Desi�ation of all wet(ands_ streams. and other critical areas that are on or within 300
feet of any area proposed to be disturbed bv the proposed clearin� and/or �adina
action
<�
- • Areas proposed for clearin� the proposed use for such areas.
_ • An�proposed g�ade changes that adverseiv affect or endan�er h on the properlv
and/or adjacent properties, and specifications to maintain them.
• A minimum of two cross sections of the site, drawn to scale. de�ctin� the existing and
_ - pro op sed �ade and anv oroposed rockeries and/or retaining walts. The director mav
also require a three dimensional topoeraphic mode( of existing and proposed
_ _ topographic conditions.
• Location and descri.ption of proposed erosion contro[ devices and structures.
• When required, a geotechnicai repork prepared by a;eotechnicat engineer, that
_ _ contains sufficient information to determine the potential im�acts of the proposed
clearin� and erading, as well as proposed measures to reduce or eliminate these
im acts_
Bulletin #0�4 —August 18, 20L0 Page 4 of 6 k:/Handouts/Process II Development Requiremenu
K�2009 Code A�itW rapriraawslS[affreport�Currrnt aaff tepat wsh odtibiMExlabirs E. F G. K[ and AFxhibic G- Process Q UevebPumc Reqs Poar Forwaz.doe
C} Q _
C�
N. TreeNe7etation EZetention Ptan
• Project nacne plan date. and/or revision date(s).
• Name nhone number and license stamQ of Qreparer who shall be a cettified arborist
oc a certified landsca�e architect.
� North arrow and bar scate.
• Statement outlining the�umoses of anyproposed tree removal (e_�__ buiidinQ
construction street oc roadway drivewav recreation area patio. or par[cinQ tot),
toeether with a p%�osed timetable for when this work will occur_
• A tree survey that identifies the tocation approximate size. species. and number of
trees on this site and also identifies the ��eneral location of trees within 50 feet of the
site Tree survey samp(es mav only be used at the discretion of the director.
• A depicrion oPthe spatiai limits for tree/ve�etation retention areas and details of
tree/veQetation protection measures.
• A depiction of anv new vegetated areas to be established,_
• The manner in which the cleared areas on the property wili be reclaimed with
veQetation specificarion or any required miti�ation�lantings and a timetable for
replantina.
• Approved tree/vegetation retention�lan shall be incomorated into the clearins and
Butletin #0�4 - August 18, 2010 Page 5 oE6 k/Handouts/Process t[ Deve(opment [tequirements
K.�.009 Code Amendments\Submittal requirementsGStaff reportlCurrent staff report with eshibits�Eshibits E, f G, H, I and 1�E�chibit G- Pra:ess li Devebpment Reqs poor fotmat.doc
Submitted
❑ CI
... E � ❑
i
,❑ �
Q' ❑
. ;� � '��❑ �
,Q ❑
'. - � .
' �` �
`� �
' �` fl
❑ : Cf
Q . �
. � � � a
' � Q
( ' �" �
Special studies and additional information for Process Ii.
Please provide FOUR copies of the following:
Level One Downstream storm drainage analysis as described in the KCSWDM as
amended by Federal Way
Preliminary technical information report addressing relevance of the 8 Core and 5
Special Requirements of the KCS WDM
Trip generation analysis prepared by an engineer licensed in State of Washington
Concurrency application prepared by an engineer licensed in State of Washington
Traffic impact anaiysis prepared by an engineer licensed in State of Washington
Parking study as required by the Traffic Division
Noise study
Lighting plan
Geotechnical study
Wetland delineation report
Wetland mitigation plan
Stream delineation and classification report
Critical aquifer recharge & wellhead protection areas information/inventory
Other information relating to design and siting of proposed development (including
site cross sections)
Specific information to determine compliance with city goaLs, policies, and regulations
Piease co�nsidertnis;as a No�ice of Completeness.
�, � _
��` ` , 2(}l ` this Process II apptication is d�terni�ned to be �cotnplete based on
�, .. r; -- - , �
,. .
��re�er�ts;
,g�t Fip�� �pp�icatton as`signment The Crt� of.FedeFat Way will take actican ou the ;
���� t��C-�il appl�eatile requirez�tents��'e-�?et, Piease no�c that City review witl be halted
�ad€��tiona:� ,in�ort�atian. .
Title:
�i'�TI�E.`T:1�ND'�SE APPI:IGAT[ON. .4 COPY.QF THIS �tfl`CICE SHALL BE FRQVH3EA `CO THE
-I� i�:FPI:IGA'I'I€1N: , `
Bulletin #054 — August i 8, 2010 Page 6 of 6 k:/Handouts/Process II Deveiopment Requirements
EXHIBIT H
EXHIBIT TO PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Tit(e 19.15,
"Permits and Review Processes"
Bulletin #001 - Development Requirements:
Process III (Project Approval) or Process I� (Hearing Examiner Approval)
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
ClTY O�
�e��r�� ���
DEPARTMENC OE CO.tithiUNIT'Y DEVELOPMEYTSERVICES
3332� 8`� Avenue South
PO Box 9718
Federal Way WA 98063-9718
253-835-Z607;Eax 253-835-2509
www.citvoffederalwav.com
�� Y �������� ������������
❑ PROCESS III {PROJECT APPROVAL� ❑ PROCESS IV tHEARING EXAMINER APPROVAL�
Name:
File No(s):
• This form is to be used by an app(icant as a�uide in determininD what consritutes a complete application.
• All checked items must be submitted to constitute a complete application.
• Applicant wilt be notified of a comptete app(ication within 28 days.
• A complete application does not imp(y compliance or conformance with applicable codes.
• Additional fees may be required Eor consultant review of critical areas_
General Ptan Standards
• Eight complete and folded sets of drawin�s (folded to 9 x 12 inches).
• Minunum plan sheet siae shatl be 24 x 36 inches_
• Plans mvst be drawn at an engineering scale that allows the entire plan to fit on one sheet_
• Minicnum scate is 1 to 20 unless otherwise authorized.
• All information is to be (egible.
• Plans shall be prepared by a certified professionat (licensed in the state of Washina oa) unless otherwise authorized.
• [f the deve(opment �ronosal has a value of $75 000 or geater the site surv�, site plan, preliminarv drainage, g,rading_
ri t-of-way ptans. and building elevation p(ans shall be prepazed by a certified professional licensed in the state of
WashinQton. The survev shall be prepared bv a ceRified land survevor: and the site plan, drainaQe, �ading�ri,��it-of-wav
plans, and buitdin� elevations bv a certified architect or en;ineer. Eze�ard(ess oEthe value of the development, tandscape
plans must be prepared bv a Washina on State licensed iandscape architect_
Re uired Submitted
;� �:'_' A. Completed Master Land Use application, with owner's si�ature
t;.
-.C� . ❑ s�' B. Application fees including SEPA fees as a�pticable.
; E:� .-� �;:= -�= C. Copy ofentire undertying p(at or King County Assessor's parcet map
� # Q;_ D. Vicinity map on separate 8% x L t sheet
E� �� �'< ;` E. Two copies of current title report for subject property
� •�`; F. Two copies of current letters of water and sewer availabiliry (only required for vacant
;;�� ; �. ro e
�2 .
�. �.� G. Eight copies of site photographs �om each compass point (north, east, south, & west)
� .: _^ ���� referenced on the site plan
� Y �:
� > � �: H. Concuirency application
Bulletin #OOL —August 18, 20i0 Page 1 of � kJE[andouts/Development Requirements
K�2009 Code AmmdawttslSubmitW roqwrememslStaff mportlCurtent shff report wrth a�}ubiulFxlubits E. F G. FC [�d 11Exhibit H- Devdopmart Requiranents poor formazting.doc
Submitted
��:,:
F �. ` �.
I. Topographic Survey
• Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
• Name, phone number, and license stamp of preparer
• North arrow and bar sca(e
• Site area
• Property lines, utilities, easements, sidewailcs, street edges, existin� structures, parking, and
site improvements (i_e. drainage systems with pipe sizes, invert and rim elevations, etc)
• Shuctures and driveways within (�0 feet of subject site (on both sides of street)
• Minimum two foot contours for slopes Less than 15 percent and five foot contours for slopes
t� percent or � datum sha(1 be King County Aerial Survey or NGVD-29
• Delineate slopes g�reater than 40 percent �ade on or within 2� feet of the site
• Delineate streacns, ponds, wetlands, natural drainage courses, and other surface watec
features on or within 200 feet of the site per Federa! Way Revised Code (F WRC) Chapter
14_30, "Critical Areas"
• [dentifr h'ees as defined bv EWRC 19.05.200
J. Site Plan
• Project name, pian date, and/or revision date(s)
• Nauie and phone number of ownerla;ent
• Name, phone number, and License stamp of preparer
• North arrow and bar scale
• Vicinity map
• Site area
• Total par[cing stall count
• Total gross floor area of all proposed floors or leve(s
• Locarion and dimensions of existing/and or proposed structtues, property lines, sidewalks,
easements, parking tayout, street edges, mechanical equipment, trash enc(osures, outdoor
uses, storage areas, fencing, rockeries, and retainina wa1Ls
• Existing streams, ponds, wetiands, natural drainage courses, and other surface water
features on or within 200 feet of site per FWRC Chapter 1430, "Critical Areas"
• Location of stands of trees as defined by FWRC 19.05200
• Existing and proposed utilities including: utitity poles and boxes, water, stoRn sewer,
sanitary sewer, and fire hydrants
� Structures and driveways within L�0 feet of subject site (on both sides of street)
• lnternational Bui[ding Code (iBC) constiuction type and occupancy classification
• Location and square footage calcutations of any on-site pedestrian areas (i.e., plazas,
courtyards) or open space areas
+ [ndicate anv oroposed phasing with proposed timetines Eor full com tep tion"
• Show location and calculate acreaae prec(uded &om development due to the presence oE
critica( areas. inc(udins: wetlands, streams, steeQ slopes. and other features (atona with
buffers), broken out bv cate�rv, covered bv critical areas resulations.
• Show location and calculate acreaee dedicated for public rights-of-wav (for both newlv
created streets and ex�ansions of existing streetsl. as well as private tracts, alleys, and
ingress/e�ess and utilities easement broken out by categOry•
• Show iocation and calcu(ate acreage of tracts (or other areas) dedicated or set aside for
retention/detention/drainaee facilities. open space. or other on-site public facilities, broken
out bv categorv.
• Provide net site azea. which is gross area minus critical azeas. ri ts-of-way, private open
space, and ubtic pur�ose lands.
� Pub[ic purpose landr mean acreage of tracts (or other azeas) dedicated for retention/detention/drainage faci(ities, open space and parks, or
other on-site public facilities_
Bulletin #OQ1—August 18, 2010 Page 2 of � k/E[andouts/Development Etequirements
K�2009 Code Amadme�slSubmiaal requir�n[slSnffreQort�Grraa staff repat with exlubitslFxhibits & F G. H. I aad AExhibi[ H- ikv�vt Re.qwrm�encs poor fom�atciog.dce
R aired Submitted
�- K. Prel'uninary Drainage, GradinD, and [tight-of-Way Plan
� _ ��: ,', • Project name, plan date, andlor revision date(s)
- - • Name, phone number, and license stamp of preparer
• NoRh a�row and bar scale
r _ �;�:,- _ • Pretiminary storm drainage system in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water
�,,.� ,� a �, � Design �Lianuat �iCCSLVDl41), as acuended by Ferlerai Way
-���-�� �=_.,. ,_, .�,_ ; • Preliminary �ading ptan with fuiished contours; minimum two foot coatours Eor slopes (ess
� s
� �' than L� percent and five foot contours for slopes i 5 percent or greater; datum shall be Kiing
}� � r � j _
_ ��� �,� ' County Aeria( Survey or NGVD-29
`�� �; s.., • Pretiminary right-of way improvemeat plan, as required by the Public Works Dept
��� ,��� � � • Approximate cut & filt quanriries of site earthwork
�. - : �
� �� �- ` � • Total existing and proposed impervious surEace area
.' � -��'y �� f ; �' -:
� �� �,��� �_- = • Existing and proposed urilities iuciuding: utility poles and boxes, watec, storm sewer,
.� >�; = sanitary sewer, and fire hydranks
�,� �`� � ` `-� � L_ Pretiminary Landscape Plan
.�=�;-- �; �` , • Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
�� ��'-�� � _ • Name, phone number, and license stamp oEpreparer
�'r7',tr.z -< � 4 `"'>
��� � � �f =� �-_ - • North arrow and bar scale
i�- �= y� z��- �� • Specific tocation, type, size, and nucuber of trees to remain and to be cemoved
. �� ��:�
>, �,� �,� r�-� �: • Plant schedule with the scientific name, common name, size, spacing, and quantity oEeach
�� ����� -�� �' � • Specific tocatioa and sqaare footage calculations of drought tolerant landscaping (document
`-�� ���`�-`� that a minimum 25 percent is provided per FWRC i9.125.040[6])
- °• �-� _ � � �''� ::
�„ _���Yy� • Irrigarion plan for lawn areas
'� b ��' ` • Specific (ocation, square footage calculaxions, and total square footage of each paricing tot
t'� `��r� �� �s :=`= tandscapeistandperFWRC 19.I25.070(2xa)
����=��-� �;_ `�_ • Screenin� of outdoor faci(ities such as: h enclosures, outdoor storage, drive
��
�'. �,� � �, ;; through faci(ities, storn2water facitities, and ground based mechanical equipment
� `� ��� '. Building wall area [andscaping per F WRC 19.125_040
.
� < ��_� � �- ;
'.�..} �� 3 �- �,�.._; • Specific location of street trees in the right-of-way
�� Y • [denrify perimeter (andscape type as t, II, or III
.�; _ —
3 .� s" '_` •:- M. Building Elevations/Desi� Cntent
� Q:. Q • Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
��� • Name, phone number, and license stamp of greparer
• Bar scale
.� _, • Statement of architectural desi�n intent, finish materiaLs, and colors
� _ • Fcont, rear, and side (labeted as north, south, east, and west) building etevations of proposed
� - structures
� "� �` • Exterior wall openings
��� ;; ._ • Exterior materials and cotors board
,,., ,,�j - • Garbage/recycling facility screen details
y`� 1 '_ • Roof-top and ground based mechanical equipment screen details
= � � • Building height calculation
'`-� • Narrative summary of how project compties with applicable desi� guidelines (FWRC
� ,
��.�,�, � z , -- Chapter 19.115, "Community Design Guidelines")
,��`�,�� f !; N. State Environmenta.l Policy Act (SEPA) Checklist
�;�
;� �` -�� � • Ei ght co pies of the com pleted, si g ned, and dated SEPA checklist
�-� � �, .
�'�. - -���
Bultetin #OO l— August l8, 2010 Page 3 of � kJHandouts/Development Requirements
K�2009 Code �.uendmauslSebmicW raluiremrntslStaff rcport\Curraa rtaff cr.�wrt witfi aclnbitslExhibita � F(}. F� t aad J�F�ibic H- Devdopmau Requ"vemmts poor fomutting.doc
R uired Submitted
O. Ctearing and �adinap(an
� •�. • Project name. ulan date, and/or revision date(s)_
• Name. phone number. and license stamp of oreparer.
- • North arrow and baz scate.
y • Identification of existina s(ope depictin�_ areas with 0% to 1�% slope: areas with t 5% to
' �0'/o slope: and areas of 40% or geater slope_
��
'�-�`_, � ,=.: . • Proposed grades-
-�'"•-�.��'� �� ��= • Locarion of al( exisring andlor proposed structures, drivewa s. riaht-of-wav improvements.
'�� �' utilities. and easements on the subject propertv_
�.��, �3 °
,-
'"-°° = �: • Desi�ation of alt wettands. streams, and other critical areas that are on or within 300 feet
�r.-'-... . : , � ,>
_- " of any area proposed to be disturbed by the proposed clearin2 and/or � action.
�„�'� �� - • Areas proposed for clearing and the proposed use for such areas.
`��'�`" s • Any proposed �ade changes that adverselv affect or endanger trees on the properiy and/or
��`� ' - adjacent prope�ties. and specifications to maintain them.
�`' �'� A minimum of two cross sections of the site, drawn to scale, de ip ctin� the existing and
.
- _ - proposed �rade and any proposed rockeries and/or retaining walls. The director may also
�� : require a three dimensional to�o� model of existin� and proposed topo�aphic
� � conditions.
�� =-� ,�� x:. -
= h�"�'` • Location and descriptioa of proposed erosion contro( devices and structures_
`;�� $ s,�; • When required. a�eotechnicat report, prepared by a�eotechnical engineer, that coatains
��t �� �'�, �" sufficient information to determine the potential impacts of the proposed clearin��and
-�� ��. '{`�� �-- din as well as ro osed measures to reduce or etiminate these im acts.
�s---� : f • ;��`- � � ,;
� w� & P. Tree/Vegetation Retention Plan
r ��. �. -���; • Project name. p1an date. and/or revision date(sl.
x'�,�;-. �'�.�� �: ���,. ,: ,. • Name. phone number_ and (icense stamp of preparer, who shatl be a certified arborist or a
��."'�,�..����.� � ��'� . certified landscape architect.
`'�-� � ` � �` " • North arrow and bar scale_
,� r�� ' '` ��` �*- �
�� �'' � • Statement oatlinin�[he purposes of an,Ynroposed dree removal (e.� building construction.
�. ��� . s.
,���,. �� �, street or roadwav, drivewav. recreation area. �atio, or parkinQ (ot), to�ether with a proposed
� 3�.�� r°' timetable for when ttus work will occur.
, .�
3 ,;�, • A tree survey that identifies the (ocation. a�proximate size, species, and number of trees on
this site and also identifies the Qeneral location of trees within �0 feet of the site Tree
- survey sam le�s mav oniy be used at the discretion of the director.
_ • A depiction of the spatial (imits for tree/ve}tation retenrion areas and details of
- - tree/ve etation protection measures.
�' J • A depiction of anv new ve�etated areas to be established
��-� � �� • The manner in which the c(eared areas on the�roperty will be rec(aimed with ve�etation
': specification or an rLrequired miti�ation �iantings and a timetable for replantin�
� �'� �.
,� , • A�proved tree/vegetation retentio�lan shall be incorporated into the clearing and gradin�
� drawinas for final construction documentatioa
Builetin #00! — August 18, 2010 Page 4 of � k:/Elandouts/Development Requirements
K�2009 Code AmendmrnulSubmittal raryuremauslStaff report\Cuaent staff rcpat with exhibitslE.�du'bits E, F G. H, ( and J\Extiibit H- Devdopmutt Requiranems poor f���.dac
Re ui�ei� Subriti�ted-
0 D
` _O �
❑ �
: ❑ �
�� � 0 �
Q D
� ❑
❑ �
� , � ,
❑ ❑..
❑ 0
`�-. �
� � �
❑ �
Special Studies and Additional Information
Please provide FOUR copies of the following:
Level One Downstream storm drainage analysis as described in the KCSWDM, as
amended by Federal Way
Preliminary technical information report addressing relevance of the 8 Core and 5 Special
Reauirements of the KCSWDM __
Trip generation analysis prepared by an engineer licensed in State of W
Traffic impact analysis an engineer licensed in State of Washington
Parkin� studv as required bv the Traffic Division.
Noise study
Lighting plan
Geotechnical study
Wetland delineation report
Wetland mitigation plan
Stream delineation and classification report
Critical aquifer recharge & wellhead protection areas information/inventory
Other information relating to design and siting of proposed development (including site
cross sections)
Specific information to determine compliance with city goals, policies, and regulations
Notice Requirements
E� E7 .
❑' ❑
Q- �
Process III — For applications that are located within, or are, 300 feet from properties
zoned SE, RS, or RM, provide one set of self-addressed, stamped business sized envelopes
(with City of Federal Way return address) of persons receiving property tax statements for
all properties within 300 feet of the boundary of the subject property. Include a separate list
of the addresses with their parcel numbers and an assessor's map showing the 300-foot
boundary.
Process IV— Provide two sets of self-addressed, stamped business sized envelopes (with
City of Federal Way return address) of persons receiving property t� statements for all
properties within 300 feet of the boundary of the subject property. Include a separate list of
the addresses with their parcel numbers and an assessor's map showing the 300-foot
boundary.
SEPA — Provide one set of self-addressed, stamped business sized envelopes (with City of
Federal Way return address) of persons receiving property tax statements for all properties
within 300 feet of the boundary of the subject property. Include a separate list of the
addresses with their parcel numbers and an assessor's map showing the 300-foot boundary.
IMPORTANT — Please do not submit metered envelopes. The Federa( Way Post Office
may refuse such envelopes. In addition, you are highly encouraged to use the Forever
stamps.
Bulletin #001 — August I8, 2010 Page 5 of � k:/Handouts/Development Requirements
K:�2009 Code Amendmmts\Submittal requirements\Staff reportlCurrent staff report with exhibits�Exhibits E, F G, H, [ and AErzhibit H- Development Requirements poor focmatting.doc
EXHIBIT I
PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19.15, "Permits and Review
Processes"
19.15.045 "Completeness of applications"
(Ciry File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
Exhibit I
19.15.045 Completeness of applications.
(1) Use Process I and Use Process ll. At the time of intake of a complete use
process I or use process II application a notice of completeness as referenced in
FWRC 19 15 040 shall be provided to the applicant This notice shall indicate the
date the application is deemed com plete If the citv determines that the use process I
or use process II application is incomplete the Cit shall notifv the applicant of what
needs to be submitted for a complete use process I or use process II application.
,
, . . .
,
, ,
,
a{� In the notice of application, if required, *��� ::��'.`.`.°^ ����rm��n�'^„. the city
shall also identify, to the extent known to the city, the other agencies of local, state,
or federal government that may have jurisdiction over some aspect of the proposed
development activity.
(2) Use Process 111 or Use Process IV. Within 28 calendar days of receivinq an
a�plication for use process III or use process IV the city shall determine whether fhe
application is complete as referenced in FWRC 19 15 040 If found to be complete,
prior to the 28-day deadline a letter of completeness shall be issued indicatinq the
date the use process III or use process IV application is deemed complete. If the citv
determines the application to be incomplete prior to the 28-dav deadline, the citv
shall notifv the applicant of what needs to be submitted for a complete use process
III or use process IV application In this written determination the citv shall also
identify, to the extent known to the citv the other aaencies of local state, or federal
qovernment that ma �have iurisdiction over some aspect of the proposed
development activitv. If the use process III or use qrocess IV a� application was
found incomplete and an applicant submits additional information, the city shall notify
the applicant in writing within 14 days, the date the application is deemed complete
or whether further additional information is necessary.
(3) Additional information. A determination of completeness shall not preclude the
city from requesting additional information or studies, either at the time of the letter of
completeness or subsequently, if new information is required or if there are
substantial changes in the proposed action.
(4) Vesting. A proposed use process I, II, III, or IV application shall vest to and be
considered under the zoning code and other land use control ordinances in effect on
the land at the time a fully completed application for use process I, II, III, or IV has
been submitted to the city. In the event that the application is deemed incomplete,
the use process I, II, III, or IV application shall vest to those codes in effect on the
date that all requested supplemental or specific information is submitted. A complete
application shall be defined as set forth in FWRC 19.15.040 and based on
requirements in related handouts. Vested rights shall not be waivable pursuant to the
vested rights doctrine.
(Ord. No. 09-625, § 3, 9-15-09; Ord. No. 09-594, § 19, 1-6-09. Code 2001 § 22-
33.5.)
K:�2009 Code AmendmeMS\Submittal requirements\Staff report\Current staff report with exhibits�Exhibits E, F G, H, I and .I�Exhibit I version 2 revised I9.15.045.doc
EXHIBIT J
PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Fec�eral Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19.15, "Permits and Review
Processes"
19.15.030 "Review processes for improvements and additions to
developed sites"
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
Exhibit J
19.15.030 Review processes for improvements and additions to developed
sites.
Improvements and/or additions to existing developed sites shall be subject to
land use review processes as follows:
{1) Process L Improvements and/or additions to an existing developed site that
are exempt from SEPA shall be processed using process I, provided the
improvements and/or additions do not exceed any of the following thresholds:
(a) There is no change of use.
(b) There is no reduction in the amount of required landscaping, buffering,
open space, or public areas.
(c) There is no material change or reduction in tfie amount of required
parking.
(d) There is no material change in #he location of utilities, easemen#s, or
pedestrian connections.
(e) There is no material change to the approved architectural design.
(fl There are no additional adverse impacts to c°^�:� critical areas_ ef
cinnifin�n� �roo�
(2) Process ll. Improvements and/or additions to an existing developed site
that are exempt from SEPA and exceed the thresholds in subsection (1) of this
section shall be processed using process II.
(3) lmprovements not exempt from SEPA. Improvements and/or additions to
an existing developed site that are not exempt from SEPA shall be processed
under process III, unless process IV is indicated by the applicable use zone chart
in which case process tV shali be used.
(Ord. No. 07-573, § 10, 12-4-07; Ord. No. 00-375, § 9, 10-3-00. Code 2001 § 22-
32-2-)
K:�'�009 Code .lmendmeats�Submittal ra�wrements�Staft'report\Cutrent staff repon with ochibits�Ezhibits E, F G, ti, ( and 11Erhibit 1- revised 19. I i 030.doc
City Council Agenda Bill
Attachment #3: Draft Minutes of
the August 25, 2010
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Amendments to FWRC Chapter 18 Subdivisions, and Chapter 19
regarding submittal requirements for plats and commercial projects.
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
This page has been intentionally left blank.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
PLANNING COMMISSION
August 25, 2010 City Hall
7•00 p m Council Chambers
MEETING MINUTES
Commissioners present: Merle Pfeifer, Hope Elder, Lawson Bronson, Wayne Carlson, Sarady Long, Tim O'Neil
and Tom Medhurst. Staff present: Director of Community Development Services Greg Fewins, Planning
Manager Isaac Conlen, Principal Planner Margaret Clark, Senior Planner Deb Barker, Senior Planner Janet Shull,
Assistant City Attorney Peter Beckwith, and Administrative Assistant Darlene LeMaster. Council Member Jeanne
Burbidge was also present.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Pfeifer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
All commissioners present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of July 21, 2010, were approved as written.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
COMMISSION BUSINESS
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Directar of Community Dev�lopment Services will address the commission during the `Additional Business'
section of the agenda.
PUSL�C H�AR,I1vG — Shoreline 1klaster Prog�-am Update
Chair Pfeifer explained the guidelines for the Public Hearing.
Senior Planner Janet Shull stated that the intent of tonight's meeting was to consider revisions to the draft
Shoreline Master Plan (SMP).She introduced the City's consultant, Teresa Vanderburg with ESA Adolfson and
David Pader with the Depart�ient of Ecology. She also stated that there was a sign up sheet at the back that
serves two purposes. The first was to sign in if you would like to testify and secondly, to sign up if you would
like to be on an e-mail notification list.
Ms. Shull gave a brief overview of the SMP, which serves to regulate development along shorelines of the state
and establishes a comprehensive vision of how the shoreline area will be used and developed over time. She also
stated that local jurisdictions are required to prepare a local SMP to carry out the requirements of the Shoreline
Master Act (SMA). The SMP also includes goals and policies that are part of the City's comprehensive plan and
regulations that are part of the city code. The SMP includes information about existing conditions and analysis
about the potential cumulative impacts of future development and opportunities for restoration.
Ms. Shull then showed a map of the City's shorelines explaining that there were two categories — marine
shorelines and shorelines associated with lakes. There are two lakes, Steel Lake and North Lake within the City
G:1Planning Commission�2010Uvfeeting Summary 08-25-IO.doc
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 July 25, 2010
and a number of additional lakes within the Potential Annexation Area (PAA). The City is required to plan for
the lakes within the PAA, however, the regulations will only apply when the area is annexed into the City.
Ms Shull then summarized the SMP process to date. She explained that work on the SMP began in early 2006.
At that time a Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) and a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) were formed to
provide input on the update. The City held a public open house in June 2006 and set up a website with
information on the SMP update. In 2007, the Planning Commission held three public meetings after which they
forwarded their recommendation to the City Council, who approved the draft SMP update in June 2007. In July
2007, the draft SMP update was submitted to the DOE for review and comments were received from DOE in
January 2009.
City staff and their consultant ESA Adolfson have been working with DOE an revisions based on DOE's
comments for the past year. Because the draft SMP update has been changed since the Planning Commission
and Council last saw it, staff decided to bring it back to both Planning Comr�iission and City Council.
The City mailed notice to all shoreline property owners within the City and P�A about the public comment
process and the availability of draft documents. The City also mai��d �otice to former �AC and TAC members.
This City's website was also updated and links to the revised draft SMP were prov°id�d. Hard copies of the
revised documents were placed in libraries and were made available at City Hall. A cogy v�as also made
available in the City Council Conference Room and counciI tnembers were made aware of its atvailability.
Ms Shull then went over highlights to the revisions. She explained that Section 2— Inventory and
Characterization and Section 4— Shoreline Environment had not bee� ;updated as DOE had no comments on
these sections. Section 2 is very bulky so it was �tot included in the Pta�ning Commission's blue binder, but is
on the website, however the Shoreline Environment Desig�ations, which is � single page map, was included.
Ms Shull explained that Section One - Introduction was revisec� �o presez�t a better linkage between our local
SMP and the Statewide SMA. FQUr new policies weFe ac�ded to Sectian Three -- Goals and Policies. Ms Shull
stated that we modified existing polieies to add emphasis on the SMA goal of "no net loss" of ecological
function of the city's sharelines, the �'urpose and Responsibility section was expanded and a section
summarizing Public Partieipa�ian was adc�ed.
Ms Shull stated that in Section �ive -- Shoreline Reg�lations, numerous revisions were made for clarity. For
example, city sta€f �ddec€ a Development Standards Table; integrated critical areas regulations instead of having
them be appe�tdices; added requirement for a 50-foot setback from top of marine bluffs; and added a staff
proposed change to allow piers ar�d docks an �he Marine Shoreline.
In Section Six =- Restoration Plan, �ity staff added and updated information on regional programs that help with
shoreline restaratio�; added information on restoration opportunities for freshwater lakes; and added two tables
that summarize and prioritize restoration opportunities.
In Section 7, staff added de�'i�iEions that are required to make the City's SMP consistent with the SMA. Ms
Shull also stated that in Appendix A-- Cumulative Impacts Analysis, staff added a table that summarizes land
development activity in the past five years within the shoreline area and added a section that analyzes the
potential cumulative impact of allowing docks and piers on the marine shoreline.
Ms Shull mentioned that staff had scheduled a study session with the planning commission and interested
citizens for August 4, 2010, however it was changed to an informational meeting when only one Planning
Commissioner, Commissioner Carlson, attended. There were eleven citizens, the City`s Consultant and the DOE
staff in addition to staff in attendance. During the meeting, there was discussion on proposed setbacks from
marine bluff and proposed standards for bulkheads. There was also one written comment, E�chibit 2, a request
from the Kutschas to modify the stringline provisions for lakes only. Ms Shull stated that since the stringline
setback provisions had already been approved by Council, staff is not recommending any changes.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 July 25, 2010
Ms Shull then went over some modifications proposed by staff. These included clarifying that the 50-foot
minimum marine bluff setback is from the "top" of the marine bluff. It also included modifying Section
15.05.050(1)(a)(i-iii) to make it clear that hard shore armoring (bulkheads/riprap) is subject to proof of
imminent damage and a shoreline conditional use permit in the Urban Conservancy Environment and that no
conditional use permit is required for soft shore armoring regardless of zone.
Ms Shull ended her presentation by stating that staff recommends approval of the proposed revisions to the draft
SMP Update with staff modifications as depicted in Exhibit 1 to the August 25, 2010 staff report.
The public hearing was opened for public testimony.
Norm Kutscha, 33021 38``' Ave S, Federal Way — Submitted a document dat.et� �ugust 25, 2010 and also
read from the document requesting that the Planning Commission take another look at the shoreline
setback regulations for lakes in order to make them more equitable far �x�sting homes in relationship to
new homes.
Peter Townsend,• 29508 12` Ave SW, Federal Way — He �elt that it is importa�tt ; to know what staff
considers the problem areas under the SMA for the past fi�e years and what shoul� be done to solve the
problems.
The public hearing was opened to questions from the commissioners:
Commissioner Bronson asked what changes are being made because af DOE requirements and what changes are
being made by the City, such as setbacks, that we could change later.lVls. Shull replied that most of the changes
in the binder are required changes, except for piersidocks and setbacks. Sl�e t�oted that the Kutscha's request
would not be opposed by DOE. However, staff didn't feel it was their place to make changes to what the City
had already approved.
David Pater with Department 4f Ec:a�ogy from the Bellevue office introduced himself and noted that he has
worked with the city to resoIve issues a�d believed that they have resolved them. The state recognizes the
unique distinction of eaeh }urisdiction, and there is some flexibility. The shoreline stabilization section is the
most rigid. The state uses a checklist to make sure each jurisdiction has met requirements, and that there is room
for modifications to setbacks, piers �nd dec�CS_ �-Ie further added that there was a lot of back and forth
negotiations betwcen �te ��ty and DU�:
Commissioner O'Neil wonderec� �hat the changes meant for the taxpayer and how might the use of waterfront
property'be cha�ged. Ms. Shull not�d that the goal was to make as few changes as possible, and that the changes
appearreasona�l�.
Teresa Vanderburg v�th ESA/Adoi�'son noted that there is a new focus on conserving and preserving vegetation
within the setback zone and also to avoid impacts to resources in the water. There are also provisions for
dimensions of docks and piers. She clarified that the changes are only for new development and not existing
development. There is a provision for tear-down houses or expanding existing uses.
Commissioner Medhurst asked if variances were available. Ms. Shull replied that yes, shoreline variances are
subject to hearing examiners recommendation that is forwarded to the State, which has the ultimate approval.
Commissioner O'Neil asked whether the DOE had the final say just for variances. Ms. Shull answered that DOE
would have the final say only for variances and conditional use permits. However, these decisions are
appealable to the Shoreline Hearings Board.
Commissioner Carlson was concerned about the length of time it took for the DOE's response to proposed
changes to the City's shoreline code. Ms. Shull noted that the state experienced staff shortages, and that once
their comments were available, the amendment was prioritized and brought to commissioners as complete as
Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 July 25, 2010
possible. Commissioner Carlson also had questions about the value of the cumulative impacts analysis as the
analysis is quantitative but the conclusions are qualitative. David Pader, with DOE responded, that the
cumulative impacts analysis is adequate
Chair Pfeifer asked if there were any more questions from the commissioners, and seeing none called for the
motion.
Commissioner Bronson moved to recommend adoption of the code amendment as prepared by staff.
Commissioner Medhurst seconded the motion.
Discussion — Commissioner Elder urged Commissioners to consider item #4 of the Kutscha's request regarding
setbacks. Commissioner Carlson disagreed with Commissioner Elder noti�g that the Kutscha's request, if
approved, might penalize property owners who have not yet exercised their deyelopment rights. Commissioner
Carlson also acknowledged that critical areas need greater setbacks.
The motion carried, 6-1 (Elder dissenting).
The public hearing was closed.
PUBLIC HEARING — Amendments Related to Submittal Requirements for Plats and Commercial Projects
Chair Pfeifer explained the guidelines for the PubYic �Iearing.
Senior Planner Deb Barker delivered the staff report. Prapased �mendments to the Federal Way Revised Code
(FWRC) include:
• Short Subdivisions — Chapter I8.3Q. d30 Content and form of apptication;
• Preliminary Plat — Chapter 18.35.02'0 Content and form of application;
• Permits and Review Pracess —�hapter 19.IS.(�40 Development Application Submittal
Requirements;
• Permits and RevaeNZ Processes - Chapter �� IS. F�45 Completeness of Applications; and
• Permits and Review Proeesses - Chctpter 19.15.030(1)(� Review Processes for improvements and
addition.s to developed sites
The public hearing was opened far gublic testimony.
There was no public eomment.
The public testimony was elosed.
The public hearing was opened to questions from the commissioners:
Commissioner O'Neil said he agreed with the checklist concept and feels that it is much easier for the public to
use. He inquired whether this information was available on-line. Ms. Barker replied that submittal requirements
checklists are available on the City's website and staff can assist the applicant to locate the requirements and the
checklists. Commissioner O'Neil asked if the applications are tracked on-line. Ms. Barker noted that the current
permit tracking system is not set up to track these applications on-line.
Commissioner Medhurst wanted to understand if the requirements have changed, or if some have been
eliminated. He feels that the checklist is more confusing and could be arbitrarily applied. He prefers code as
written. Ms. Barker said that the code does not give any discretion to waive submittal items that may not be
Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 July 25, 2010
necessary, while the checklist provides flexibility. Chairman Pfeifer noted that there is lots of support from
Master Builders for the checklist and bulletin concept. Commissioner Medhurst asked for clarification as to
which codes were eliminated. Chairman Pfeiffer stated that none of the codes were eliminated and the code is
still there. The checklists provide a place to go to find out what their specific application requires. Ms Barker
pointed out that the code states that the director may waive any requirements that are determined to not be
reasonably necessary. Commissioner Medhurst replied that language addressed his concerns and he is satisfied.
Commissioner Carlson is also in support of the checklist format. However, he is still concerned that submittal
requirements can be modified at the stroke of a pen. He believes that any types of changes to the submittal
process should go through the public process, especially the planning commission. He supports the amendments
only if substantive changes to application submittal requirements go through public process. Ms. Barker stated
that substantive changes to the code do come from code amendments that ha�� atready gone through a public
process. She noted that recent changes to the clearing and grading codes cqntained very substantive changes to
performance standards, and those changes to code went through a very pub��e grocess. Substantive code changes
are not administratively made, but are approved through the code amendmen� process. Commissioner Carlson
stated that allayed some but not all of his concerns.
Commissioner Bronson agreed that the checklist is a wonder�rxt idea. He asked why pra,�eEts can't be submitted
electronically. Ms. Barker replied the City's permitting system is only equipped to rece�e eleetrical permits
electronically. Commissioner Bronson asked why appTicatians could not be submitted �t a thumb drive.
Planning Manager Conlen agreed that these types of projects da take a�ot a€ paper and the City would love to
reduce paper. However, the City does not have the technology to review applications on a computer screen, to
mark it up or make comments. If applications are submitted electronic�It�, the City has added copying costs that
should be borne by the applicant. Commissioner $ronson is amazed that �ity does not have enough equipment
to review the plans electronically. Planning Manager CQ�]:en said that it wc�.tld be great if we did but currently
we do not have that technology.
Commissioner Long thanked sta#� for bringing this tapic to the Comrnissioners. He feels that this concept will
be a big benefit to develope�s. He '�nc�uired if plans were required for Process I and II before they were
determined to be complete. It�s. Barker canfirmed that plans were required and gave examples of typical process
I and II applications. Commxssioner Long, inquired about �he differences between existing code and proposed
changes to the completeness see�ion of the code. Planning Manager Conlen stated that there is no change to
current practices. The intent is to clarify t�re eade so it is clear what the practice is. There is no change from
current practice for process I and II campleteness review, which is done at counter; and there is no change for
process III anc� IV completeness review, which take a more lengthy review process and includes a follow-up
letter.
Commissioner E7�'�1ei11 said that he understands that the proposed amendment clarifies when an applicant
becomes vested. IV��. Barker confir�ned that as the current code is vague, it is important to clarify that a complete
application is a vesteet �pplication.
Commissioner Long observ�d that currently the City's Traffic Division determines if a submitted traffic study is
acceptable, and therefore if an application is complete. With the proposed language, an application would be
considered complete even i"f the submitted traffic study was later found to be unacceptable. Ms. Barker noted
that was an on-going topic of concern by staff since reports are not always professionally prepared.
Commissioner Long recommends that the checklists be changed to add that traffic impact analysis shall be
stamped by a professional engineer. This was clarified so that the report shall be prepared by a licensed engineer
in State of Washington.
Chairman Pfeifer thanked staff for putting the amendment together. He believes that the code amendment makes
sense and will save developers time in the long run.
Commissioner Long moved to recommend adoption of the code amendment as prepared by staff.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 6
Commissioner Carlson seconded the motion.
July 25, 2010
There was general discussion and agreement that Commissioner Long's recommended changes to the checklist
do not need to be reflected in the motion.
The motion carried, 7-0.
The public hearing was closed.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
Director of Community Development Services Greg Fewins addressed the CQmmission with the following
items: _
Administrative Assistant Piety will be on medical leave for an undeterrn�ned period of time. During her
absence, Tamara Fix will be the person to communicate with regarding Plannr�g �ommission. Ms. Fix will be
assembling the Planning Commission agenda packet and conesponding with a1I P�anning Commissioners and
Stakeholders. Darlene LeMaster will be staffing all Planning Commission meetin�s and drafting meeting
minutes
October 20, 2010 Planning Commission Public Hearing vvill be on Urban Chickens. 'f'�iere are no topics for
either the Sept. 1 or the Sept. 15, 2010 Planning Commission meetings, therefore, thos� tneetings will be
cancelled. Staff would like to propose a study session for the full Plartning Commission on Wednesday,
September 29, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. to talk about the urban chicken tapic. All Commissioners said they would be
able to attend the special study session.
2011-2012 Budget — Director Fewins explained ta t�ie eommissioners hov�r Eo access all of the 2011-2012 City
Budget documents from the City's website. Director Fevvins also highlighted the proposed budget cuts to
impact the Department of Community Development Services should GounciI approved the proposed budget.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
AnJOUx1v
The meeting was adjourned at 9:(�0 p.�n.
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: �8fA5f�6�0 �
ITEM #:
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19 relating to clarifying the complete
application and review standards of the zoning and development code, and a housekeeping amendment that
maintains consistent critical areas language.
POLICY QUESTION: Should the City of Federal Way approve an amendment to Federal Way Revised Code
(FWRC), Chapter 19, that clarifies which land use applications are subject to completeness standards as well as a
housekeeping amendment to maintain consistent use of critical areas language?
COMMITTEE: Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC)
CATEGORY:
❑ Consent
� Ordinance
❑ City Counc B ❑ Resolution
STAFF REPORT BY: Deb Barker, Senior Planner _
MEETING DATE: 09/20/2010
❑ Public Hearing
❑ Other
DEPT Community Development Services
Attachments: (1) Draft Adoption Ordinance; (2) Staff Report to the Planning Commission for the August 25,
2010,Public Hearing; and (3) Draft Minutes of the August 25, 2010, Planning Commission Public Hearing.
Options Considered: (1) Adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation as shown in the Draft Adoption
ordinance; (2) Adopt the Planning Commission's recommendation as modified by the LUTC; (3) Do not adopt
the amendments; or (4) Re er the amendments back to the Plannin _ Commission�'o�ther�roceedings.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Council approve Option # 1; adopt the Planning Commission's
recommendation reflected in the Draft Adoption Ordinance.
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: •W`I �I M� ��a I��I"� �� 1 DIRECTOR APPROVAL: �_ __��_
Committee Council Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION I move to forward the proposed ordinance to First Reading on October S
2010. ,.,
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION(S):
2 READING OF ORDINANCE (10/19/2010) I move approval of the LLITC recommendation to approve the
code amendments, which are reflected in the Adoption Ordinance. "
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL #
❑ DENIED 1sT reading 0 •
❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE #
REVISED — 08/12/2010 RESOLUTION #
l READING OF ORDINANCE (10/OS/2010): 1 move to forward the ordinance to a second reading for
enactment on the October 19, 2010 consent agenda.
City Council Meeting Date: October 5, 2010
City Council Agenda Bill
Attachment #1:
Draft Adoption Ordinance
Amendments to FWRC Chapter 19 relating to clarifying the complete
application and review standards of the zoning and development codes,
and a housekeeping amendment that maintains consistent critical areas
language.
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating
to clarifying the complete application and review standards of the
zoning and development code; amending FWRC 19.15.045 and
FWRC 19.15.030. (Amending Ordinance Nos. 09-625, 09-594, 07-573
and 00-375)
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need to periodically modify Title 19 of the Fecleral Way
Revised Code (FWRC), "Zoning and Development Code," in order to conform to state and federal law,
codify administrative practices, clarify and update zoning regulations as deemed necessary, and improve
the efficiency of the regulations and the development review process; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance, containing amendments to development regulations, and the text of
Title 19 FWRC, has complied with Process VI review, chapter 19.80 FWRC, pursuant to chapter 19.35
FWRC; and
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest for the City Council to adopt language that clarifies which
applications are subject to completeness review standards within the City of Federal Way; and
WHEREAS, the amendment reflects that Process I, II, III, and N land use processes are subject
to completeness standards; and
WHEREAS, the amendment documents that completeness review for Process I and Process II
applications is conducted `over the counter' and is expedited so that an applicant can receive a"notice of
completeness" at intake; and
WHEREAS, completeness review for Process III and IV applications occurs during Development
Review Committee (DRC) deliberations which are scheduled within 28 days of application submittal; and
WHEREAS, in order to maintain consistent definitions and terms throughout the FWRC, a
"housekeeping" amendment to replace the term "sensitive" areas with the term "critical" areas and
eliminate reference to the term "significant trees" in FWRC 19.15.030(1)(� is proposed; and
Ordinance No. 10- Page 1 of S
WHEREAS, the Proposal is categorically exempt from environmental review under the State
Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) pursuant to WAC 197-11-800(20); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission properly conducted a duly noticed public hearing on these
code amendments on August 25, 2010, and forwarded a recommendation of approval to the City Council;
and
WHEREAS, the Land Use/Transportation Committee of the Federal Way City Council
considered these code amendments on September 20, 2010, and recommended adoption of the text
amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY 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.
(a) These code amendments are in the best interest of the residents of the City and will
benefit the City as a whole by clarifying what projects are subject to completeness review and removing
inconsistent language.
(b) These code amendments comply with Chapter 36.70A RCW, Growth Management.
(c) These code amendments are consistent with the intent and purpose of Title 19 FWRC and
will implement and are consistent with the applicable provisions of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan.
(d) These code amendments bear a substantial relationship to, and will protect and not
adversely affect, the public health, safety, and welfare.
(e) These code amendments have followed the proper procedure required under the FWRC.
Section 2. Conclusions. Pursuant to chapter 19.80 FWRC and chapter 19.35 FWRC, and based
upon the recitals and the findings set forth in Section 1, the Federal Way City Council makes the
following Conclusions of Law with respect to the decisional criteria necessary for the adoption of the
proposed amendments:
Ordinance No. 10- Page 2 of S
(a) The proposed FWRC amendments are consistent with, and substantially implement, the
following Federal Way Comprehensive Plan goals and policies:
L UP4 Maximize efficiency of the development review process.
EDPI S 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.
HP9 Maximize efficiency in the City's development review process and ensure that
unnecessary time delays and expenses are eliminated. Continue to provide streamlined
permitting processes for development that is consistent with the FWCP and FWCC,
and that has no adverse impacts.
(b) The proposed FWRC amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public health,
safety, and welfare because it clarifies that projects are subject to complete application standards,
provides certainty to an applicant, and increases the efficiency of the development review processes.
(c) The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the public and the residents of the City
of Federal Way because clarity in the application process results in continued development within the
City thus aiding the local economy.
Section 3. FWRC 19.15.045 is hereby amended to read as follows:
19.15.045 Completeness of applications.
(1) Use Process I and Use Process II. At the time of intake of a complete use process I or
use process II a�plication a notice of completeness as referenced in FWRC 19.15.040 shall be
provided to the a�plicant This notice shall indicate the date the application is deemed complete.
If the citv determines that the use process I or use process II application is incomplete the City
shall notify the ap�licant of what needs to be submitted for a complete use process I or use
process II application. � --'---=-'--- '' �---°- - " -- ,.,.u,..,.;,,,, +�,o �:�., �i.,.,�i
__, -- _ " " "'r r -- - --�--
a t, i�,.,. � i .,;,i. ,-o� ,- o r� ��a�v � �°;� �Tn v,-;,,,- +,. +t,.o
a��@�ii$rrE��xxc�3�r�3�Pprrcu�6irrrE6=iiPz@� , ` . . . .,�,. �., ...�
�
� e �
*,�o ��; r, „�,.,�..,+ r ea� �„ �.o ,�.,r:��oa � ,.�o�o ,,;; ,.+;,.r In the notice of
�;,u�..,.�.
application, if required, *'��� -��-�'*°„ a°'°����+�� the city shall also identify, to the extent lrnown
to the city, the other agencies of local, state, or federal government that may have jurisdiction
over some aspect of the proposed development activity.
(2) Use Process III or Use Process IV. Within 28 calendar days of receivin� an
�_plication for use process III or useprocess N the cit�shall determine whether the application
Ordinance No. 10- Page 3 of S
is complete as referenced in FWRC 19.15.040. If found to be complete, prior to the 28-day
deadline a letter of completeness shall be issued indicatinQ the date the use process III or use
process IV application is deemed complete. If the city determines the application to be
incomplete prior to the 28-day deadline the city shall notifv the applicant of what needs to be
submitted for a complete use process III or use process N application. In this written
determination the cit shall also identif to the extent known to the city, the other a�encies of
local state or federal �overnment that may have iurisdiction over some aspect of the proposed
development activity. If the use process III or use process N� application was found
incomplete and an applicant submits additional information, the city shall notify the applicant in
writing within 14 days, the date the application is deemed complete or whether further additional
information is necessary.
(3) Additional information. A determination of completeness shall not preclude the city
from requesting additional information or studies, either at the time of the letter of completeness
or subsequently, if new information is required or if there are substantial changes in the proposed
action.
(4) Vesting. A proposed use process I, II, III, or N application shall vest to and be
considered under the zoning code and other land use control ordinances in effect on the land at
the time a fully completed application for use process I, II, III, or IV has been submitted to the
city. In the event that the application is deemed incomplete, the use process I, II, III, or IV
application shall vest to those codes in effect on the date that all requested supplemental or
specific information is submitted. A complete application shall be defined as set forth in FWRC
19.15.040 and based on requirements in related handouts. Vested rights shall not be waivable
pursuant to the vested rights doctrine.
Section 4. FWRC 19.15.030 is hereby amended to read as follows:
19.15.030 Review processes for improvements and additions to developed sites.
Improvements and/ar additions to existing developed sites shall be subject to land use review
processes as follows:
(1) Process I. Improvements and/or additions to an existing developed site that are exempt
from SEPA shall be processed using process I, provided the improvements and/or additions do
not exceed any of the following thresholds:
(a) There is no change of use.
(b) There is no reduction in the amount of required landscaping, buffering, open space,
or public areas.
(c) There is no material change or reduction in the amount of required parking.
(d) There is no material change in the location of utilities, easements, or pedestrian
connections.
(e) There is no material change to the approved architectural design.
(� There are no additional adverse impacts to �� critical areas_ ^� �:�;�^^^+ *�°°°
(2) Process II. Improvements and/or additions to an existing developed site that are exempt
from SEPA and exceed the thresholds in subsection (1) of this section shall be processed using
process II.
(3) Improvements not exempt from SEPA. Improvements and/or additions to an existing
developed site that are not exempt from SEPA shall be processed under process III, unless
process N is indicated by the applicable use zone chart in which case process N shall be used.
Ordinance No. 10- Page 4 of S
Section 5. Severabilitv. The provisions of this ardinance 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 6. 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 7. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this
ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed.
Section 8. 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 day of
20
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MAYOR, LINDA KOCHMAR
ATTEST:
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:
EFFECTNE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.:
Ordinance No. 10- Page 5 of S
City Council Agenda Bill
Attachment #2:
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
Amendments to FWRC Chapter 19 relating to clarifying the complete
application and review standards of the zoning and development codes,
and a housekeeping amendment that maintains consistent critical areas
language.
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
CITY OF �
�'�derall�ay
STAFF REPORT TO THE PL�!�NNING COMNIISSION
Plaaning Commission Meeting of August Z5, 2010
Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18 — Subdivuions,
Chapter 19.15.040 — DevelopmentApplication Submittal Requirements,
Chapter 19.15.045 — Completeness ofApplications, and
Chapter 19.15.030 — Review Processes for improvements and additions to developed sites.
SUBMITTAL REQUIItEMENTS FOR PLATS AND COMMERCIAL PROJECTS
Federal Way File No.10-102132-00-UP
Report prepared by Senior Ptanner Deb Barker
L PURPOSE OF AMENDMENT
As part of the 2010 Planning Commission Work Program, City sta.ff proposes amendments to the
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) to address issues identified by the City Council and the City's
Stakeholder Group. At this time, stai� is proposing to clarify which projects are subject to
completeness standards, and is further proposing that the submittal requirements for plats and
commercial projects be standardized, to the extent possible, in order to assist developers in the
application process, to ensure consistency in project completeness, and ta provide data necessary for
the annuat Buildable Lands Reports required by King County. One housekeeping amendment is also
proposed.
II. BACKGROUND
The City of Federal Way Stakeholder Group has conducted annual meetings to review City codes
and procedures since 2006. One concern was that plat applications are too detailed and require too
much information too eazly in the process. Staff has reviewed the requirements for various projects
and found that for the most part, submittal items currently requested are needed in order to review
plat applications, but some disccetion can be applied to initial submittal reqturements that are
currently listed in the FWRC. Staff also identified the need to clarify language regarding
completeness standards for Process I, II, III, and N land use review processes. A housekeeping
amendment is also proposed.
III. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CODE AMEPiDMENTS
To effectively communicate the submittal requirements and ciarify the objectives for review, staff
proposes to relocate submittal requirements from the FWRC into standardized submittal requirement
checklists and/or technical handouts (see attached exhibits). Standardizing submittal requirements
checklists and technical handouts will make the submittal process more straight forward for the
applicant when preparing an application, and will support their ability to submit a complete
application. ln this time of changing technology, some typical requirements become outdated. A
checklist allows customization and provides flexibility as technology evolves. In addition to the
standardized submittal requirements, this code amendment clarifies that Use Process I, II, [II, and N
are subject to completeness review. The following is a summary of the proposed amendments:
(a) Short Subdivisions — Chapter 18.30.030 Conlent and form of application
FWRC 1830.030 lists the standards for the application for a short pla�. This language is also
used for applications for binding site plans. FWRC 18.30.030(2) lists thirty separate items that
must be depicted on a submitted short plat drawing or submitted with the formal application.
The purpose of this amendment is to eliminate this section and replace it' with language that
refers to the checklist thax is maintained by City sta:ff. See EzhibitA — FWRC 18.30:030
Content and form of application and Exhibit B— Bulletin #101, Short Subdivision.
(b) Preliminary Plat — Chapter 18.35.020 Content and form of applieation
FWRC 18.35.020 tists the standards for a preliminary plat application. FWRC 1835A20(2)
lists over thirty separaxe items that must be depicted on submitted drawings or included with the
formal app[ication. T'he purpose of this amendment is to eliminate this section and replace it
with language that refers to the checklist that is maintained by staff. See Exhibit C— FWRC
18.35 020 Content and form of application and F,xhibit D- Bulletin #037, Preliminary Plat
Submittal Requirements.
(c) Permits and Review Processes — Chapter 19.1 S. 040 Development Application Submitfal
Requirements
FWRC 19.15.040 Lists the standards for a commercial project applicatian which require a
detecminaxion of completeness. FWRC 19_ 15.040 lists over thirty separate items �hat must be
depicted on submitted dra.wings or provided.with the application, but does not clarify which
applications ate subject to completeness re�riew. The purpose of this amendment is to clarify
that Process I, II, III and N projects are subject to completeness review. The amendment also
eliminates the list of submitta.l requirements and replaces it with language that refers to
checklists that are maintained by City staff. See Exhibit E— FWRC 19. I.i.040 Development
Application Submittal Requirements, Exhibit F— Bulletin #OS3, Development Requirements for
Process I, Exhibit G— Bulletin #054, Development Requirements for Process II, and Exhibit
H— Butletin #001, Development Requirements for Process III or N.
(d) Permits and Review Processes - Chapter 19.1 S.04S Completeness of App[ications
FWRC 19.15.045 identifies the timing and steps that the city must take when an application is
determined to be complete. Although state regulations. dictaxe notice of complete application for
specific procedural actions, the current code does not distinguish how different [and use
processes are treated with respect to completeness. The purpose of this amendment is to clarify
that Process I, II, III, and N land use processes are subject to completeness standards.
In addition, this amendment is intended to clarify completeness review procedures. Use Process
I and Process II receive expedited eompleteness review at the time of application intake and the
Planning Commission Staff Report
K:�2009 Code Ameadments\Submittal requiremmts�Staff repon\Curtent staff repoR with e�chibitsGSTAEF REPOR'P ciurent with housekaping aznendmeatdoc Page 2
appticant is provided with a"notice of completeness" at intake. However, Process III anc! N
applications receive completeness review during Development Review Committee (DRC)
deliberations that are scheduled within 28 days of receipt of the app(ication. The applicant is
mailed a tetter of comp(eteness following DRC review. See Exhibit I— FWRC 19.15.045
Completeness of App[ications.
(e) Permits and Review Processes — Chapter FWRC 19.1 S. 030(1) (� Review Processes for
imprnvements and additions to developed sites
A housekeeping amendment is being proposed to replace the term "sensitive" areas with the
term "critical" areas and etiminate references to the term "significaat tree." The term
"sensitive" area was changed to "critical" area in a 2004 code amendment. The term "sensitive"
area currently found in FWRC 19.15.030(1)(fl was not changed as part of that 2004 code
amendment; this amendment corcects that oversight. Also, the term "significant tree" was
e(iminated as a result of the 2409 code amendment for "Clearing, Grading and Tree and
Yegetation Retention. " The proposed change eliminates this term from FWRC 19.15.030(1)(fl
as it is no longer used in the FWRC. See Exhibit J— FWRC 19.1 S. 030 Review processes for
improvements and additions to developed sites.
N. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY
The Project is procedurally exempt from State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review under
WAC 197-11-800(19) (Procedural Actions). Public Notice of the August 4, 2010, public hearing
was published and posted on July 17, 2010, in accordance with the City's procedura.l requirements.
There were no public comments.
V. DECISIONAL CRITERIA
FWRC 19.80.130 provides criteria for zoning text amendments. The following section analyzes the
comptiance of the proposed zoning text amendments with the criteria provided by FWRC 19.80.130.
The City may amend the text of the FWRC only if it fmds that
1. The proposed amendments are consistent witE� the applicable provisions of the
comprehensive plan.
The proposed FWRC zoning text amendments are consistent with the fotlowing goals and
policies conta.ined in the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP):
LUG2 Develop an efficient and timely development review process based on a public/private
parhiership.
LUP4 Maximize efficiency of the development review process.
EDPI S 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.
HP9 Maximize efficiency in the City's development review process and ensure that
unnecessary time de[ays and expenses are eliminated. Continue to provide streamlined
permitting processes for development that is consistent with the FWCP and FWCC,
and that has no adverse impacts.
r��gc��� s�R�«c
K:120Q9 Code AmeodmentslSubmittal requircmeotslSqff repatlCu�rent staff repat with exlubitslSTAFE REPORT cu�rent wit6 housekeeping amendmmtdac Page 3
HPI D Encourage community input, where appropriate, into the development permit process
by providing thorough and timely information to the public.
HPII Continue to assist developers with housing proposals at the earliest possible
opportunity, including preapplication meetings, to produce projects that can be
reviewed quickly and maximize their ability to receive percnits.
2. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to public health, safety, or
wetfare.
The proposed FWRC text amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public
health, safety, or welfare because it standardizes development regularions to provide
clarity about what constitutes a complete application; defines comp[eteness etigibility;
and refines various related codes in order to increase the efficiency of the development
review process.
3. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the residents of the City.
Approval of the proposed code amendment would bene�t the City as a whole as it provides
clarity about what constitutes a complete application, which results in continued development
within the City, thus aiding the local economy and the housing market
VI. PLArTNING COMMISSIOIY REVIEW AND ACTION
Pursuant to FWRC 19.80.050(b}, the City Councit may review Ci "ty-initiated changes to the text of
the zoning code from time to rime at the Council's discretion. The Pla.nning Commission is being
asked to review the proposed changes to the zoning code and forwazd a recammendation to the City
Council. Chapter 19.80 FWRC, "Process VI Review," esta.blishes a process and criteria for zoning
code text amendments. Consistent with Process VI review, the role of the Pla.nning Commission is to
review and evaluate the zoning code text regarding any proposed amendments; to detercnine whether
the proposed zoning code text amendment meets the criteria provided by FW2C 19.80.130; and to
forward a recommendation to City Council regarding adoption ofthe proposed zoning code text
amendment. Consistent with the provisions of FWRC 19.80.240, the Planning Commission may take
the following actions regarding the proposed zoning code text amendments:
1. Recommend to City Council adoption of the FWRC text amendments as proposed;
2. Modify the proposed FWRC text amendments and recommend to City Council adoption of
the FWRC text amendments as modified;
3. Recommend to City Council that the proposed FWRC text amendments not be adopted; or
4. Forward the proposed FWRC text amendments to City Counci( without a recommendation.
VII. STAFF RECOMMENDATIOPI
Based on the above staff anatysis and decisional criteria, staff recommends that the following
amendments to FWRC Title 18 Subdivisions, and to Chapter 19.15 FWRC Permits and Review
Processes as outlined in Section III above be recommended for approval to the City Council.
l. Amendments as set forth in Exhi6it A, to FWRC 1830.03U, Content and form of
application. �
2. Amendments as set forth in E�chibit C, to FWRC 18.35.020, Content and form of
application.
Plaming Commission Staff Report
K:�2009 Code AmeadmentclSubmittal ra�uirementslStaffreport�Gurent staffceport with exhibitsiSTAFF REPORT cucrent with housekaping amendmentdoc Page 4
3. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit E, to FWRC 19.15.040, Development Application
Submittat Requirements.
4. Amendments as set forth in E�chibit I, to FWRC 19.15.045, Completeness of
Applications.
5. Amendments as set forth in Exhibit J, to FWRC 19.15.030, Review processes for
improvements and additions to developed sites.
EXHIBTTS
Exhibit A, FWRC 18.30.030 Content and form of application (Short subdivision)
Exhibit B, Revised Short Subdivision Handout
Exhibit C, FWRC i 835.020 Conteni and form of application (Preliminary plat)
Exhibit D, Revised Preliminary Plat Submittal Requirements Handout
Exhibit E, FW1tC 19.15.040 Development Application Submittal Requirements
E�ibit F, Checklist for Development Requirements for Process I, Director's Approval
Exhibit G, Revised Checklist for Development Requirements for Process II, Site Plan Review
Exhibit H, Revised Checklist for Development Requirements, Process III (Project Approva!) or
Process IV (Hearing Ezaminer Approval)
Exhibit I, FWRC 19.15.045 Completeness of applicatiorrs
Exhibit J, FWRC 19.15.030 Review processes for improvements and additiorrs to developed sites
Ptanning Commission Slaff Report
K:�2009 Code AmendmentslSubmittal teqoirements�.Staff ceport\Cucrent statt'report wiffi exhibits�.STAFF REPOKT cunent with housekeeping amendmeatdoc Page 5
EXHIBIT A
PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18.30, "Short Subdivisions"
18.30.030 "Content and form of application"
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
__ _ _. _ __ - - - --
Exhibit A
18.30.030 Contenf and form of application.
All short subdivision applications must at the minimum qrovide the information
contained within Bulletin #010 Short Subdivision Submittal Rea�irements. The
submittal requirements are not intended to determine if an anqlication conforms
to cifii of Federat Way codes. Thev are used onlv to determine if all required
materials have been submitted A code related review witl oceur after a complete
application has been submitted The director mav waive anv sectio�s determined
to be not reasonablv necessarv.
• - - - - - - - - _
- -- ■-- - -
.
, - - - - - - -
�
• - - � - - - -
- -- - - - -
, - -- - -
. . �� - -
.
� - - - -
- - �� - -
'�: - - - - - _- - - - -
� �
, , , ,
, •,
S�dFiFIS19F�:
, , > >
, , .
, . .
. � + •
,
> > +
� �
, , � ,
� . •
. ` -- ' - - ----- -r ----"__ _•_--`-` -- --._u __ �_..._a:..a..�,.a.. ..11...,.. ..,.,.J - :
..i.r.e c. 1�� 1�1��.
i �
�'�b"tL���J:
� '
� •
t
��':
�Pi�:
.�
��nle�e. i* i �+n�.�mn.+nierl hv +he re�� �ec�+erl foo_
(Ord. No. 09-610, § 3(Exh. A), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(2)), 5-15-07;
Ord. No. 97-291, § 3, 41-97; Ord. No. 90-41, § 1(16.150.10 —16.150.30), 2-27-
90. Code 2001 § 20-83.)
K�20o9 Code Aweodme�s�Submittal requiremmts�Scaffreport�Currau sw@'rcport wi[6 «Iubits�Exhibics.� B. C, D�Exhibit A t8.3o short plaz.doc Page 2
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT TO PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18.30, "Short Subdivisions"
Bulletin O10 - Short Subdivision
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
CiTY OF ��
Federal ��a�
DEPART�IEiYT OF COMMUNTfY DEVELOPMELVT SERVICES
3332� 8`� Avenue South
PO Box 9718
Federal Way WA 98063-9718
253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609
www.ciryoffederalway.com
SHORT SUBDIVISION
PURPOSE
A short subdivision (i.e., short ptat) is the division or re-division of land into nine or fewer lots for the
purpose of sale, lease, or transfer of ownership. A short subdivision may be a conventional or ctuster
subdivision, cottage housing, zero-lot line townhouse development, or small lot detached development of
nine or fewer lots, as we[1 as a binding site plan. A short subdivision must be approved and recorded
before newly created tots may be legally sold.
HOW TO APPLY
The applicant (owner or owner's appointed agent) files a complete application with the Department of
Community Development Services using the Master Land Use Application form availabte at the
department (and on our website, www.cityoffederalway.com). The applicant aLso provides any information
or material as specified in the provisions of the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) describing the
decision applied for and any additional information or material that the�director determines is reasonably
necessary for a decision on the matter. Please refer to the following "Submittal Requirements" section to
determine the materials that must be submitted to complete your application for a short subdivision.
PREAPPLtCATlON CONFERENCE
Applicants aze encouraged to schedule a preapplication conference to become familiar with FWRC
requirements, policies, and regulations. It is also an opportunity to coordinate with City departments and
obta.in their comments on the proposed subdivision. Refer to the City's prea.pplication conference handout
for information on preapptication conferences.
WHO MAKES ?HE DEClSION
The director will make the decision on the short subdivision. The application is processed under the
provisions of Chapter 1830 FWRC, "Short Subdivision Plats." Your applicaxion wiil be evaluated on the
basis of the infornla.tion you provide, the criteria listed in the pertinent sections of the City's regulaxions,
and inspection ofthe properly. Short subdivisions shall be designed to the standards ofFWRC 18.55.010
through 080, and 18.60.030 through 120. Upon determining that the short subdivision application is
complete, the director (or his/her designee) shall distribute a notice of comptete application.
COMPLIANCE WITH SEPA
Short subdivisions aze usually exempt from the Washington Sta.te Environmental Poticy Act (SEPA).
However, a SEPA checklist and corresponding fee will be required if any of the following is associated
with the short subdivision: 1) the site is subject to critical azea review; 2) the short subdivision requires
stormwater, sewer, or water tines larger than eight inches in diameter, 3) the short subdivision occurs on
KVA09 Code Art�mdma�tslSu6mittal req�uranensVSnff rcportlCurcart sraff rcport with addbia�E�Chibiu A B. C, D1Fnlubit B-&Jletin O10 Shat Subdrviam.doe Page 1
land covered 6y water; or 4) the short subdivision is a further subdivision of a previously exempted short
subdivision. The director will determine the scope of the environmental review required by the appiication
in order to comply with SEPA. For a detailed explanation of the City's environmental policy, cefer to
FWRC Title 14.
CRITICAL AREAS
Projects that involve work within critical areas (e.g., wetEands, streams, steep slopes, and lakes) may
require that the City contract out for expert technical assistance. Pursuant to FWRC 19.150.030, the
applicant is responsible for providing any inforcnation, mapping, studies, and materials, and for paying for
inspecrions or ceview by a qualified professional accep�abte to the City. You will be advised at an eazly
point in the process if your project will be subject to these types of expenses.
SHORELINES
Short subdivision that are within 200 feet of the ordinary hi�h water mazk of Puget Sound, Steel Lake,
North Lake, or Lake Kilarney require review under the city's Shorel'ine Master Program. Applicants shauld
speak with department staff for further information regarding shoreline regulations prior to submitting.a
formal apptication.
TRAFFIC-RELATED REQUIREMENTS
All short subdivisioris are subject to transportation concurrency and Traffic Impact Fee requirements. Refer
to Concurrency Application Informarion and Traffic Impact Fee handouts for additional information.
APPEALS
Any decision issued by the director can be appealed. The Ciry of Federal Way Hearing Examiner decides
appeals of short subdivision decisions after a public heazing. See FWRC 1830.140, et seq. for detailed
information regazding appeals of short subdivision decisions.
RECORDING
The City records all approved short subdivisions with the King County Division of Records and Elections.
A copy of the documents (referred to as a short plat), stamped with the recording number, is then
distributed to the appticant, file, and King County Department of Assessments. All fees for such recording
must be paid by the applicant before recording.
Bul(etin #O l0 —June 7, 20 t0 Page 2 of � k�IandouulShort Subdivision
SHORT SUBDIVISION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
A complete application is required before the City can proceed with technicai analysis and make an
informed decision on your application. Following is a list of materials that must be submitted with your
application. Please do not tum in your application until all items on the tist that apply to your proposal
have been included. Consult with the Deparlrnent of Community Development Services if you have a
question. All application materials become public information.
GENERA! REQlIiREMENTS
Submitted
A. Completed Master Laztd Use Application form including signature of persons with
ownership interest in the property. Agent authorization is required if application is not
sisned bv owners of all subiect narcels.
B. All application fees
C. Two copies of a computation sheet (with surveyor's seal) that provides the square footage
of all streets, individual lots and tracts, and totat azea contained within the subject parceLs,
i.e. Lot closure calculations.
D. Two copies of a ritle report for ttte subject property, prepared within 90 days, including
any easements or reshictions affecting the properties with a description, purpose, and
reference by auditor's fcle number andlor recording number, parties of interest; and any
restricrions or covenants rnnninQ with the nroaertv.
E. A copy of the current county quarter section map for the area. (These maps can be found at
F. Vicinity map on separate 8%z x 11 sheet
G. Two copies of certificate of water availability, signed within a year of the date of
auqlication (onlv renuired for vacant proqerty).
�I. One copy of certificate of sewer avaitability, si�ed within a year of the date of
appticatioq imless the site is to be served by an on-site septic system. One copy of the
Seattle-King County Health Department approval of the proposed subdivision is required,
if the project is to be served by on-site septic system.
I. Site photographs from each compass point (north, east, south, & west) referenced
on the site plan
J. Two copies of preliminary engineering dcawing showing the locarion and size of all
ditches, culverts, catchbasins, and other parts of the design for the control of surface water
drainage. (This is a separate sheet from the short plat map.)
K. Two copies of a preliminary clearing and grading and tree/vegetation retention ptans_
consistent with Chapter 19.120.040 FWRC, Clearing, Grading and Tree and Vegetation
Retenrion.
L. Two copies of a preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR), if required per the
King Counry Surface Water Desi�;n Manual (KCSWDII�.
M. Additional information as reQuired by the Community Development Services and/or Public
Works Departments.
N. Seven full size prints of the proposed short plat as specified below as well as one copy of
8-1/2 by i l iach paper. One set of reproducible mylar drawings will be required after the
short p(at is approved, prior to si�tin� and recordinQ.
Bu[lerin #O10 —June T, 2010 Page 3 of � k:�Elandouts\Short Subdivision
SEVEN COPIES OF FUIt SIZE PLANS (ASSEMBLEQ IN SETS AND FOIDED TO 9" X 12'�)
The drawing shall be 18" x 24"in size, dra.wn to a scale of 1"=50' or larger on the City's standard short plat
title block form, and must comply with the provisions of RCW 58.09 and WAC 3i2-130. The drawing
shall include, but is not limited to, the following informarion:
t. Praposed name of the short subdivision. (You
may wish to check with the City to make sure the
name of the short plat has not been taken yet.)
2. Locarion by secrion, township, range, and/or
other legal description.
3. Name, address, and phone number of developer.
4. Name, address, and phone number of each
properry owner.
5. Name, address, and phone number of registered
land surveyor.
5. Scale of drawing, north arrow, and date
(subsequent resubmittals must have a revision
date}.
7. Existing topography of tHe Iand'indicated �y
contours of two- foot intervals for slopes less
than 15 percent and five foot intervats for stopes
of 15 percent or greater. Vertical Dahun
(NVGD-29 or KCAS).
8. Location and extent of significant natural
features on a�d immediately adjacent to the site.
Such features shall include but are not timited to
streams, wetlands, views, stands of trees, and
water bodies to the extent that significant natural
features and/or their associated buffers affect the
short subdivision.
9. Comprehensive plan and zoning ctassification of
the proposed short subdivision site and adjoining
properties.
10. Adjacent ownerships and the tand or tot divisions
of adjoining properties not in co�unon
ownership for a distance of at least 100 feet
around the perimeter of the property proposed
for subdivision. A separate list of names may be
used for clarification purposes.
11. Locatioq widths, and names of existing or prior
streets, railroad, or urility rights-of-way or
easements, access easements, parks and other
public spaces, and existing permanent structures
to be retained within and adjacent to the
proposed short subdivision. R/here the property
has been previously subdivided, the original lots,
blocks, streets, easements, etc., shatl be shown
by dotted lines. Show distance between existing
structures to be retained and property lines._
(Show pavement widths, planter strips,
sidewallcs, uti(ity poles, etc.)
12. Existing and conceptually proposed water, sewer,
and drainage faciliries on, under, or over the
land showing size, grades, and locations.
13. Locarion and widths, and names of proposed
streets, utility right-of-ways, and easements.
14. Layout, number, tot sizes, and dimensions of
proposed lots. Inclucte the square footage of each
lot.
15. Parcels of tand intended to be dedicated for public
use, or resecved for use of owners of the property in
the short subdivision.
16. A statement explaining how open space shall be
provided. For a coavenrionat short subdivision,
open space in the amount of 15 percent of the gross
land area of the subdivision site is required to be
provided. If the City determines that the location,
quality, or extent of the required open space would
not fulfill the intent or purpose of useful common
open space, a payment of an equivalent fee-in-lieu
of the requuect project open space shall be paid
pursuant to FWRC 18.SS,U60(2),
17. Total acreage of the site platted, prior to creation of
any tots, tracts, or other dedications.
18. Acreage precluded from development due to the
presence of critical areas, including: wet(ands,
streams, steep slopes, aac� other feadues (along with
buffers), broken out by caxegory, covered by crirical
areas regulations.
T9. Acreage dedicated for public rights-of-way (for both
newly created streets and expansions of existing
streets), as well as private Eracts, alleys, and ingress/
egress and utiliries easement created for the purpose
of providing aceess to lots within subclivisions.
20. Location and acreage of tracts (or other azeas)
dedicated for retenrioa/detenrion/drainage facilities,
open space and parks, or other on-site public
facilities, broken out by category.
21. Calculation of net ptat area, which is �ross plat area
minus critical areas, rights-of-way, private open
space, and public purpose lands?
22. Building setback lines.
23. Typical roadway sections including streetlights and
street trees (existing and proposed).
24. Vicinity map with labeled s�eets and north arrow.
25. Basis of bearing, statement of equipment and
procedures used, indication of peritneter boundary,
lot, and right-of-way lines with a notation of
bearings or azimuth &om the north, distances, and
curve data, as well as the location aad description of
all monuments, both found and set
� Open space requirements for cottage housing, zero-lot line town house
development, and smail lot deffiched developmeat can be found in
FWRC 18.35.060.
Z Public purpose lands mean acreage of tracts (or odser azeas) dedicated
for �etendon/detention/ drainage facilities, opea space and parks, or
other on-site public faciliees.
Bulletin #010 August 18, 2010 Page 4 of 5 k�Iandouts�Short Subdivision
26. Statement oEequipment and procedures used.
27_ Existing addresses, if applicable.
28. Indication of perimeter boundary, lot, and right-
of way lines with a notation of bearings or
azimuth from the north, distances, and curve
data.
29_ Location and description of all monuments, both
found and set
30. The City's ffle number will be assigned upon
application. Inctude the file number on subsequent
resubmittals.
Butletin #Ot0 —August 18, 2010 Page 5 of � k:�Fiandouts�ShoR Subdivision
EXHIBIT C
PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 18.35, "Preliminary Plat"
18.35.020 "Content and form of application"
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
--- - __._.._ _ _
Exhibit C
application conforms to city of Federat Wav codes. They are used onl�o
determined if all reuuired materials have been submitted. A code related review
:will occur after a comp(ete aQ,plication has been submitted. The director mav
waive any sections determined to be not reasonably necessarv.
, ,
, , ,
des�#�er�
/iii\ Al.+mo .+e�rlre�e� �+nrl r+M�r�e n��mher n�cl�iel�r�er
jT�rj'�an� , � -
� � •
� , .
� .
'�er�eya�-er�e�e�:
, , , ,
�
, , ,
18.35.020 Content and form of application.
� - - - -
- - �� --
�i.- - - - -- - - - -
� _!�'lT:TT.�T_'�
� - - - - - - - - - - - -
� - - - - -
� - - - - - -
, _ _ - -
� - - - - - -
� - - - - - - -
- �� --
- �� --
:iile - - - - _ - ' -
K:�2009 Code Ammdments�Submittal requiremrnts\Staff report�Current staff �eport with ezhibits�ExMibi[s A, B, C, D�Exhibit C- lB.Si.020 Prdiminary Pla submittal «q.dac
�.ia,�-�-•. - - - _ _ -
��
�� .
�
. ,
. �
�
:(Ord. No. 09-610, § 3(Exh. A), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(2)), 5-15-07;
0rd. No. 98-309, § 3, 1-6-98; Ord. No. 97-291, § 3, 4-1-97; Ord. No. 90-41,
'§ 1(16.50), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 20-111.)
K�2009 Code Amendmants�Submithl requiremmtsl5taffrepart\Curteot staff repoR wich acltibits�Exhibiu A B, C, D�Exhibit C-18.35.020 Preliminary Pla wMnittal req.doc
EXHIBIT D
EXHIBIT TO PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FV�TRC) Title 18.35, "Preliminary Plat":
Bulletin #037 - Preliminary Plat Submittal Requirements
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
�
CITY OF �
Fe�deraf U1l�y
DEPARTMENTOFCO�IUNITY DEVELOPI�IENT
SERVICES
33325 8`� Avenue South
PO Box 9718
Federa( Way WA 98063-9718
253-835-2607;Fax 2�3-835-2609
www:citvoffederalwav.com
Preliminary Plat Submiitai Requirements
PURPOSE
A preliminary plat application allows the division or re-division of (and into ten or more lots for the
purpose of sale, lease, or transfer of ownership. A preliminary plat may be a conventional or cluster
subdivision, cotta.ge housing, zero-lot line townhouse development, or small lot detached development of
ten or more lots. A final plat must be approved and recorded before newly created lots may be tegally sold.
(Refer to Fina1 Plats Submittal Requirements handout for information on final plats.)
HOW TO APPLY
The applicant (owner or owner's appointed agent) fcles a complete application with the Deparlment of
Community Development Services using the Master Land Use Application form available at the
deparlment (and on our website, www.cityoffederalway.com). The applicant also provides any information
or material as specified in the provisions of the Federal YYay Reuised Code (FWRC) describing the
decision applied for and any additional information or material that the director determines is reasonably
necessary for a decision on the matter. Please refer to the following "Submittal Requirements" secrion to
determine the materials that must be submitted to be considered a complete prelimmary plat application.
PREAPPLICATtON CONFERENCE
Applicants aze required to schedute a preapplication conference to become familiar with FWRC
requirements, policies, and regulations. It is also an opportunity to coordinate with City departments and
obtain their comments on the proposed subdivision. Refer to the City's preapplication conference handout
for information on preapplication coaferences.
WHO MAKES THE DECISION
The City Council makes the decision on the preliminary plat based on a recommendation from the Hearing
Examiner, who holds the public hearing. The preliminary plat application is processed under the provisions
of Chapter 1835 FWRC, "Prelimivary Plat" Your application will be evaluated on the basis of the
informarion you provide, the criteria. listed in the pertinent sections of the City's regulatians, and inspection
of the property. Preliminary plats shalt be designed to the standards of FWRC 18.55.010 to 080, and
18.60.030 to 120.
COMPLIANCE WtTH SEPA '
Preliminary plats are subject to the Wasiungton State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA}_ Foc a detailed
explanation of the City's environmenta.l policy, refer to FWRC Title 14.
CRITICAL AREAS
Projects that involve work within critical areas (e.g., wetlands, streams, steep slopes, and lakes) may
require that the City contract out for expert technica! assistance. Pursuant to FWRC 19.150.030, the
applicant is responsible for providing any informa.tion, mapping, studies, and materials, and for paying for
inspections or review by a qua.lified professional acceptable to the City. You wili be advised at the eacliest
possible point if your project will be subject to these types of expenses.
SHOREUNES
Subdivision that are within 200 feet of the ordinary high water mark of Puget Sound, Steel Lake, North
Lake, or Lake Kilarney require review under the city's Shoreline Master Program. Applicants should speak
with department stat� for further information regazding shoreline regularions prior to submitting a formal
application.
K�2009 Code Amadma�tslSubmittal «quiraneatslStsff repocdCurtrnt spff report with mdii6itslF.xlnbits e� B. C. D�Exhbit D- Hulldin 037 Prd'onioay Platdoc
TRAFFIC RELATED REQUIREMENTS
All preliminary plats are subject to transportation concurrency and Traffic Impact Fee requirements. Refer
to the concurrency information and Traffic Impact Fee handouts for additional information.
APPEALS
Any decision on a preliminary plat can be appealed to King County Superior Court. See FWRC 18.35.210,
for deta.iled information regarding appeals of preliminary plat decisions.
PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
A complete application is required before the City can proceed with technical analysis and make a
recommendation to the Hearir►g Examiner on your application. All checked items must be submitted to
constitute a complete application. Please note that a complete application does not imply compliance or
conformance with applicable codes. Please do not turn in your application until all items on the list that
apply to your proposal have been included. Consult with the Department of Community Development
Services if you have a question. All application materials become public information.
PRELIMINARY PLAT SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
Required Submitted
A. Completed Master Land Use Application form including signature of persons with
ownership interest in the property. Agent authorization is required if application is not
simed bv owners of all subiect parcels. _
B. All application fees including preliminary plat and SEPA fees.
C. Two copies of a current title report or plat certificate, prepared within the last 90 days,
(including any easements or resMctions affecting the properties with a description,
purpose, and reference by auditor's file number and/or recording number; parties of
interest; and any restrictions or covenants running with the property.)
D. A copy of the current King County Assessor's quarter section map for the area identifying
all properties within 300 feet of the proposed subdivision. (These maps can be found at
metrokc.�ov.)
E. One 11 x 17 reduced copy of the preliminary plat map.
F. Notice of availability from the purveyor(s) of sewer and water signed within a yeaz of the
date of preliminary plat application.
G. Copy of the preapplication summary letter.
H. Four copies of the projecYs Preliminary Technical Information Report (TIR) per the 2009
King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). T'he TIR must include a Level I
downstream analysis and must address relevance of the 8 Core and 5 Special Requirements
of the KCSWDM.
I. Four copies of critical areas studies, (i.e., geotechnical study, wetland delineation, wetland
mitigation, stream delineation, classification, critical aquifer recharge and wellhead
nrotection areas inventorv. etc.) _
J. Four copies of a School Access Analysis.
K. Four copies of special studies or requirements as requested in your preapplication
summ�ry letter
L. Four copies of Trip Generation or Tra�c Impact Analysis (TIA), prepared by an engmeer
licensed in the State of Washington, as required by the Traffic Division.
Bulletin #O10 — August 18, 2010 Page 2 of 4 k:�I-Iandouts\Short Subdivision
� �"� ` ; M. Seven copies of a landscape plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect idenrifying
�`� � <
� ..-
:� existing wooded azeas, meadows, rock outcroppings, proposed and requiced buffers, open
spaces, street trees, omamentai landscapiug, other landscape features, and stands of trees
and rotection techni ues as ma be re uired er the FWRC.
N. Seven copies of a pretiminary clearing and grading and tree/vegetation retention plan
- consistent with Chapter 19. t20.040 FWRC, Ctearing, Grading and Tree and Vegetation
Retentioa
O. Seven copies of a property survey in conformance with FWRC 1835A20(2), stamped by a
licensed land surve or.
P. Seven copies, as applicable, of a phasing plan showing divisions of the plat and a proposed
timetable for construction of each division.
Q. Seven copies of a proposed preliminary plat drawn to scale of 1" ° 100' or larger (1:50 is
preferred), which includes the Preliminary Plat Drawing Requirements listed on Page 5 of
" this handou�
R Additional information as required by the Commuuity Devetopment Services and/or Public
Works De artments.
Notice Requirements
Preliminary Plat - A list of the names and acldresses of all owners of real property, as shown
by the records of the county assessors located within 300 feet of any portion of the boundary
of the proposed subdivision and any adjo'ming reat properties owned by the owners of the land
proposed to be subdivided. If the owner of the property which is proposed to be subdivided
owns adjacent property, the addresses of owners of property located within 300 feet of any
portion of the boundaries of such adjaceutly located parceis must also be provided. Two sets
= of stamped envetopes with address labels for all owners described above.
SEPA — Provide one set of setf-addressed, stamped business sized envelopes (with City of
�;, � Federal Way retum address) of persons receiving property tax statements for all properties
;'��r - ° within 300 feet of the boundary of the subject property. Include a separate List of the addresses
�� �.i:� ¢' with their parcel numbers and an assessor's map showing the 300-foot boundary.
�:,, �
� �,�� �
�� "" -
���::-- ��f`
"�,� ,#' ,+�' ` '. ,, ' '
�' IMPORTANT — Piease do not submit metered envelopes. The Federal Way Post
��; g � �� � Office may refuse such envelopes. In addition, you are highly encouraged to use the
,;�. ; - �;. -•-: `Y Forever stamps.
-�...: ;.: �,. �.::
Bulletin #010 — August 18, 2010 Page 3 of 4 k:�Handouts\Short Subdivision
PREUMINARY PLAT DRAWING REQUIREMENTS
The preliminary plat drawing shall include, but is not limited to, the fotlowing informarion:
t. Proposed name of subdivision. (You may wish to
check with King County to make sure that the
name of your plat has not yet been used.)
2. Location by section/Wrvnship/range and lega[
descriprion.
3. Name, address, and phone number of the
developer.
4. Name, address, and phone aumber of each
property owner.
5. Name, address, and phone number of registered
land surveyor.
6. Scale of plat, date, and north arrow (subsec�uent
resubmittals mnst have a revision date).
7. Existing topography of the land indicated by
contours of twafoot intervals for slopes less than
15 percent and five-foot intervals for slopes of 15
percent or greater. Identify all slopes 40 percent or
greater on or within 25 feet of the site.
8. Locarion and extent of significant natural feat�ues
on and adjacent to the site: Such featiu�es include
strearos, wetlands, views, stauds of trees, water
bodies, to the extent that the significant naturai
feature and/or their associated buffers affect the
proposed plat.
9. Comprehensive plan and zoning classifications of
subject and adjoining properries.
t 0. Adjacent common ownerships and the land or lot
divisions of adjoining properties not in common
ownership for a distance of at least 100 feet around
the pecimeter of the property proposed for the
subdivision. A separate list of names may be used
for clarification purposes.
11. Location, widths, and names of existing or prior
platted streets; railroad, or utility rights-of-way or
easements; parks or otfier public spaces; and
existing permanent structures to be retained within
and adjacent to the proposed subdivisioa Where
the property has been previously subdivided, the
ori�nal tots, blocks, stireet easements, etc., sha(L be
shown in dotted lines in scale witkt the proposed
subdivision. Show distance between existing
structures to be retained and properly lines. (Show
pavement widths, ptanter strips, sidewalks, urility
poles, etc.)
12_ Existing and conceptually proposed water, sewer,
and drainage urilides oq under, or over the tand
showing size, grades, and location.
13. Locations and widths of proposed streets, utility
rights-of-way and easements.
14. Layout, number, and dimensions of proposed Iots.
Include the square footage of each lot
( 5. Parcels of land intended to be dedicated for public
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
�
23
24.
25.
26.
27.
� Open space reyuirements Eor cottage housing, zero-lot line town
house deve(opment, and smaU tot depched deveMpment can be fonnd
ia FWRC 18.55.060.
Z Public purpose lmeds mean acceage of uact� (or other areas)
dedicated for retention/detention/drainage facdifies, open space and
parks, or other oa-site public facdities. -
use, or reserved for the use of owners of the
property in the subdivision.
Building setback lines.
The location af all ditches, culv�rts, catch basins,
and other parts of the design for the control of
surEace water drainage.
Typical roadway sections, existing and proposed,
including streetlights and street trees.
A sta.tement explaining how open space shall be
pmvided. For conventional subdivisions, open
space in the amount of 15 perce�ct of the gross land
area of the subdivision site is required to be
provided. If the City determines that the location,
quality, or extent of the required open space would
not fulfill the intent or purpose of usefut common
open space, a payment of an equivalent fee-in-tieu
of the required project opeu space sha�l be paid
pursuant to FWRC 18.55.060(2).�
Toeal acreage of the site platted, prior to creation
of any Iots, tracts, or other dedications.
Acceage prectuded from developmen# due to the
presence of critical azeas, including: wetlaads,
streams, steep slopes, and other feaques (along
with buffers), broken out by category, co�rered by
crirical areas regularions.
Acreage dedicated for public rights-of-v�ay (for
both newly created streets and expansions of
existing streets), as we[1 as private tracts, alteys,
and ingresslegress and utilities easement create�
for the purpose of providing access to lots witE�in
subdivisions.
Location and acreage of tracts (or otfier areas)
dedicated for retention/detention/drainage
facilities, open space and parks, or other on-site
public facilities, broken out by category.
Net plat area, which is gross plat area minus
crirical areas, rights-of-way, private open space,
and public purpose lands.
Vicinity map with labeled streets and north arrow
showing the proposed subdivision's relation to the
area.
List the height of all retaining watls and rockeries.
The City's file number will be assigned upon
application. Include the file number on subsequent
resubmittals.
Bulletin #O l0 — August 18, 2010 Page 4 of 4 k:�Elandouts4ShoR Subdivision
EXHIBIT E
PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal YYay Revised Code (F WRC) Chapter 19.15 "Permits and Review
Processes"
19.15.040 "Development application submittal requirements"
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
Exhibit E
_ _-- -_ -- - -- - --- _ _-- ---- - -- - --- _ _ _---- ._._- - - - -- --- - -
19.15.040 Development application submittal requirements.
All use process I, II, ilI and IV applications �eies�s �•���^� ren� rir��
rlel�errwin �inr�� �� he rr�..rle •. }'+ ���he�{�er .. i.�r»nla�e •�r��li'.��ii+r� h.+� henn ..
s�+�ed must at the minimum provide the inforrnation contained within Bulletin '
#053. DeveloAment Requirements for Process /. Bulletin #054. Development �
Requirements for Process ll or B�Iletin #001 Development Requirements
Handouf for Proeess lll or !V dependinct on the particular Use Process beinq
a�plied for. The submittal requirements are not intended to determine if an
application conforms to city of Federal Way codes. They are used only to
determine if all required materials have been submitted. A code-related review
will occur after a complete application has been submitted. The director may
waive any sections determined to be not reasanably necessary.
� -- - - - -- -
• �. � ■-
��� _
- - - - �� -
� � � • a a . � - - - - - _
!�, � • • �. � �
_ „
-- - - � - - - - - - - -
� - - - - - -
� - - - - - - - -
- • - -
�- - -
i
� � � � � _ � �
� _ � _ � _ � � -
� _ � _
K�2009 Cade Amendmmts�Submittal aquiremmu�Statf report\Curtmt ua�report wit6 addbaslEzttibiu E, F G. H. I md PFshibit E- tevised I9.I5.040.doc
� l � � �
• � � � � � �
� � � � � � ■ 1 � �
� � � � � �
� � I �
� ' � � � � � ' ' � � � � �
� � � � � � ' � � � �
l 1 - ' � �
� �
� � � - ' � � ' ' �
:—r-- - -
, �°�IA�y�: :
{d�Rafl�iRgs��: .
(Ord. No. 09-610, § 3(Exh. A), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 09-594, § 18, 1-6-09; Ord. No.
_97-291, § 3, 4-1-97. Code 2001 § 22-33-)_ _ . _ _ _
[�;upp9 Code pmendmrnts�Submittal requ"vemrnts�.Snff report�Currmt sta@'cepoR with ezhibitt�Exhibin E, F G. EC I and 1�Exhibit E- revised I9.I5.040.doc
EXHIBIT F
EXHIBIT TO PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19.15,
"Permits and Review Processes"
Bulletin #053 -
Development Requirements for Process I— DiYecto�s Approval
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
CITY OF ��
������� ���
DEPARTMEN7' OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVlCES
3332� 8`� Avenue South
PO Box 97 t 8
Federal Way WA 98063-9718
253-83�-2607;Fax 253-835-2609
w�vw.cityoffederalway.com
DEVE�OPMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR PROCESS I
Director's Approval
Project Name:
Project Description:
Applicant/Agen� _
Fiie No(s):
• This form is to be used by an applicant as a guide in determining what constitutes a complete
application for Process I, Directors Approval.
• All checked items must be submitted to constitute a complete application.
� Process I applications that contain all checked items will be determined complete at intake.
The applicant or agent will be notified immediately if an application is considered complete.
• A comptete application does not imp(y compliance or conformance with applicable codes.
How To AP�tr
The appiicant (owner or owner's appointed agent) must file the fo[lowing items:
Q l
0
;`
D
� A. Master Land Use Application, with owner's signature
Q B. A detailed narrarive description of the project, on a sepacate 8%2 x 11 sheet
Q` C. Siz (folded) copies of the site plan
� ' D. Appiicarion fees
If the project involves a new structure or changes to the exterior of an existing structure, also provide:
R uired S ubmitted
� �
;:❑ � -
E. Sia (folded) copies of existing and proposed building elevations
F. Color & materials indicators (color photos or color board and materials sample)
K:12049 Code Amendments\Submittal rec}uirementslStaff repoR\Current staff report with exhibits�Exhibits E, F G, I-F, [ and
J�Exhibit F- Bulletin 053 Process I Development Requirements.doc
WHEN USE PROCESS I IS USED
Reference to Process I is found in various pla.ces in the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC), indicating
that certain developmen� activities, uses, or interpretations aze permitted only if approved using Process I.
Any Process I appiication that is not exempt from the requirements of the State Ercuironmental Policy Act
(SEPA) will be reviewed using the procedural requirements of Process III. See FWKC Titte 19, Chapter
55, for a detailed explanation of Process L
WHO MAKES THE DECISION
Under Process I, the Director of Community Development Services makes the decision based on review
and analysis of decisional criteria and ffie official file. See FWRC 19:SS.Q 10 for decisional criteria.
APPEALS
Any decision issued by the director can be appealed. Appeals of Process I, Director's Decision, are decided
by the City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner after a public hearing. See FWRC 19.55.050 for detailed
information regarding appeals of Process I decisions.
� ' . ��-�.���: � ��'� �
.���� _. $ _-..
- Pfeas�. cc�nscdes t�iis as. a�o4ie� _a�CQU�pteteBess -
- f- _
s . _��.. . , . . . _,, � .. . ,._x " „ _ _
lt�� re ��rements
�,._ .
:cvEt. ri-,isvcE.sruirav -
.__... ..�
s �tai�"rec�uests �c�i�cct� `� � ''
�_
�- � _ _
Bulletin #053 — August t 8, 20 t0 Page 2 of 2 k:�Iandouts�Process I Development Requirements
EXHIBIT G
EXHIBIT TO PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19.15,
"Permits and Review Processes"
Bulletin #054:
"Development Requirements for Process II — Site Plan Review"
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
�
CtTY OF
�G����� ���
DEPARTMENT OE COMdiUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERV[CES
33325 8`� Avenue South
PO Box 9718
Federai Way WA 98063-9718
253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609
www.citvoffederalwav_com
DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR PROCESS II
Srr� Pu►n► REViEw
Project Name:
Project Description:
Applicant/Agen�
Fle No(s):
• This form is to be used by an applicant as a guide in determining what constitutes a complete
application for Process II, Site Plau Review.
• All checked items must be submitted to constitute a complete application.
• Process II applications that contain all checked items will be determined complete at intake. The
applicant or agent will be notified immediately if an application is considered complete.
• A complete application does not imply compliance or conformance with applicable codes.
Process li Submittal Checklist
EZ uired Submitted
-� Q�. ��1 � A. Completed Master Land Use Application, with owner's signature
_� � �: B. Application fees
h,
f�. = �: _; C. Copy of entire undertying plat or King County Assessor's parcel map
? �":
„C� ��' -: D. Vicinity map on separate 8'/z x 11 sheet
' -:Y+
;�� � a =� f=: E. Two copies of current title report for subject properly
_ t �� �
` `; ` F. Two copies of current letters of water and sewer availability (only required for
;� ` . ��` :
:: � :: vacant ro
<� ��` �� �� G. Site photographs from each compass point (north, east, south, & west) referenced
= t: , on the site lan
K�2009 Code AmmdmeneslSubmittal req�iranmts�Staff repocdCursem sta@'ceport with eulubits�E�ubia E, F G. H. [ and 1�Exlubit G- Process Q DevdoPmrnt Reqs Pooc Fotmatdac
Generai Ptan Standards for Process il
• Eight complete and folded sets of drawings (folded to 9 x 12 inches).
• Minimum plan sheet size shall be 24 x 36 inches.
• Plans must be drawn at an engineering scale that allows the entire plan to fit on one sheet
• Minimum scale is 1:20 unless otherwise authorized.
• All information is to be legible.
• Ptans shall be prepared by a certified professional ((icensed in the state of Washington) unless
otherwise authorized. Note: If the development proposal has a value of $75 000 or a'eater, the site
survev site plan areliminarv draina�e srading ri t-of-way_plans and buildin� e(evation plans sha(1
be prepared bv a certified professional licensed in the state of WashinQton. The survev shall be
prepazed b� a certified land surveyor and the site plan dra.inage grading right-of-wav nlans, and
building�, elevations bv a certified architect or en�ineer R�a�,rdless of the value of the develoqmen�
landscape plans must be�repared bv a Washic2 State licensed tandscane architect.
. J,�, .
�� �:° H. Topographic survey
� • Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
• Name, phone number, and license stamp of preparer
�
• North arrow and bar scale
i� Y "' •
�, Stte area
- • Properry lines, utilities, easements, sidewallcs, street edges, existing structuFes, parking,
and site improvements (e.g. drainage systems with pipe sizes, invert and tim
etevations)
• Structures and driveways within 150 feet of subject site (on both sides of street)
• Minimum two foot contours for slopes less than 15 percent and five foot contours for
slopes 15 percent or greater; datum shall be King County Aerial Survey or NGVD-29
• Delineate slopes greater than 40 percent grade on or within 25 feet of the site
• Delineate streams, ponds, wetlands, natural drainage courses, and other surface water
feari�res on or within 200 feet of the site per Federa! Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title
14, Chapter 30, "Criticat Areas"
• Identifv trees defined bv FWRC 19.0�.200
Bulletin #054 — August 18, 2010 Page 2 of 6 k:/E[andouts/Pcocess [I Development Requirements
K\2009 Cods Ammdmm�Submiasl m�uirartrncslScaff repoMCu�ran staff rcpo�c with od�bas�Exhibi[s 6. E G. B. [ md nEzhibit G- Proeesc Q Devdopmatt Reqs poot fomucdoc
i
�
...: � ,_ �, -
-'� �.7.. ,: ";
L Site plan
+ Project name, ptan d3te, and/or revision dat�(s)
• Nazne and phone number of owner/agent
• Name, phone number, and license stamp of preparer
• North arrow and bar scale
• Vicinity map
• Site area
• Total parking stall count
• Total gross floor area of all proposed floors or levels
• Location and dimensions of existing/proposed structures, property lines, sidewalks,
easements, parking layout, street edges, mechanical equipment, trash enclosures,
outdoor uses, storage areas, fencing, rockeries, and retaining walls
• Existing streams, ponds, wetlands, natural drainage courses, and other surface water
features on or within 200 feet of site per FWRC Title 14, Chapter 30, "Critical Areas"
• Location of stands of trees as defined by FWRC 19.05.200
• Existing and proposed urilities including: utility poles and boxes, water, storm sewer,
sanitary sewer, and fire hydrants
• Structures and driveways within 150 feet of subject site (on both sides of street)
• IBC construction type and occupancy classificarion
• Location and square foota.ge calculations of any on-site pedestrian areas (i.e., plazas,
courtyards) or open space areas
• Show location and calculate acrea��nrecluded from development due to the presence
of critical areas includin� wetlands streams. steep slopes. and other features (alons
with buffers) broken out by categorv covered b�criticat areas reeularions. as
�nlicable.
� Show location and calculate acreaee dedicated for public ri�ts-of-way (for both newlv
created streets and expansions of existin� streetsl. as well as private tracts. allevs, and
in�ess/eQZess and utilities easement broken out b�categorv.
• Show location and calculate acre �e of tracts (or other areasl dedicated or set aside for
retention/detention/drainage facilities open space or other on-site public facilities.
broken out b cY ategory
• Provide net site area which is gross azea minus critical areas, ri ts-of-wa�private
, . . �-- �- i
J. Preliminary drainage, grading, and right-of-way plan
• Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
• Nazne, phone number, and license stamp of preparer
• North arrow and baz scale
• Prelitninary storm drainage system in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface
water Design Manual (KCSWDM) as amended by Federa.l Way
� Preliminary �ading plan with finished contours; minimum two foot contours for stopes
less than 1� percent and five foot contours for slopes t 5 percent or greater, datum shatl
be King County Aerial Survey or NGVD-29
• Preliminary right-of-way improvement plan, as required by the Public Works Dept
• Approximate cnt & fill quaatities of site eardiwork
� Total existing and proposed impervious surFace area
• Existing and proposed utilities inctuding: utility poles and boxes, water, storm sewer,
sanitarv sewer, and fire hvdrants __
� Pubfic purpose lands mean acreage of tracts (or other areas) dedicated for retention/detention/drainage facilities, open space and
parks, or other on-site public facilities.
Bulletin #054 — August 18, 2010 Page 3 of 6 kJEIandouts/Prceess II Development Requirements
KVA09 Code A�ittal «quira�ncslScaff repon�Currmc uaff rcport wit6 e.du6its�EzAibiu H. F G, H. [ and J�Ezlubit G- Pmcess Q DwduPmrnt Reqs Poa formadoc
K. Preliminary landscape plan
�_ Q• • Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
• Name, phone number, and license stamp of preparer
• North azrow and baz scate
• Specific location, type, size, and number of trees to remain and to be removed
• Plant schedule with the scientific name, common name, size, spacing, and quanrity of
each
� • Specific location and square footage calculations of drought Wlerant landscaping
(document that a miaimum 25 perceat is pravided per FWRC 19.12�.040[6])
• [rrigation ptan for lawn areas
• Specific tocation, square footage calculations, and total square footage of each parking
. . lot landscape island per FWRC 19.125.070(2)(a)
+ Screening of outdoor facilities such as: trash/recycling enclosures, outdoor storage,
drive through facilities, stormwater faci(iries, and �rouad based mechanical equipment
• Building wall area landscaping per FWItC 19.125.040
�, - • Specific location of street trees in the right-of-way
;4 �. ,« y; ;,�. ..�. • Idenri eeimeter landsca e e as I, II, or tII
- � � ` � . �.' L. Building elevarions
{�;
'� h�,� • Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
,�� �; ��„� �` • Name, phone number, and license stamp of preparer
�
= � x. - �,� ;
� ; � �, ',,��.� � • Baz scale
����`�`� • Sta.tement of arcluteccural design iatent, finish materials, and colors
�������� � • Front, rear, and side (labeled as north, south, east, and west) building etevarions of
� ;{ proposed structures
� � �,�
� , £ �F ��, :: : Exterior wali openings
- Exterior materiaLs and colors board
• Gazbage/recycling Eacility screen details
• Roof-top and ground based mechanicat equipment screen details
• Buildin hei t calcularion
. , _ �_ : : . M. Clearing and adin�plan
C� , Q._ ' • Project name, p(an date. and/or revision date(s).
• Name. �hone number, and license stamp of preparer.
• North arrow and bar scale.
• Identification of existing,slo_pe depictin� areas with 0% to IS% stope: azeas with 15%
to 40% slope: and areas of 40% or �eater slope.
, • Proposed grades.
- • Location of all existingand/or proposed structures drivewa�, ri;ht-of-way
improvements, uriliries. and easements on the subject propertv.
• Desi�*+ation of all wetlands streams and other critical azeas that are on or within 300
feet of an�a proposed to be disturbed bv the nro�osed clearine and/or �radinQ_
� action
' � ..: • Areas proposed for clearing and the proposed use for such areas.
�.;
• Anv proposed� chan�es that adverselv affect or endanger trees on the arooerlv
= and/or adjacent properties. and specifications to maintain them.
• A minimum of two cross sections of the site drawn to scale, depicting the existin� and
proposed �ade and anYproposed rockeries and/or retaining walls. The director mav
also reqnire a three dimeasional topoeraphic �nodel of existing and proposed_
topogra_phic condirions.
• Location and descriprion o�roposed erosion control devices and structures,_
• When rec�uired a�eotechnical report by a�eotechnical en��meer that
conta.ins sufficient information to determine the potential impacts of the proposed
clearing and g.,r ding, as well as proposed measures to reduce or etiminate these
im acts.
Bulletin #054 — August l8, 2010 Page 4 of 6 k:/Handouts/Process [I Development Requirements
K�2009 Code Ama�Su�tW raryircmmts�StaffreportlCurtart 9�'mpat wa6�adribits�Exhbics E. F C+. E� [ and �Ex�i�[ G- Procass Q Devebpmmt Reqs Poa fortoacdac
'` N. Tree/Ve�etarion Retention Plan
� Q • Project name plan daxe and/or revision date(sl.
• Name .phone number and license stamo of preparer who sha(( be a certified arborist
or a certified landsca�e architect.
- • North arrow and baz scale.
�, • Statement outlining the Q�ooses of any,proposed tree removal (e.e.. buildins
� construcrion. street or roadway, drivewa.v recreation area, patio. or Qarkine lot),
, to�ether with a proposed timetable for when this work witl occur.
' • A tree surve�,thax idenrifies the location a,�pro�cimate size, s�ecies, and number of
; trees on this site and also identifies the �eneral location of trees within 50 feet of the
site Tree survey sam.�les ma� onlv be used at the discretion of �he director.
• A deQiction of the spatiallimits €or tree/vegetarion retention areas and details of
$ tree/ve e� tation protection measures.
• A depiction of any new ve¢etated areas to be established.
� � ;4
• The manner in which the cleazed areas on the �aaertv will be reclaimed with
: vesetation s�ecification or any reQUired mirigarion plantings and a timetable for
replantine.
• Ap_proved tree/vegetation retenrion_plan shall be incorporated into the clearin� and
Bulletin #054 — August 18, 2010 Page S of 6 k:/Handouts/Process t[ Development Requirements
K:�2009 Code Amendments\Submittat requirements�.Staff report\Current staff report with exhibits�Exltibits E, F G, H, I and 1�Eshibit G- Process II DevelopmeM Reqs poor focmat.doc
Special studies and additional information for Process II.
Bulletin #054 — August 18, 2010 Page 6 of 6 k:/Handouts/Process II Development Requirements
EXHIBIT H
EXHIBIT TO PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19.15,
"Permits and Review Processes"
Bulletin #001 - Development Requirements:
Process III (Project Approval) or Process IV (Hearing Examiner Approval)
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
�
CITY OP
������a� ��
Y
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNiTY DEVELOPMErTi' SERVICES
33325 8�' Avenue South
PO Box 9718
Federal Way WA 98063-9718
253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609
www.cityoffederalwaYcom
DE��i.�P�YiE�T RE�UiR��V1E�iTS
❑ PROCESS III (PROJECT APPROVAL� ❑ PROCESS (V (HEARtNG EXAMINER APPROVAI�
Name:
�te No(s):
• This form is to be used by an applicant as a a ide in determining what constitutes a complete application.
• All checked items must be submitted to constitute a compiete applicarion.
• Applicant will be notified of a complete apptication within 28 days.
• A complete application dces not imply compliance or conformance with applicable codes.
• Additionat fees may be required for consultant review of critical azeas.
General Ptan Standards
• Eight complete and folded sets of drawings (folded to 9 x 12 inches). "
• Minimum plan sheet size shall be 24 x 36 inches.
• Ptans must be drawn at an engineering scale that allows the entire plan to fit on one sheet.
• Minimum scale is 1 to 20 uQless otherwise authorized.
• All information is to be legc`ble.
• Plans shall be prepared by a certified professional (licensed in the state of Washington) unless otherwise authorized
• If the development proposal [ias a value of S75 000 or greater the site survev site p(an preliminarv draina e� ding,,,
rie t-of-wayplans and building elevation plans shall be pre�ared by a certified professional licensed in the state of
Washington The survev shail be prepared bv a certified land survevor and the site plan, drainage, din�n t-of-wav
p(ans and building elevations bv a certified architect or eneineer. Regardless of the value of the developmenk landscaae
plans must be p�ared b�a Washington State licensed Landscape architect.
Re uired Submitted
;� � �` fi; A. Completed Master Land Use app(ication, with owner's si�atvre
-� - Q:' �, B. Application fees includin�SEPA fees as appticable.
�:
�`� _` �;� �� �� C. Copy of entire undertying plat or King County Assessor's parcel map
�_� .',��,� '; D. Vicinity map on separate 8%a x i l sheet
�� t - -
�� �� T' E. Two copies of current title report for subject property .
' `�� � 3� F. Two copies of current (etters of water and sewer availability (only required for vacant
� �
"�' &�.f'.`,',��3 ,�ac .. ... . '� Y,,��.'^a'� : r� �
3T.K ,� � ��:. " '� 4 � 4 :
��� ���^ � G. Eight copies of site photographs &om each compass point (north, east, south, & west)
'��'� �,^ > � �' � 3 ,� , referenced on the site plan
�� .. k d .
� �; ; ,s'° �- ,,
� � + ;r r �f ; H. Concurrency application
Bul(etin #001—August 18, 2010 Page 1 of � k:/Handouts/Devetopment Requirements
K�2009 Code AmadmmtslSubmittal requircments�Staff teportlCurtau staff report with uFubits�Exkbirs E, F G. I{ [ and AExftibic H- Developme� Requiranenu poor farmatting.doc
Submitted
I. Topographic Survey
�`_. • Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
• Name, phone number, and license stamp of preparer
- • North arrow and baz scale
' � .. • Site area
: �.
��� + Property lines, utilities, easements, sidewalks, street edges, existing structures, parking, and
- site improvements (i.e. drainage systems with pipe sizes, invert and rim elevations, etc)
�`'" Structures and driveways within 150 feet of subject site (oa both sides of street)
��� - .
�����:�,.�' • Minimum two foot contours for slopes less than 15 percent and five foot contours for slopes
`; "'' 15 percent or �eater, datum shall be King County Aerial Survey or NGVD-29
• Delineate slopes greater than 40 percent grade on or within 25 feet of the site
'� �-. • Delineate streacns, ponds, wetlands, nahual drainage courses, and other surface water
�°� '= features on or within 200 feet of the site per Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter
fi i � �
, � ` ' 1430, "Crirical Areas"
�y'" ` • Identifv trees as defined bv FWRC 19_05.200
J. Site Plan
• Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
• Name and phone number of ownedagent
• Name, phone num6er, and license stamp of preparer
• North arrow and bar scale
• Vicinity map
• Site area
� Total parking stall count
• Total gross floor area of all proposed floors or leveLs
• Location and dimensions of existing/and or proposed structures, property lines, sidewallcs,
easements, paztcing layout, street edges, mechanical equipment, trash enclosures, outdoor
uses, starage areas, fencing, rockeries, and retaining wa1Ls
� Existing streams, ponds, wetlands, natural drainage courses, and other surface water
features on or within 200 feet of site per FWKC Chapter 143U, "Critical Areas" :
• Locarion of stands of trees as defined by FWRC 19.05200
• Existing and proposed utilities including: utility poles and boxes, water, storm sewer,
sanitary sewer, and fue hydrants
• Structures and driveways within 1�0 feet of subject site (on both sides oEstreet)
• lnternationa! Building Code (iBC) construction type aad occupancy classiftcation
• Location and square footage calculations of any on-site pedestrian areas (i.e., plazas,
courtyazds) or open space areas
• Indicate anyproposed phasin�with prog,osed timelines for full completion.
• Show location and calculate acreage nrecluded fi development due to the presence of
critical areas includin� • wettands streams steep slopes. and other features fa(ona with
buffers). broken out by cateeorv covered bv critical areas re�ulations.
• Show location and calculate acrea�e dedicated for pub(ic ri ts-of-way (for both newly
created streets and expansions of existin,g streets). as wetl as private tracts, allevs. and
ingess/e�ess and utilities easement broken out bv cateeorv.
• Show location and calculate acreage of tracts (or other areasl dedicated or set aside for
retention/detention/draina�e facilities open space or other on-site pubtic facilities. broken
out by cate�rv.
• Provide net site area. which is Qross area minus critical areas. rig ts-of-wav, nrivate ooen
space. and public purpose lands.'
4 Public purpose lands mean acreage of tracts (or other areas} dedicated for retention/detention/drainage facilities, open space and pazks, or
other on-site pubtic facilities.
Bultetin #001— August 18, 2010 Page 2 of � k:/Handouts/Development Requirements
K:\2009 Code Amadmmts\Submiaal rryuirm�encs�Sta@'report\Cutraa swff report with exlu'hiu�Ezhibics E, F G. EI. [ and 11Ezldbrt H- DevdaPmmt Requireme^ts Poar fotmstting.dae
R uired Submitted
�� `� ,' K. Preliminary Drainage, Grading, and Right-of-Way Plan
�*�� �� :� �; . • Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
�
�$� s �,.=- {;� - • Name, phone number, and license stamp of preparer
`� � ` • North arrow and bar scale
T V' t
�� �� `�- �` • Pretiminary storm drainage system in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water
-Wx ��" � = � � 1 �:
- .}-� �-� = Design �Yfanual (KCSWDNi), as amendec! by Federal Way
�;:, �� ��� • Preliminary grading plan with finished contours; minimum t�'o foot coatours for slopes less
��'n� ? than 15 percent and five foot contours for slopes I S percent or greater; datum shall be King
`'_��� County Aerial Survey or NGVD-29
�" f Q � • Preliminary right-of-way improvement plan, as required by the Public Works Dept
��'���� � Approximate cut & fill quanrities of site earthwork
<� �� ,�
"`'� �}' 3� ;' � 5; • Total elcisting and proposed impervious surface area
�� .��,� �4: � :
��' ' x� • Existing and proposed utilities including. utiGty poles and boxes, waxer, storm sewer,
_ �:� �`
�- �: �- : sanitary sewer, and fire hydrants
.�._.'�.._ �� �
` ` �� '�� '�'� L. Preliminary Landscape P(an
_� '� -�� � .
x �` �� �'� • Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
°i :• � j .
.�--�� • Name, phone number, and ticense stamp of preparer
� -�,,,,, ���,� • North arrow and bar scale
L "" �' Specific location, type, size, and number of trees to remain and to be removed
�' ; -.� v; s � '�� � � •
�t�� • Plant schedule with the scientific name, com�non name, size, spacing, and quantity of each
�- �"�� • Specific location and square footage calculations of drought tolerant landscaping (document
j ;:� ��_ ,
°�-� that a minimum 25 percent is provided per FWRC 19. i25.040[6])
��' • Irrigation plan for lawn areas
,. �� � • Specific location, square footage calculations, and total square footage of each parking lot
�k ,,,�,�; landscape island per FWRC 19.125.07U(2)(a)
;°� y �;`v �' �r� �: • Screening of outdoor facilities such as: trash/recycling enclos�es, outdoor storage, drive
�` `� ���' through faciliries, stormwater facilities, and ground based mechanical eqaipment
:�.
• Building wall area landscaping per FWRC 19.125.040
� ;�;�:��: • Specific location of street trees in the right-of-way
�-�� �� `:v . '- • Idenrify perimeter landscape type as I, II, or III
��� � � .
� � .�� ��� _ -
�� � �`� - _ '' _' M. Building ElevationslDesign Intent
� �F • Project name, plan date, and/or revision date(s)
�,�"�` • Name, phone number, and license stamp of preparer
, „�
� �r • Baz scale
����� • Statement of architectural desi� intent, finish materia(s, and colors
,; `��`� �� � • Front, reaz, and side (labeled as north, south, east, and west) building elevatioas of proposed
�'� :?� ,- � :; :: stnectures
� �� y 4 `
� °� ;�, =� � ; • Exterior wall openings
�� • Exterior materials and colors board
�� � } _ , ; • Garbage/recycting facility screen details
Y�= 's.e` � fiSS+
.� .��;z � • Roof-top and ground based mechanical equipment screen details
� -� • Building height calcutation
'��'� � • Narrative summary of how project complies with applicable design guidelines (FWIZC
{' '� ��� � = Chapter 19.115, "Community Design Guidetines")
# =y k- `
�
�� �,�`:�3_ ^.� -
����' � ,: N. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) Checklist
���� ,�� '� �-�°`� � • Ei ght co pies of the com plete d, si g ned, and dated SEPA checklist
��'� _
��..
-� �� ... h ; ,� x.;, r...;:
Bulletin #OO L— tlugust 18, ZO LO Page 3 of � kJHandouts/Development Requirements
K:12009 Code AmaodmaKSlSubroitW requiranaus�Snft'rcportlCutrent s[sff report wit6 edubitslExLibrts 6. F G, EC [ acd RExtcbit H- Devdopmrnt lt«Nvp°mts Poor fw°�4u^gd�
R aired Submitted
O. Clearing and g.radin�plan
;� � • Project name. plan date. and/or revision date(s).
• Name, phone number. and license stamp of preparer.
• North arrow and bar scale.
--�,� ;. • Identificarion of eacisting,s[ope depictins: azeas with 0% to 15% slope: areas with 15% to
�� �� ,< 40% stope: and areas of 40% or ereater slope.
���s � �� • Proposed gr., ades.
$ f .�„ �"��' • Locarion of all existin� and/or proposed structures, driveways. ri t-of-wav improvements_
a�A; �� ; utitines. and easements on the subject propertv.
�'�`,, �� ,� ; • Desi�narion of atl wetlands. streams. and other crirical azeas that are on or within 300 feet
;��� `� of anv area proposed to be disturbed by the proposed clearin��and/or �ading acrioa
-���`�`� • Areas proposed for clearina and the proposed use for such azeas.
�� �: ��
�`-� _�: ���� ,� s • Any proposed �rade chan�es that adverselv affect or endaneer trees on the property and/or
ti� 4�' ':� adjacent properties. and specifications to maintain them.
�" Y � �`�` `�� ?�- • A minimum of two cross sections of the site, drawn to scale, depictin�,the existing and
'-� � proposed grade and anyproposed rockeries and/or retainin� wal(s. The director mav also
���� r�uire a three dimensional to�osrauhic model of existing and proposed topogn_phic
� � � � � _ � � �. condirions_ � p
'�•�� z �� k � � ��, '
�_�,aK �. = ~ • Location and descriptian of �r�osed erosion control devices and structures.
� -:, -. ;
�� �� �� � f� � • When required a geotechnical report, prepared bv a aeotechnical en�:ineer. that contains
��`�: sufficient utformation to determine the otential im acts of the roqosed elearin and
�_ .. ; � � P P P g
�� :� �, din as well as ro osed measures to reduce or eliminate these im ts.
�� : �� ; ,, .
� � �F�`: P. Tree/Ve�etation Retention Plan
�..;:,..
�` ''�� ` • Pro ect nazne. nlaa date. and/or revision date(sl.
�-;,� .��� : 1
�- � • Name, phone number. and.lieense staanp of prepazer. who shalt be a certified arborist or a
�
- � - � �� � certified landscape architect.
� s .� � � : z� �� "- �
�, North arrow and bar scale_
:�• • Statement out '' the purposes of any.proposed dree removal (e.e;.. buildine coustcuction,
��°�,,�� street or roadway. drivewav. recrearion area. pario, or parking lotl, together with a proposed
�� k' �' �' � timeta.ble for when this work will occur.
,�-�=� �.4 � , -� i � ,
`��"� �` �� A tree surve that identifies the location. a roximate size, snecies, and number of trees on
-� r � • Y P�
t this site and a(so identifies the aeneral location of trees within 50 feet of the site. Tree
-- survey samples ma onlv be used at the discretion of the director.
n
• A depicrion of the sparial limits for tree/veQetation retention areas and detaiIs of
.; 4 � ; ; � tree/ve etation protection measures.
��� �� ' • A denicrion of any new veg,etated areas to be established.
'. F �.. ; a.�'
� � °-� ��� � • The manner in which the cleared areas on the propertv will be reclaimed with ve�etation.
'��� �'
�� � 3 ��_� _ specification or any r�e aired mitieatio�lantinss. and a timetable for replantin�
�-��� t • Aparoved tree/ve�etation retention plan shall be incorpora.ted into the clearin� and r�ading
�-
�'` - drawinas for final construction documentarion.
Bulletin #00 (— August 18, 2010 Page 4 of 5 k:lFiandouts/Development Requirements
K12009 Code AmaidmentslSubmiaal requiraneMS�Staff cepoR�C�c�ent staff roport with aclnbirs\F.xlubics E, F G. H. ( and J\Farhibit H- Devdopmert Itequiraneats poor fortnattingdoe
Special Studies and Additional Information
Please nrovide FOUR copies of the following:
Level One Downstream storm drainage analysis as described in the KCSWDM, as
amended by Federal Way
Preliminary technical information report addressing relevance of the 8 Core and 5 Special
Reauirements of the KCSWDM
an en�ineer licensed in State of
Traffic imnact analvsis an en�ineer licensed in State of W
as reauired bv the Traffic Division.
Noise
Geotechnical study
Wetland delineation report
Wetland mitigation plan
Stream delineation and classification report
Critical aquifer recharge & wellhead protection areas information/inventory
Other information relating to design and siting of proposed development (including site
cross sections) _
information to determine compliance with city goals, policies, and regulations
Notice Requirements
Process III — For applications that are located within, or are, 300 feet from properties
zoned SE, RS, or RM, provide one set of self-addressed, stamped business sized envelopes
(with City of Federal Way return address) of persons receiving property tax statements for
all properties within 300 feet of the boundary of the subject property. Include a separate list
of the addresses with their parcel numbers and an assessor's map showing the 300-foot
boundary.
Process IV — Provide two sets of self-addressed, stamped business sized envelopes (with
City of Federal Way return address) of persons receiving property tax statements for all
properties within 300 feet of the boundary of the subject property. Include a separate list of
the addresses with their parcel numbers and an assessor's map showing the 300-foot
boundary.
SEPA — Provide one set of self-addressed, stamped business sized envelopes (with City of
Federal Way return address) of persons receiving property taac statements for all properties
within 300 feet of the boundary of the subject property. Include a separate list of the
addresses with their parcel numbers and an assessor's map showing the 300-foot boundary.
IMPORTANT — Please do not submit metered envelopes. The Federal Way Post Office
may refuse such envelopes. In addition, you are highly encouraged to use the Forever
stamps.
Bulletin #001— August 18, 2010 Page 5 of 5 k:/Handouts/Development Requirements
K:�2009 Code Amendments\Submittal requiremeMS�Staff report\Curtent staft'report with exhibits�Exhibits E, F G, H, I and .1\Exhibit H- Development Requiremrnts poor foimaning.doc
EXHIBIT I
PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19.15, "Permits and Review
Processes"
19.15.045 "Completeness of applications"
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
Exhibit I
19.15.045 Completeness of appiications.
(1) Use Process I and Use Process ll. At the time of intake of a complete use
process I or use process II apqlication a notice of completeness as referenced in
FWRC 19.15.040 shall be provided to the apqlicant. This notice shall indicate the
date the a�plication is deemed complete. If the city determines that the use process I
or use process II application is incomplete the Citv shall notify the applicant of what
needs to be submitted for a complete use process I or use process II aqqlication.
,
, . . .
,
, , �
a��lisa#+e�- In the notice of application, if required, �"; ...�:�°^ �°+ermin��in�+' the city
shall also identify, to the extent known to the city, the other agencies of local, state,
or federal government that may have jurisdiction over some aspect of the proposed
development activity.
(2) Use Process Ill or Use Process IV. Within 28 calendar davs of receivinq an
a�plication for use process III or use process lV the city shall determine whether the
a�.plication is complete as referenced in FWRC 19.15.040. If found to be complete,
�rior to the 28-dav deadline a letter of completeness shall be issued indicatinp the
date the use process III or use process IV a�plication is deemed complete. If the citv
determines the application to be incomplete prior to the 28-da�deadline. the citv
shall notifv the applicant of what needs to be submitted for a complete use proeess
III or use process IV apqlication In this written determination the citv shall also
identify to the extent known to the city the other aqencies of local, state, or federal
government that may have iurisdiction over s�me aspect of the proposed
development activitv. If the use process III or use process IV a�t application was
found incomplete and an applicant submits additional information, the city shall notify
the applicant in writing within 14 days, the date the application is deemed complete
or whether further additional information is necessary.
(3) Additional information. A determination of completeness shall not preclude the
city from requesting additional information or studies, either at the time of the letter of
completeness or subsequently, if new information is required or if there are
substantial changes in the proposed action.
(4) Vesting. A proposed use process I, II, III, or IV application shall vest to and be
considered under the zoning code and other land use control ordinances in effect on
the land at the time a fully completed application for use process I, II, III, or IV has
been submitted to the city. In the event that the application is deemed incomplete,
the use process I, II, III, or IV application shall vest to those codes in effect on the
date that all requested supplemental or specific information is submitted. A complete
application shall be defined as set forth in FWRC 19.15.040 and based on
requirements in related handouts. Vested �ights shall not be waivable pursuant to the
vested rights doctrine.
(Ord. No. 09-625, § 3, 9-15-09; Ord. No. 09-594, § 19, 1-6-09. Code 2001 § 22-
33.5.)
K:�2009 Code Ame�ments\Submittal requ'vemmtsVStaft'report\Curtent staffreport with exhibits\Exhibics E, F G, F[ [ and AE�thibit I version 2 revised I9.15.045.doc
EXHIBIT J
PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENTS
Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19.15, "Permits and Review
Processes"
19.15.030 "Review processes for improvements and additions to
developed sites"
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
Exhibit J
19.15.030 Review processes for improvements and additions to developed
sites.
Improvements and/or additions to existing developed sites shall be subject to
land use review processes as follows:
(1) Process l. Improvements and/or additions to an existing developed site that
are exempt from SEPA shall be processed using process I, provided the
improvements and/or additions do not exceed any of the following thresholds:
(a) There is no change of use.
(b) There is no reduction in the amount of required landscaping, buffering,
open space, or public areas.
(c) There is no material change or reduction in the amount of required
parking.
(d) There is no material change in the location of utilities, easements, or
pedestrian connections.
(e) There is no material change to the approved architectural design.
(fl There are no additional adverse impacts to �°^�;� critical areas_ ef
c c.,.,�f,....,+ +rooc.
(2) Process /l. Improvements and/or additions to an existing developed site
that are exempt from SEPA and exceed the thresholds in subsection (1) of this
section shall be processed using process II.
(3) lmprovements not exempt from SEPA. Improvements and/or additions to
an existing developed site that are not exempt from SEPA shall be processed
under process III, unless process IV is indicated by the applicable use zone chart
in which case process IV shall be used.
(Ord. No. 07-573, § 10, 12-4-07; Ord. No. 00-375, § 9, 10-3-00. Code 2001 § 22-
32.2.)
K:�2009 Code Ameodments\Submival requirements�Staff roponlCurtent staff repoct with exhibits�Exhibits E. F G, FI, [ and PExhibit J- revised 19. I SA30.doc
City Council Agenda Bill
Attachment #3: Draft Minutes of
the August 25, 2010
Planning Commission Public Hearing
Amendments to FWRC Chapter 19 relating to clarifying the complete
application and review standards of the zoning and development code
and a housekeeping amendment that maintains consistent critical areas
language.
(City File No. 10-102132-00-UP)
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
PLANNING COMMISSION
August 25, 2010 City Hall
7:00 p.m. Council Chambers
MEETING MINUTES
Commissioners present: Merle Pfeifer, Hope Elder, Lawson Bronson, Wayne Carlson, Sarady Long, Tim O'Neil
and Tom Medhurst. Staff present: Director of Community Development Services Greg Fewins, Planning
Manager Isaac Conlen, Principal Planner Margaret Clark, Senior Planner Deb Barker, Senior Planner Janet Shull,
Assistant City Attorney Peter Beckwith, and Administrative Assistant Darlene LeMaster. Council Member Jeanne
Burbidge was also present.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Pfeifer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
All commissioners present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of July 21, 2010, were approved as written.
COMMISSIOPi $TTSINESS
PUBLIC HEAtu1vG — Shoreline Master Program Update
Chair Pfeifer exp�a�ned the guidelines for the Public Hearing.
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Director of Community I�evelopment Services will address the commission during the `Additional Business'
section of the agenda.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
Senior Planner Janet �hti�ll stated �hat the intent of tonight's meeting was to consider revisions to the draft
Shoreline Master Plan (S�P}.She introduced the City's consultant, Teresa Vanderburg with ESA Adolfson and
David Pader with the Departrnent of Ecology. She also stated that there was a sign up sheet at the back that
serves two purposes. The frst was to sign in if you would like to testify and secondly, to sign up if you would
like to be on an e-mail notification list.
Ms. Shull gave a brief overview of the SMP, which serves to regulate development along shorelines of the state
and establishes a comprehensive vision of how the shoreline area will be used and developed over time. She also
stated that local jurisdictions are required to prepare a local SMP to carry out the requirements of the Shoreline
Master Act (SMA). The SMP also includes goals and policies that are part of the City's comprehensive plan and
regulations that are part of the city code. The SMP includes information about existing conditions and analysis
about the potential cumulative impacts of future development and opportunities for restoration.
Ms. Shull then showed a map of the City's shorelines explaining that there were two categories — marine
shorelines and sharelines associated with lakes. There are two lakes, Steel Lake and North Lake within the City
G:�Planning Commission�2010\Meeling Summary 08-25-IO.doc
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 July 25, 2010
and a number of additional lakes within the Potential Annexation Area (PAA). The City is required to plan for
the lakes within the PAA, however, the regulations will only apply when the area is annexed into the City.
Ms Shull then summarized the SMP process to date. She explained that work on the SMP began in early 2006.
At that time a Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) and a Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) were formed to
provide input on the update. The City held a public open house in June 2006 and set up a website with
information on the SMP update. In 2007, the Planning Commission held three public meetings after which they
forwarded their recommendation to the City Council, who approved the draft SMP update in June 2007. In July
2007, the draft SMP update was submitted to the DOE for review and comments were received from DOE in
January 2009.
City staff and their consultant ESA Adolfson have been warking with D4� on �evisions based on DOE's
comments for the past year. Because the draft SMP update has been changed since the Planning Commission
and Council last saw it, staff decided to bring it back to both Planning Comrnission and City Council.
The City mailed notice to all shoreline property owners within the C�ty and Ft�A about the public comment
process and the availability of draft documents. The City also mai�e�€ notice to forme� �AC and TAC members.
This City's website was also updated and links to the revised draft SMP were provrtded, Hard copies of the
revised documents were placed in libraries and were made available at City Hall. A ce�py �as also made
available in the City Council Conference Room and counciI �e�tbers wer� made aware of its �.�ailability.
Ms Shull then went over highlights to the revisions. She exglained that Section 2— Inventory and
Characterization and Section 4— Shoreline En�rironment had not been updated as DOE had no comments on
these sections. Section 2 is very bulky so it was �ot included in the Plattning Commission's blue binder, but is
on the website, however the Shoreline Environment Besignations, which is a si�t,gIe page map, was included.
Ms Shull explained that Section One - Introduction was revised �o p�esent a better linkage between our local
SMP and the Statewide SMA. FQt.►t� new policies weie added to Sec�i€� Three -- Goals and Policies. Ms Shull
stated that we modified existing pat��res to add emghasis on the �MA goal of "no net loss" of ecological
function of the city's sharelines, the Purpose and Responsibility section was expanded and a section
summarizing Public ParGieipa�ie�n was adc�ed.
Ms Shull stated that in Section �i�e -- Sho�eT�e Reg�ations, numerous revisions were made for clarity. For
example, city sta#� adde� a Developtnen� Standards �'able; integrated critical areas regulations instead of having
them be app�dices; added �eq.uirement for a 50-foot setback from top of marine bluffs; and added a staff
proposed e�ge to allow piers at�d docks a� �he 1blarine Shoreline.
In Section Six -- Restoration Plan, City staf€ ad'ded and updated information on regional programs that help with
shoreline restoratic��, added informat�on on restoration opportunities for freshwater lakes; and added two tables
that summarize and p�ie�itize resto�fion opportunities.
In Section 7, staff added c�efin%tions that are required to make the City's SMP consistent with the SMA. Ms
Shull also stated that in Appendix A-- Cumulative Impacts Analysis, staff added a table that summarizes land
development activity in the past five years within the shoreline area and added a section that analyzes the
potential cumulative impact of allowing docks and piers on the marine shoreline.
Ms Shull mentioned that staff had scheduled a study session with the planning commission and interested
citizens for August 4, 2010, however it was changed to an informational meeting when only one Planning
Commissioner, Commissioner Carlson, attended. There were eleven citizens, the City`s Consultant and the DOE
staff in addition to staff in attendance. During the meeting, there was discussion on proposed setbacks from
marine bluff and proposed standards for bulkheads. There was also one written comment, Exhibit 2, a request
from the Kutschas to modify the stringline provisions for lakes only. Ms Shull stated that since the stringline
setback provisions had already been approved by Council, staff is not recommending any changes.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 July 25, 2010
Ms Shull then went over some modifications proposed by staff. These included clarifying that the 50-foot
minimum marine bluff setback is from the "top" of the marine bluff. It also included modifying Section
15.05.050(1)(a)(i-iii) to make it clear that hard shore armoring (bulkheads/riprap) is subject to proof of
imminent damage and a shoreline conditional use permit in the Urban Conservancy Environment and that no
conditional use permit is required for soft shore armoring regardless of zone.
Ms Shull ended her presentation by stating that staff recommends approval of the proposed revisions to the draft
SMP Update with staff modifications as depicted in Exhibit 1 to the August 25, 2010 staff report.
The public hearing was opened for public testimony.
Norm Kutscha, 33021 38` Ave S, Federal Way — Submitted a document datec� �ugust 25, 2010 and also
read from the document requesting that the Planning Commission take another look at the shoreline
setback regulations for lakes in order to make them more equitable for e�i�ting homes in relationship to
new homes.
Peter Townsend,• 29508 12`" Ave SW, Federal Way — He fel� #.�at it is impor��t to know what staff
considers the problem areas under the SMA far the past five years and what should be done to solve the
problems.
The public hearing was opened to questions from the commissioners:
Commissioner Bronson asked what changes are being made because c�f DOE requirements and what changes are
being made by the City, such as setbacks, that we �auld change later. Nfs. Shull replied that most of the changes
in the binder are required changes, except for piers/docl�s and setbacks. She nsYfed that the Kutscha's request
would not be opposed by DOE. However, staff did�'t fee� it v�ras their plac� to make changes to what the City
had already approved.
David Pater with Department of Eca�ogy from the B��tevue off'ice introduced himself and noted that he has
worked with the city to resoIve issues a�d believed that they have resolved them. The state recognizes the
unique distinction of each �sdiction, and there is some flexibility. The shoreline stabilization section is the
most rigid. The state uses a checklist to �ake sure each jurESdiction has met requirements, and that there is room
for modifications to setbacks, j3k�fS c1T1CI CI�CYCS He �her added that there was a lot of back and forth
negotiations betwee� the �� and I7E)E.
Commissia�er O'Neil wonderect �uhat the changes meant for the taxpayer and how might the use of waterfront
property be c�tanged. Ms. Shull nated that the goal was to make as few changes as possible, and that the changes
appear reasona���.
Teresa Vanderburg v�ith ESA/Adol�son noted that there is a new focus on conserving and preserving vegetation
within the setback zon� and alsa to avoid impacts to resources in the water. There are also provisions for
dimensions of docks and piers. She clarified that the changes are only for new development and not existing
development. There is a provision for tear-down houses or expanding existing uses.
Commissioner Medhurst asked if variances were available. Ms. Shull replied that yes, shoreline variances are
subject to hearing examiners recommendation that is forwarded to the State, which has the ultimate approval.
Commissioner O'Neil asked whether the DOE had the final say just for variances. Ms. Shull answered that DOE
would have the final say only for variances and conditional use permits. However, these decisions are
appealable to the Shoreline Hearings Board.
Commissioner Carlson was concerned about the length of time it took for the DOE's response to proposed
changes to the City's shoreline code. Ms. Shull noted that the state experienced staff shortages, and that once
their comments were available, the amendment was prioritized and brought to commissioners as complete as
r.•�viA„���o r�mm��a�����mmnn�r;�a c�mmarv oxa5_to d�
._
Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 July 25, 2010
possible. Commissioner Carlson also had questions about the value of the cumulative impacts analysis as the
analysis is quantitative but the conclusions are qualitative. David Pader, with DOE responded, that the
cumulative impacts analysis is adequate
Chair Pfeifer asked if there were any more questions from the commissioners, and seeing none called for the
motion.
Commissioner Bronson moved to recommend adoption of the code amendment as prepared by staff.
Commissioner Medhurst seconded the motion.
Discussion — Commissioner Elder urged Commissioners to consider item #4 af �he Kutscha's request regarding
setbacks. Commissioner Carlson disagreed with Commissioner Elder no�irtg that the Kutscha's request, if
approved, might penalize property owners who have not yet exercised their d�velopment rights. Commissioner
Carlson also acknowledged that critical areas need greater setbacks.
The motion carried, 6-1 (Elder dissenting).
The public hearing was closed.
PUBLIC HEA�NG — Amendments Related to Submittal Require�ents for Plats and Commercial Projects
Chair Pfeifer explained the guidelines for the Pu�Ixe Hearing.
Senior Planner Deb Barker delivered the staff repart. Prupc>sed amendments to the Federal Way Revised Code
(FWRC) include:
• Short Subdivisions — Chapter 18.34. U30 Content and form of application;
• Preliminary Plat — Cha�zfer 18.35.62�' Content and farm of application;
� Permits and Review Proeess — ehapter 19.IS.F�40 Development Application Submittal
Requirements;
• Permits and Revieru Processes —�hapter �9. �S. (14� Completeness of Applications; and
• Permits and Revierw �'rocesses - C�tc��ter 19.15.030(1)(fl Review Processes for improvements and
additiorrs to developed srtes
The public hea�ng was opened for gublic testimony.
T'here was no pubtic eamment.
The public testimony was �losed.
The public hearing was ope�ed to questions from the commissioners:
Commissioner O'Neil said he agreed with the checklist concept and feels that it is much easier for the public to
use. He inquired whether this information was available on-line. Ms. Barker replied that submittal requirements
checklists are available on the City's website and staff can assist the applicant to locate the requirements and the
checklists. Commissioner O'Neil asked if the applications are tracked on-line. Ms. Barker noted that the current
permit tracking system is not set up to track these applications on-line.
Commissioner Medhurst wanted to understand if the requirements have changed, or if some have been
eliminated. He feels that the checklist is more confusing and could be arbitrarily applied. He prefers code as
written. Ms. Barker said that the code does not give any discretion to waive submittal items that may not be
Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 July 25, 2010
necessary, while the checklist provides flexibility. Chairman Pfeifer noted that there is lots of support from
Master Builders for the checklist and bulletin concept. Commissioner Medhurst asked for clarification as to
which codes were eliminated. Chairman Pfeiffer stated that none of the codes were eliminated and the code is
still there. The checklists provide a place to go to find out what their specific application requires. Ms Barker
pointed out that the code states that the director may waive any requirements that are determined to not be
reasonably necessary. Commissioner Medhurst replied that language addressed his concerns and he is satisfied.
Commissioner Carlson is also in support of the checklist format. However, he is still concerned that submittal
requirements can be modified at the stroke of a pen. He believes that any types of changes to the submittal
process should go through the public process, especially the planning commission. He supports the amendments
only if substantive changes to application submittal requirements go through public process. Ms. Barker stated
that substantive changes to the code do come from code amendments that have a�eady gone through a public
process. She noted that recent changes to the clearing and grading codes ccm�Cained very substantive changes to
performance standards, and those changes to code went through a very publi� process. Substantive code changes
are not administratively made, but are approved through the code ame�dmerit p�ocess. Commissioner Carlson
stated that allayed some but not all of his concerns.
Commissioner Bronson agreed that the checklist is a wonder€ix� idea. He asked why pra��cts can't be submitted
electronically. Ms. Barker replied the City's permitting s�stem is only equipped to recet�e eleetrical permits
electronically. Commissioner Bronson asked why apptic��ic�zts could aot be submitted o� a thumb drive.
Planning Manager Conlen agreed that these types of projects da take a�ot af paper and the City would love to
reduce paper. However, the City does not have the technology to r�tiew applications on a computer screen, to
mark it up or make comments. If applications are submitted electronic��.ly, the City has added copying costs that
should be borne by the applicant. Commissioner Branson is amazed that �ity does not have enough equipment
to review the plans electronically. Planning Manager Co�len said that it would be great if we did but currently
we do not have that technology.
Commissioner Long thanked staff ,far bringing this tapic to the Co�issioners. He feels that this concept will
be a big benefit to developers. I-�e inc�uired if plans were required for Process I and II before they were
determined to be complete. �s. Barker Eanfirmed that pians were required and gave examples of typical process
I and II applications. Comm�ssioner Lor�g� inquired about the differences between existing code and proposed
changes to the completeness se�xon of tb� code. Planning PVlanager Conlen stated that there is no change to
current practices. The intent is ta �l�r#,fy t�e cc�de so it is`clear what the practice is. There is no change from
current practice �or process I and II aompleteness review, which is done at counter; and there is no change for
process III a�d IV complete�ess review �rhich take a more lengthy review process and includes a follow-up
letter.
Commissioner �}'�1ei11 said that �ie understands that the proposed amendment clarifies when an applicant
becomes vested. IV�s. Barker confirr�ed that as the current code is vague, it is important to clarify that a complete
application is a veste� �p�lication.
Commissioner Long obser�red �ttat currently the City's Traffic Division determines if a submitted traffic study is
acceptable, and therefore if an application is complete. With the proposed language, an application would be
considered complete even if the submitted traffic study was later found to be unacceptable. Ms. Barker noted
that was an on-going topic of concern by staff since reports are not always professionally prepared.
Commissioner Long recommends that the checklists be changed to add that traffic impact analysis shall be
stamped by a professional engineer. This was clarified so that the report shall be prepared by a licensed engineer
in State of Washington.
Chairman Pfeifer thanked staff for putting the amendment together. He believes that the code amendment makes
sense and will save developers time in the long run.
Commissioner Long moved to recommend adoption of the code amendment as prepared by staff.
r.��w9.,.,�.,.. r...�...����...,��nimnn�.�..a c�..,..�ati ns_�s_i� A�
Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 July 25, 2010
Commissioner Carlson seconded the motion.
There was general discussion and agreement that Commissioner Long's recommended changes to the checklist
do not need to be reflected in the motion.
The motion carried, 7-0.
The public hearing was closed.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
Director of Community Development Services Greg Fewins addressed the Cammission with the following
items:
Administrative Assistant Piety will be on medical leave for an undete��ned period of time. During her
absence, Tamara Fix will be the person to communicate with regarding. Planntr�g Commission. Ms. Fix will be
assembling the Planning Commission agenda packet and correspondir�g with ali P�anning Commissioners and
Stakeholders. Darlene LeMaster will be staffing all Planning Co�nm'xssion meetit�gs and drafting meeting
minutes
October 20, 2010 Planning Commission Public Hearing will be on Urban Chickens. 'I'�iete are no topics for
either the Sept. 1 or the Sept. 15, 2010 Planning Commis�ion meetings, therefore, those rneetings will be
cancelled. Staff would like to propose a study session for the ful� PTanning Commiss'rbn on Wednesday,
September 29, 2010 at 7:00 p.m. to talk about the urban chicken fopie,. All Commissioners said they would be
able to attend the special study session.
2011-2012 Budget — Director Fewins explained �o the cdmmissioners hov� tc� aecess all of the 2011-2012 City
Budget documents from the City's website. Director Fewin�s also highlig�rted the proposed budget cuts to
impact the Department of Community Development Services shoufd �ouncil approved the proposed budget.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 9:(� p.xn.
n•�v iA��;�o r�mm�aa�����mmnn,vr;�o c��MmA.� nx_�S_�o ��
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: , D('� �Q ITEM #: �
�._.-�------- ------- ._.....�__-___----------------.._� ��_-1=►-�_ ___.. �,_. -----.._____
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUB.TECT: Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19 "Zoning & Development Code," related to
residential off-street parking.
POLICY QUESTIONS Should the city: (1) clarify an existing single family residential off-street parking provision regarding
acceptable impervious surfaces; (2) remove the large lot exemption from residential parking regulations; and (3) provide
housekeeping changes?
COMMITTEE Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC)
❑ Consent � Ordinance
❑ City Council Business
❑ Resolution
MEET�1vG DATE: September 20, 2010
❑ Public Hearing
❑ Other
STAFF REPORT BY: Matthew Henera, Associate Planner___________ DEr'r�Community Develo_pment Services
Item Note — Staff presented this item to the LUTC on August 2, 2010, with no public comments received. The committee
recommended approval and forwarded the ordinance to full council for first reading. During the September 7, 2010, City
Council meeting, two citizens provided comments concerning the proposed ordinance, whereby the council referred the
item back to the LUTC for further deliberation. �
Exhibits: (1) Approved minutes of the July 21, 2010, Planning Commission meeting; (2) Planning Commission staff report
with Exhibits A-C; and (3) Draft adoption ordinance.
Background: (1) The city's existing residential off-street parking regulations allow parking within a garage, carport or
"approved impervious surface." FWRC does not define approved impervious surface and has resulted in conflicting
interpretations between staff, Municipal Court and Hearing Examiner. The proposed amendment would replace the term
"approved impervious surface" with "driveway or parking pad." Surfaces permitted outright for parking pads would be asphalt
or concrete. Applicants may apply for a no-fee modification of those outright standards that may include, but are not limited to:
gravel, pavers or Low Impact Development (LID) methods such as pervious concrete and pervious asphalt.
(2) The existing residential off-street parking ordinance exempts all residential lots in excess of 20,000 square feet (0.45 acres)
from compliance with single-family residential off-street parking regulations. Staff could not find justification for the
exemption nor any instances of a similar exemption in surrounding jurisdictions. The proposed amendment would apply
equitably to all residential uses. ,
(3)Proposed housekeeping amendments would combine all residential parking standards into one article and replace code
redundancies with cross references.
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; 3) do not adopt the proposed policy; or (4) refer
the proposal back to the Planning Commission for further proceedings.
STAF RE Option # 1, adopt the Planning Co mmission's recommendation
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ,� �,^►� ���a�ld ,I�J�I`'h I �Ii APPROVAL: c71r �
Committee Council Committee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: "I move to forward Option #2 to First Reading October S. 2010 as amended
to include asphalt, cement, gravel, pavers, LID with a and grass, provided it is not in the front yard. "
Committee Chair
Committee Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION(S): 1 R�ADING OF ORDINANCE (10/5/2010):1 move to
reading for enactment on the October 19, 2010, consent agenda.
Committee Member
the ordinance to a second
Continued on,('ollowing page
2 READING OF ORDINANCE (10/19/2010) "I move approval of the L UTC's recommendation to approve the code amendments
contained in the adoption ordinance. "
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
❑ APPROVED
❑ DENIED
❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED — 08/12/2010
COUNCIL BILL #
1 reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE #
RESOLUTION #
►n �� �O
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
PLANNING COMMISSION
July 21, 2010 City Hall
7•00 p m Council C hambers
MEETING MINUTES
Commissioners present: Merle Pfeifer, Hope Elder, Lawson Bronson, Wayne Carlson, Sarady Long, Tim O'Neil
and Tom Medhurst. Staff present: Planning Manager Isaac Conlen, Associate Planner Matt Herrera, Senior
Engineering Plans Reviewer Ann Dower, Assistant City Attorney Peter Beckwith, and Administrative Assistant
Darlene LeMaster.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Pfeifer called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
ROLL CALL
All commissioners present.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of July 7, 2010, have been delayed and will be presented at the August 4, 2010 Planning
Commission MeetiYg for approval..
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
ADMI1�iISTRATIVE REPORT
Planning Manager Conlen recalled the July 7, 2010 meeting where City Manager/Police Chief Wilson offered
to provide a budget update for all Planning Commissioners. City Manager/Police Chief Wilson has chosen two
dates and will be inviting all committee members and commissioners to attend. These budget briefings will be
delivered in a town hall format at will be held on Tuesday, August 31, 2010 and Monday, September 30, 2010
in City Hall Council Chambers at 630 PM.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
PUBLIC HEARING — Proposed Text Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code Related to Vehicle
Storage Requirements in Residential Areas
Chair Pfeifer explained the guidelines for the Public Hearing.
Associate Planner Matt Herrera delivered the staff report. Proposed amendments to the Federal Way Revised
Code (FWRC) include:
� Addition of "nonmotorized vehicles" to Section 19.05.140 (N definitions)
• Changes to text of Article VII (Commercial Vehicles, Recreational Vehicles, and Boats) of
Chapter 19.130, Off-Street Parking
G:�Planning Camrtussion�2010Uv1eeting Summary 07-21-10.doc ��� � � ��
PAGE_�___0�.�.�..-
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 July 21, 2010
• Addition of Section 19.130.2XXX (Purpose and Intent) to Chapter 19.130, Off-Street Parking
• Addition of Section 19.130.2XXX (Parking and storage of motor vehicles and nonmotorized
vehicles) to Chapter 19.130, Off-Street Parking
• Deletion of Article V(Outdoor Activities and Storage) and Section 19.130.230 (Residential
Uses)
The proposed zoning and development code amendment replaces the phrase, "approved impervious surface,"
with a more clear definition of allowable impervious surfaces, removes the exemption for lots greater than
20,000 square feet, provides a purpose and intent for residential parking and storage standards; and
consolidates code sections and removes redundant language.
The public hearing was opened for public testimony.
Clara McArthur; 31026 20` Ave S— Ms. McArthur spoke against the proposed text amendments,
stating that she felt these code changes are very untimely. Ms. McArthur is concerned that she and
others that have been affected by the poor economy will be unable to comply with proposed code
amendments.
Buck Pedigru; 31033 20`�' Ave S— Mr. Pedigru asked if the requirement to pave a driveway was a
local, county or state law. Mr. Pedigru also asked what would happen if a resident could not afford to
pay to pave their driveway... would they be penalized. Chair Pfeifer stated that the proposed
amendment is a City Code revision. It has not been mandated by the County or the State. The intent
of the ordinance is educating residents on where parking is allowable. Lastly, Mr. Pedigru asked why
Federal Way residents' property taY is substantially higher than that of Bellevue residents. Mr. Pfeifer
deferred that question to another time as it was unrelated to the topic at hand.
Rhonda Pedigru; 31033 20` Ave S— Ms. Pedigru stated that her existing driveway is compact gravel
and wants to know if the proposed amendment means that her driveway will have to be paved. If a
resident has a trailer in the back yard, will a parking pad be required? Chair Pfeifer responded that if a
recreational vehicle is parked in the back yard and is not in view from the front, it will not require a
parking pad.
The public hearing was opened to questions from the commissioners:
Commissioner Carlson said he was empathetic to what he heard during the public testimony. Commissioner
Carlson stated his interpretation of the ordinance is that as far as an existing gravel driveway is concerned, if it
met at least one of the criteria (which it should), it would be allowed and grandfathered in. In comparison, if a
resident had been parking on the grass, they could install a gra�el driveway with approval from the Community
Development Services (CDS) Director.
Mr. Herrera confirmed Commissioner Carlson's interpretation. In addition, far residents of existing homes
where a grass, gravel or dirt driveway was allowed at the time the home was permitted, these property owners
would be protected by "non-conforming development" standards and this new ordinance would not affect
them. This ordinance is for new development or for property owners who did not ha�e prior approval to park
on their grass. If a neighbor were to complain, a code compliance officer would visit the site and enforce that.
The City's Code Compliance division is complaint driven. The only way a code compliance officer would
come to your home is if a complaint was received. Allowable parking surfaces are asphalt, cement, a carport or
a garage. There is a design standard for gravel. Gravel is also allowed with a modification (written approval
from the CDS Director).
G:�Planning Commission�2010Uvleeting Summary 07-21-10.doc
EX�����
PAGE_ �__._0 .._�s.__
Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 July 21, 2010
From the audience, Ms. McArthur asked about a hard-pan dirt surface. Mr. Herrera answered that hard-pan
dirt is no an allowable surface, however, if the lot had originally been approved with hard-pan dirt as the
approved driveway surface, then staff would grandfather that property in through a written administrative
decision. Because a material isn't listed as allowable does not mean it won't be allowed. It means that staff
would like to review the proposal and then decide whether or not to allow it.
Commissioner Elder spoke against the proposed ordinance and in support resident testimony. Commissioner
Elder is bothered that our Code Compliance system is complaint driven. Why would we ask people to invest
money in making require improvements during our current poor economy? The residential audience applauded
Commissioner Elder for her statement.
Commissioner Bronson recalled the Planning Commission talking of considering semi-pervious streets. Mr.
Herrera clarified that semi-pervious surfaces on private and commercial property is on the Long Range Work
Program. Due to staffing, this item will not be brought forward any time soon. At this time, there is no policy
that allows pervious street surfaces.
Commissioner Bronson expressed concern over a resident having to go back and search through King Co.
permit records to verify what had been permitted. King Co. didn't require permits for many things prior to
Federal Way incorporating. If a resident needed to prove a permit did exist in order to make a modification,
how would they if the permit had not existed in the first place? Mr. Herrera reiterated what is meant by "non-
conforming development" and that any existing property that originated prior to city incorporation was fall
under the non-conforming development clause.
Commissioner Medhurst commented on the Hylebos Creek Park use of pervious surface in the parking lot.
Commissioner Mehurst suggesting using feedback on the success of this surface in the parking lot as back up
information to this ordinance.
Commissioner Medhurst asked for clazification for an existing vehicle, recreational vehicle, etc. parked either
in the backyard or side yard. If it is not visible from the street, what would be the requirement for a parking
pad? Mr. Herrera explained that a vehicle on a driveway in the backyaxd would not be required to sit on a pad;
however, it can not be parked in the grass. Commissioner Medhurst asked how a vehicle parked in the
backyard that is not visible to the public could be considered "neighborhood blighY' or reduces one's property
value. Mr. Herrera responded that the way the ordinance is written, if a citizen called code compliance to
complain that a neighbor was parking a vehicle on the grass in the backyard, code compliance, under this
ordinance, is required to come out and site that resident.
Commissioner Medhurst stated that in his interpretation of the ordinance, there is still quite a bit of ambiguity
that needs clarifying. Commissioner Medhurst concurs with Commissioner Elder in her dissatisfaction of
Federal Way's code compliance being complaint driven and not from being out of compliance. Mr. Herrerra
stated that this parking issue at hand is likely the number one complaint that code enforcement handles. The
ordinance came about in order to clarify the existing phrase "approved impervious surface." It would simplify
enforcing this code to have approved impervious surface more clearly defined. Commissioner Medhurst asked
that for lots greater than 20,000 s.f., would a certain amount of impervious surface trigger stormwater
mitigation? The 2009 SWDM states the trigger is 2,000 s.f.
Commissioner O'Neil questioned staff about his neighbor who parks his motor home on grass behind his
fence. Mr. Herrera noted that under the current code, the neighbor would be in violation (if reported), because
you may not park on grass. The proposed ordinance clarifies what is meant by "approved impervious surface."
Commissioner O'Neil asked if the impervious surface have to be permanent. Could it be wood? Does it need
G:�Planning Commission�2010Ubieeting Summary 07-21-10.doc
EXt� � � �'�'
PAGE,. � f ��.�._
Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 July 21, 2010
to be permitted? Mr. Herrera stated a concrete or asphalt parking pad does not have to be permitted. Anything
outside of what is defined as approved could be requested in writing for approval by the CDS Director. There
is no charge for an administrative decision.
Commissioner Long feels the City is sending mixed messages. In 2009, the Surface Water Division presented
Low Impact Development. The purpose was to reduce impervious surfaces. Now staff is saying that more
impervious surface needs to be added as parking surfaces. Another point of the LID ordinance was that it was
illegal to wash your vehicle on your driveway as soapy and dirty water flows into the catch basins. Educational
materials were distributed encouraging residents to wash their cars on their lawn. Staff is now saying it is
illegal to park on your lawn, the same lawn that you should park on to wash your car. Mr. Herrera clarified
that staff wants and encourages residents to wash their car on the lawn. The intent of the ordinance is that cars
should not be parked on the lawn for any length of time. The car washing ordinance was a result of the City
adopting a Federal standard as part of the NPDES permit. The code is in effect as part of the permit. As it
stands today, parking on grass is in violation of the code. The intent of the proposed ordinance is to clarify
what is meant by "approved impervious surface." This ordinance applies to new development.
Commissioner Carlson clarified that LID and pervious pavement may not always be the preferred application
for all sites.
Commissioner Medhurst understands the intent of the ordinance and supports the ordinance that wants to
prevent visual blight. However, Commissioner Medhurst is strictly against putting boundaries on what can be
parked on the side or rear of a home, especially if it is not in public view. Mr. Conlen also wanted to clarify
that this ordinance doesn't apply to City right of way. This ordinance and the changes to this ordinance don't
apply to the surface of driveways. The point to this ordinance applies to the parking surface that is not on the
driveway. Mr. Conlen also asked the commissioners to consider the other side ofthe azgument when it comes
to blight. Unfortunately, there was no public comment heard from citizens that are in favor of this ordinance,
but based on the number of complaints that are received, the concern over neighborhood blight is very strong.
Commissioner Elder voiced her frustration with this ordinance and that she feels there is not consistency in the
City Code.
Commissioner O'Neil asked about non-motorized vehicles. Mr. Herrera confirmed that non-motorized
vehicles include campers, trailers, etc. Mr. Herrera again stated that this modification to the proposed
ordinance is not a policy change. All of the scenarios brought forth into discussion would be treated today, not
difFerently than they have been treated up until now. Staff is merely asking to clarify what is meant by
"approved impervious surface". And if a citizen wanted to use something other that what is listed as approved,
a written request needs to be made and approved by the CDS Director in the form of an administrative decision
at no cost to the citizen. Staff was not prepared to discuss a policy change. Should the commission request
staff to do that, it would need to be requested to add to the work plan. Commissioner O'Neil also inquired if
non-conforming development is transferred with tile when a property is sold.
Assistant Atty. Beckwith noted that what is being proposed actually broadens what can be exceptions to the
rule with approval from the CDS Director. The discussion of non-conforming development applying to future
property owners when a property is sold is a separate and legal topic that is not a part of the issue at hand.
Commissioner Bronson asked if staff has researched ASTM standards that defines impervious surface. Mr.
Herrera stated that the City has adopted the ASTM standards in its Development Standards Manual. What is
missing is the definition of what is approved impervious surface. Commissioner Bronson was unhappy that
what is defined by ASTM as impervious is not automatically also approved. He feels that staffshould follow
the national standard, period, and that staff needs to revisit this issue in its entirety. Lastly, if there are so many
G:�Planning Commission�2010V�3eeting Summary 07-21-10.doc
E)CI-� � � ��
PAGE_�.�� �
Planning Commission Minutes Page 5 July 21, 2010
people against others parking on lawns, why aren't they present and making comment.
Mr. Herrera noted that asphalt and cement were defined as approved based on what other neighboring local
jurisdictions have in their codes. Chair Pfeifer summarized the intention of the revision to the ordinance as
presented.
More examples and scenarios were brought into the conversation by commissioners with the same reiteration
of the ordinance as it has existed since it came into being over eleven years ago. The proposed changes to the
ordinance clarify what is meant by "approved impervious surface." The process and policy surrounding code
compliance procedures have not changed. Assistant City Atty. Beckwith stated that if a permit wasn't required
at the time (e.g. parking on a gravel or dirt driveway) and it was okay then, then it is okay now.
Commissioner Medhurst supports taking out the ambiguity in the ordinance but feels other issues have been
raised and should be revisited in its entirety. There are a number of open issues the public has a legitimate
concern with (i.e. side yards, driveways, backyards, etc.)
Commissioner Carlson concurred with Commissioner Medhurst. He would like to reconsider what is defined
as visual blight. Mr. Herrera said that if directed, staff could put this on their work plan.
Chair Pfeifer invited additional public comment.
Clara McArthur; 31026 20�" Ave S— Ms. McArthur is still unclear on what it means to be grandfathered in.
Chair Pfeifer explained non-conforming development standards as it applies to this ordinance. Ms. McArthur
thanked the Commission and staff and feels that the requirements are reasonable for new development, not for
established property owners.
Mary Francis Painter; 3102120` Ave S— Ms. Painter wanted to request that the issue of grandfathering in is
not left to the discretion of the code enforcement o�cer. Ms. Painter also suggested a public stakeholder
group that discusses visual blight.
Rhonda Pedigru; 31033 20` Ave S— Ms. Pedigru asked about an easement on the side of one's property. Asst.
City Ariy. suggested that this issue is a separate issue. Commissioner Medhurst explained that he believes Ms.
Pedigur to be speaking of a setback, not an easement.
Norma Blanchard; 31039 7` Ave SW— Ms. Blanchard stated she feels that the City's code compliance officers
are ineffective and gave examples to back up her opinion.
Commissioner Long inquired about a penalty for those not in compliance with this ordinance. How much time
is given for a resident to get into compliance. Mr. Herrera stated he is not familiar with the fines or their
amounts. The intent of code compliance is not to fine or penalize residents; rather, it is to educate residents
and give them an opportunity to become compliant before any further action may be necessary. Commissioner
Long expressed he is in favor of clarifying the existing ordinance as it applies to approved impervious surface.
The public testimony was closed.
G:\Planning Cortvnission�2010Vvleeting Summary 07-21-10.doc
E)C�! � �' !�'
PAG � .��....� � -S..Q--.�
Planning Commission Minutes Page 6 July 21, 2010
Commissioner Carlson moved to approve the ordinance as presented by staff with one amendment:
Exhibit A, Page 1, Seciton 19.130.2a�, (1)
All motor vehicle and nonmotorized vehicle parking and storage for residential uses containing either
detached or attached dwellings shall be in a garage, carport, driveway, or a parking pad except for
recreational vehicles to be used as a temporary dwelling as specified in FWRC 19.130.290(1). A parkingpad
shall accommodate the size of the vehicles and be composed of asphalt or cement. The director may grant a
modification of parking pad surface materials to include gravel, pavers, LID methods (vervious asphalt.
pervious concrete, etc. ), or other suitable materials pursuant to criteria set forth in FWRC 19.130.100.
Commissioner Medhurst seconded the motion.
There was brief discussion by Commissioner Bronson, advocating the need to accept the ASTM standards. As
such, Commissioner Bronson will not vote to approve this proposed ordinance.
The motion carried, 4-3. Commissioners Long, Elder and Bronson dissenting.
The public hearing was closed.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
None
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 8:35 p.m.
G:�Planning Commission�20101Meeting Summary 07-21-10.doc � � �� �
��� - �
PAGE���'-�-��
�
CtTY OF �
Federal Way
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
DATE July 14, 2010
TO: Chair Merle Pfeifer and Members of the City of Federal Way Planning Commission
FROM Matthew Herrera, Associate Planner
Greg Fewins, Director of Community Development Services
SUB.TECT: Zoning and Development Code amendments related to residential off-street vehicle
parking requirements.
F�LE: 10-102049-00-UP
MEETING DATE: July 21, 2010
A. POLICY QUESTIONS
(1) Should the City replace "approved impervious surface" with prescriptive requirements for
residential vehicle parking and storage surface material; (2) remove the exemption for all lots greater
than 20,000 square-foot to comply with the residential motor vehicle parking and storage regulations;
(3) provide a purpose and intent statement for residential parking and storage standards; and (4) make
housekeeping amendments to consolidate code sections and remove redundant language from the
existing residential vehicle storage standards.
B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends amending Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapters 19.05 and 19.130
reflecting affirmative responses to the policy questions above and as shown in strikeout/underline
format in EXhibit A.
C. ATTACHMENTS
E�ibit A— Proposed code amendment to Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Title 19, "Zoning and
Development Code," Chapters 19.05 and 19.130
E�ibit B— Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) issued June 30, 2010
Exhibit C— Community Development Services Stakeholder Group
D. BACKGROUND c�it ANALYSIS
The substantive portion of the proposed code amendments were requested by the deparhnent's code
enforcement staff to provide clarification of suitable surface materials for vehicle storage in
EXt� � � i� 2-
PAGE�..����.-.-
residential areas. Additionally, code enforcement staff has requested the commission to consider the
removal of an exemption from the City's motor vehicle and non-motorized vehicle storage
regulations provided to single-family lots greater than 20,000 square feet (approximately 0.45 acres).
While drafting the proposed code language, planning staff recognized the benefit of providing a
purpose and intent statement; consolidating the code section with a similar residential code section
related to residential commercial and recreational vehicle storage; and several housekeeping
amendments that will provide a cross reference to applicable standards and the removal of redundant
language.
Surface Materials
As shown in the strikeout version of the existing code (page 1 of Exhibit A), there are currently three
acceptable methods to store vehicles on residential properties; garage, carport, or on an approved
impervious surface. Garage and carport are clear methods for vehicle storage, but FWRC does not
provide reference to what constitutes an "approved impervious surface." Staff recommends replacing
"approved impervious surface" with "[... ] driveway, or a parking pad." Further explanation of the
parking pad would include: "[a] parking pad shall accommodate the size of the vehicle and be
composed of asphalt or concrete." Citizens would also be given the option to request a modification
of those standards if the alternative material(s) would not leave the property, is usable year-round, and
will not deteriorate air or water quality as shown in the cross-reference on the underline version of the
proposed amendment and existing FWRC 19.130.100 provided for reference (pages 2 and 4 of
E�ibit A, respectively). The result of the amendment will provide a clear and consistent requirement
for citizens, applicants, and staff.
Code Enforcement staff receive complaints from City residents regarding the unappealing aesthetic
impacts of neighboring residents that park vehicles on vegetated and unpaved surfaces. Additionally,
parking areas composed on unpaved surfaces can contribute to erosion and water quality deterioration
during times of heavy rainfall. Staff is able to enforce the current code for complaints of vehicles
parked on vegetated surfaces as the existing code language refers to garages, carports, and approved
impervious surface that are appropriate for vehicle storage. It is the instances of vehicles parked on
gravel and hard packed dirt surfaces that staff has had difficulty administering a clear and defensible
enforcement of the code provision.
As mentioned previously, the Zoning and Development Code does not provide guidance of what an
approved impervious surface represents. Over several years this has resulted in inconsistent
determinations made by staff from several departmental divisions. Residential complaint calls to the
City regarding vehicles parked on gravel or dirt have been difficult to resolve as there is currently no
clarifying language as to whether the surfaces are considered an "approved impervious surface." A
recent Federal Way Municipal Court ruling dismissed a Notice of Violation order as it determined a
graveled area qualifies as a pad, but the city's Hearing Examiner disagreed and suggested that a
parking pad is an impervious surface such as concrete. The intent of this proposed amendment is to
provide the public and staff an unambiguous description of an appropriate residential off-street
parking surface.
Lot Size Exemption
Current off-street parking regulations related to residential uses exempt all lots greater than 20,000
square feet, or approximately 0.45 acres, from compliance with vehicle storage requirements (E�chibit
A, page 1). Code enforcement staff responding to perceived violations, such as vehicles, boats, and
RVs parked on lawns, are unable to act on the complaint due to the exemption. Staff did not find lot
Residential Off-Street Parking File #10-102049-UP �
Planning Commission Staff Report f 5 Z
EX� �'��
PAGE.=.�� �.?- --
size exemptions for vehicle storage at the five jurisdictions referenced below. Further, staff could not
find justification for including the exemption in historical records related to the original code
adoption in 1999. As citizen complaints concerning the vehicle storage regardless of the lot size
continue to be made and there does not seem to be a defensible justification for the distinction, staff
recommends an equitable enforcement of the regulation by removing the 20,000 square-foot lot
exemption.
Jurisdictional Comparisons
Staff has reviewed residential off-street parking code language in the following five jurisdictions:
City Surface Material Requirement Large Lot Size
Exem tion
ACC 18.52.060 - off street parking spaces for SF dwelling shall be All weather
Auburn Paved with asphalt concrete or cement concrete. surface may be
used for lots >4
acres
KCC 15.05.090 — paved w/ asphalt or equivalent material unless
Kent waived by the planning director, but the first 20 feet of the driveway No
must be aved.
Des DMMC 18.44.100 - asphalt or concrete for driveways and parking No
Moines ads.
Renton RCC 4-4-080(G) - asphaltic concrete, cement or equivalent material No
of a ermanent nature as a roved b the Public Works De artment.
Tacoma TCC 13.06.510 - asphalt concrete or cement. Alternatives with No
a roval from Ci En ineer.
Purpose Statement
Planning staff recommends the addition of a purpose and intent statement to the new Article VI
"Residential Parking and Vehicle Storage" code section that provides a background and justification
for the regulations. The statement provides a layperson summary of the intent of the regulations and
clear basis for enforcement when needed.
Housekeeping Amendments
While researching and drafting a proposal to the Planning Commission, staff has proposed the
following non-substantive code amendments:
Consolidation — The relocation of the existing residential off-street parking regulations titled
"Residential Uses" to a new article titled "Residential Parking and Vehicle Storage." The proposed
article would consolidate parking regulations for typical motorized and nonmotorized vehicles,
commercial vehicles, recreational vehicles, and boats. (Exhibit A, page 2)
Definition — The relocation of the nonmotorized vehicles definition from within the text of the
standards to the Zoning and Development Code definition section in Chapter 19.05 FWRC. (Exhibit
A, page 1)
Redundancies — Planning staff recommends removing language regarding the emergency use of RVs
as temporary dwellings and replacing it with a cross reference to the applicable code section. Staff
Residential Off-Street Parking
Planning Commission Staff Report
File # 10-102049-UP
Page 3 of 5
E������
PAGE � G�_-i ----
also recommends removing redundant language regarding junk and inoperable vehicles. (E�chibit A,
page 2)
E. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY
A Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) (Exhibit B) was issued for the proposed code
amendments on June 30, 2010, pursuant to State Environmental Policy Act Rules 197-11-340. Notice
of the environmental determination was provided in the Federal Way Mirror, City designated bulletin
boards and emailed to the department's stakeholder group (Exhibit C�. The comment period ended on
July 14, 2010, with no comments submitted to the City.
Public notice of the Planning Commission hearing was emailed to the department's stakeholders June
30, 2010, published in the Federal Way Mirror July 3, 2010, and posted on the City designated
bulletin boards July 7, 2010. This staff report was emailed to the deparhnent's stakeholders on July
14, 2010.
F. BASIS FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
FWRC Title 19, "Zoning and Development," Chapter 19.80, "Process VI Review," establishes a
process and criteria for development regulation amendments. Consistent with Process VI review, the
role of the Planning Commission is as follows:
1. To review and evaluate the proposed development regulation amendments.
2. To determine whether the proposed development regulation amendment meets the
criteria provided by FWRC 19.80.130 (Item G below).
3. To forward a recommendation to City Council regarding adoption of the proposed
development regulation amendment.
G. DECISIONAL CRITERIA
FWRC 19.80.130 provides criteria for development regulation amendments. The following section
analyzes the compliance of the proposed amendments with the criteria provided by FWRC 19.80.130.
The city may amend the text of the FWRC only if it finds that:
1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan.
Staff Response — The proposed code amendment is eonsistent with the following goals and
policies:
L UGI
L UG3
L UP14
HP4
Improve the appearance and function of the built environment.
Preserve and protect Federal Way's single family neighborhoods.
Maintain and protect the character of existing and future single family
neighborhoods through strict enforcement of the City's land use regulations.
Maintain a strong code enforcement program to protect residential areas from
illegal land use activities.
Residential Off-Street Parking
Planning Commission Staff Report
File #10-102049-UP
Page 4 of 5 '
E������
aeGE `�.�� �..---
2. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to public health, safety, or welfare.
Staff Response — The proposed code amendment bears a substantial relationship to welfare
as it will remove ambiguity regarding what is and what is not considered appropriate vehicle
storage.
3. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the residents of the City.
Staff Response — The proposed code amendment is in the best interest of the city as it
provides clarity to an existing code provision, aesthetic value to residential areas, and equity
among all single family property owners.
H. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
Consistent with the provisions of FWRC 19.80.240, the Planning Commission may take the following
actions regarding the proposed development regulation amendments:
1. Recommend to City Council adoption of the FWRC text amendments as proposed;
2. Modify the proposed FWRC text amendments and recommend to City Council adoption of
the FWRC text amendments as modified;
3. Recommend to City Council that the proposed FWRC text amendments not be adopted; or
4. Forward the proposed FWRC text amendments to City Council without a recommendation.
Residential Off-Street Parking
Planning Commission Staff Report
File #10-102049-UP
Page 5 of 5
EXM����` 2
PAGE 5 ��=
19.05.140 N definitions.
"Native vegetation" includes native, undisturbed areas or rehabilitation of previously
disturbed areas that consist of trees, plants, forest litter, and understory indigenous to the Pacific
Northwest or near natives that are suitable for the Pacific Northwest climate. Invasive species,
such as Himalayan Blackberry or Scotch Broom, are not native species.
"Natural features " means physical characteristics of the subject property that are not
manmade.
"Natural materials" means materials chemically unaltered from their natural state.
"Natural surveillance " means easy observation of buildings, spaces, and activities by
people passing, living, working, or recreating nearby.
"Nonconformance " means any use, structure, lot, condition, activity or any other feature
or element of private or public property or the use or utilization of private or public property that
does not conform to any of the provisions of this title or that was not approved by the city of
Federal Way through the appropriate decision-making process required under this title.
"Nonliving groundcover" means gravel, chipped bark or similar nonpolluting material
through which water can freely percolate to the soil beneath.
"Nonmotorized vehicles " include but are not limited to travel and camp trailers, utilitv
trailers truck campers and boat or vehicle trans�ort trailers.
"Normal maintenance " includes interior and exterior repairs and incidental alterations.
"Normal maintenance and repair" includes, but is not limited to, painting, roof repair
and replacement, plumbing, wiring and electrical systems, mechanical equipment replacement
and weatherization. "Incidental alterations " includes, but is not limited to, construction of
nonbearing walls or partitions.
"Notice of determination " for sign regulations means the determination that the city
issues as to whether a sign conforms to this title and other sections of this Code.
"Nuisance vegetation " shall mean any tree or vegetation that, in the opinion of the city or
an expert approved by the city (such as, but not limited to, a professional forester, certified
arborist, or landscape architect), is an invasive variety, is an allergen, or due to its location is
causing or is likely to cause damage to a permanent structure, or other economic or environmental
hann or harm to human, animal, or plant health that cannot be mitigated without removal of the
tree or vegetation.
"Nursing home " means the same as "convalescent center."
(Ord. No. 09-610, § 3(Exh. A), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 09-593, § 24, 1-6-09. Code 2001 § 22-1.14.)
. . �.Tr_es+r
- -=�
� o � 2n ��n n,.�;a�.,�:..� ,.,.e�
�
� •
n i� � i.• i a � a w• i ..i. ..a �� - �.. o:ae.,.;,.�
1
1
� �1���'�
arsc[aTCr6'racctac�cr�F � � � E � ��
- - - - - - . .. . . . , . , .•,•. � -'�-- �----�- ----_-_
. ,
EXH1�1T
PAGE_!___0�.. �____
_ � ��. - - - - - - -
. .. _� . �. • �� - � �� � �
. .�� . •• , , �� .� �� . � .�
�
Article VI�. �' - - � ' �' ''� '..�, D �..=.. +_.._-�' "°'''�'°", ===a ��=`-- Residential Parking and
cvrnrr:cra.Z . � ..,. , ...........
Vehicle Stora�e
19.130.2XX Purpose and intent
The purpose of this article is to establish standards for�arkin � and storage of vehicles for
residential zones and uses These standards are intended to �protect propertv values bv reducin�
visual bl�,ht caused by vehicle storaee located on lawns and other vegetated areas and to provide
reasonable size limitations for storage of commercial and recreational vehicles.
19 130 2XX Parkine and stora�e of motor vehicles and nonmotorized vehicles
( 11 All motor vehicle and nonmotorized vehicle and storage for residential uses
containing either detached or attached dwellings shall be in a gara�e carport, drivewav, or
parking pad composed of asphalt cement pavers or �xavel except for recreational vehicles to be
used as a tem�orary dwelling as specified in FWRC 19.130.290(11
(2) An��ag� carport or�arking�ad shall have direct drivewav access.
�3) All vehicles considered junked wrecked dismantled or inoperable must be stored in
a completelv enclosed buildin�.
19.130.250 Parking and storage of commercial vehicles in residential zones limited.
Parking or storage of commercial vehicles is prohibited on residentially zoned lots except
as follows:
(1) A maaLimum of one commercial vehicle based on standard pickup, light duty trucks,
or passenger vehicles, that does not exceed a maximum of 10,000 pounds gross vehicle weight
rating (GVWR as defined in RCW 46.25.010) may be parked on any residentially zoned lot;
(2) A maximum of one commercial vehicle regardless of GVWR may be parked or stored
on any lot in a single-family residential zone (RS 35.0) or a suburban esta.tes zone (SE);
(3) Commercial vehicles may be parked on any lot in a residential zone for a m�imum
of 48 hours for the exclusive purpose of loading or unloading the vehicle;
(4) Commercial vehicles may be parked on any lot in a residential zone for construction
purposes pursuant to a valid development permit;
(5) A maximum of one commercial vehicle not more than nine feet in height and 22 feet
in length may be parked on any lot if used for private construction purposes and when it is not
visible from a right-of-way or access easement and not parked in the driveway;
(6) Parking or storage as allowed by FWRC 19.130.270.
Except for commercial vehicles used for loading and unloading purposes and commercial
vehicles for construction purposes with a valid development permit, no more than one
commercial vehicle is allowed per lot.
(Ord. No. 09-607, § 3(Exh. A-1), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 09-595, § 12, 1-6-09; Ord. No. 04-457, § 3, 2-
3-04. Code 2001 § 22-1176.) EX� �� i 7 �
PAGE.�,���..1_._
EXNl��IT �
PAGE�._��..�.�._
19.130.260 Parking and storage of recreational vehicles and boats in residential zones limited.
Parking or storage of any recreational vehicle or boat more than nine feet in height and
more than 22 feet in length is prohibited in residentially zoned lots except as allowed by FWRC
19.130.270 or 19.130.290(1).
(Ord. No. 09-607, § 3(Exh. A-1), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 09-595, § 13, 1-6-09; Ord. No. 04-457, § 3, 2-
3-04. Code 2001 § 22-1177.)
19.130.270 Exceptions.
The city may, using process III, approve a request to park or store a vehicle or boat of any
size on a lot in a residential zone if:
(1) The parking or storage of the vehicle or boat will not be detrimental to the character
of the neighborhood;
(2) The property abutting the subject property will not be impacted by the parking or
storage;
(3) The placement of the vehicle or boat will not create a potential fire hazard; and
(4) The parking or storage is clearly accessory to a residential use on the subject property
and the vehicle or boat is operated by a resident of the subject property.
(Ord. No. 09-607, § 3(E�ch. A-1), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 04-457, § 3, 2-3-04; Ord. No. 00-375, § 25,
2000; Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(115.145(2)), 2-27-90. Formerly 22-1177. Code 2001 § 22-1178.)
19.130.280 Additional requirements.
The city may impose screening requirements, limit the hours of operation and impose
other restrictions to eliminate adverse impacts of the parking or storage.
(Ord. No. 09-607, § 3(E�ch. A-1), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 04-457, § 3, 2-3-04; Ord. No. 90-43,
§ 2(115.145(2)), 2-27-90. Formerly 22-1178. Code 2001 § 22-1179.)
19.130.290 Limitation on use.
It is a violation of this chapter to sleep in, or use for any other residential purpose, a
vehicle, recreational vehicle, or boat parked in a residential zone for more than 14 days in any
180-day period, except as allowed by subsection (1) of this section.
(1) Based on a written request, the director may permit a recreational vehicle of any size
to be used as a temporary dwelling on a single-family residential lot where the primary dwelling
unit is unsafe to occupy by reason of disaster or accident such as fire, wind, earthquake, or other
similar circumstance, provided:
(a) The recreational vehicle may be occupied for a maximum of 12 months from
the date the primary dwelling was damaged. One 12-month extension may be granted by
the director based on demonstration of continuing hardship and documented good faith
efforts to complete construction.
(b) Occupancy of the recreational vehicle shall cease within 30 days of issuance
of a certificate of occupancy for reconstruction of the primary dwelling unit at the
property.
(c) The recreational vehicle may be located within the required front yard setback
but may not obstruct sight distance at driveways and intersections. The recreational
vehicle may not be in required side or rear yards setbacks.
(d) Generators shall not be utilized.
(e) The director's approval is revocable if the requirements of this section are not
met.
(Z) The director shall provide a copy of the approval letter to the applicant, pro `4
owner (if different from the applicant), and all adjoining property owners. ��� �� i 7 Z
(Ord. No. 09-607, § 3(E�ch. A-1), 4-7-09; Ord. No. 04-457, § 3, 2-3-04; Or d. No. 9 0- 4 �AGE � i�� �
§ 2(115.145(3)), 2-27-90. Formerly 22-1179. Code 2001 § 22-1180.)
�� �
EXh� . . ��` 3
PAGE 3 ��---
�
GITY OF �
Federal Way
DETERMINATION OF NONSIG1vIFICANCE (DNS)
Proposed Text Amendments to Federal Way Revised Code {FWRC)
Retated to Vehicle Storage Requirements in ResidenNal Areas
(Non-Project Action)
File No: 10-102049-00-UP
Description: Proposed text amendments to the City's zoning and development code include the addition of
prescriptive requirements of aspha(t or pavement for residential vehicle storage surface material;
the removal of exemption for all lots greater than 20,OQ0 square foot to comply with the
residential vehicle storage regulations; and housekeeping amendments to remove redundant
(anguage from the existing residential vehicle storage code section.
Location: Non-project action — Citywide
Applicant: City of Federai Way
Lead Agency: City of Federal Way
Staff Cantact: Associate Planner Matthew Herrera, 253-835-2638
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on
the environment, and an environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.03U(2)(c). This
decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist, Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, and
other municipal policies, plans, rules, and regulations designated as a basis for exercise of substantive authority
under the State Environmental Policy Act pursuant to RCW 4331 C.l 1 U. This information is available to the
public on request.
Further information regarding this action is available to the public upon request from the Department of
Community Development Services. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act
on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by 5:00 p.m. on Jaly 14, 2010.
Unless modified by the City, this determination will become final fotlowing the above comment deadline. Any
person aggrieved of the City's final determination may file an appeal with the City within 14 days of the above
comment deadline. You may appeal this determination to the Federal Way City Clerk, at the City of Federal Way
(address below), no later than 5:00 p.m. on July 28, 2010, by a written letter stating the reason for the appeal of
the determination. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections.
Responsible Official: Greg Fewins
Title: Director, Department of Community Development Services
Address: 33325 8"' Avenue South, PO Box 9718, Federal Way, WA 98063-9718 EX� ���' I �
PAGE_����?
Date Issued: June 30. 2010 Signature: ,�. ��
�
�.,.o. ��5 EXl� � � ��' �
PAGE 1 ��__�___
Stakeholders List
Updated June 21, 2010
Bob Cooper
Lloyd Enterprises Inc.
PO Box 3889
Federal Way, WA 98063-3889
bobc(a)_llovdenterprisesinc.com
Chris Carrel
Friend of the Hylebos
PO Box 24971
Federal Way, WA 98093
ccarrel�a att.blackbeny.net
Dan Biles
SBI Developing
PO Box 73790
Puyallup, WA 98373
danbna,soundbuilthomes.com
Kurt Wilson
SBI Developing
PO Box 73790
Puyallup, WA 98373
(253) 539-8116
kurtna,soundbuilthomes.com
Julie Ramseth
Harsch Investment Properties
13010 NE 20�' Street, Suite 450
Bellevue, WA 98005
�ulier e ,harsch.com
Julie Ramseth
Harsch Investment Properties
13010 NE 20�' Street, Suite 450
Bellewe, WA 98005
(530) 450-0778
j ulier(�a,harsch.com
Don Perry
Lakehaven Utility District
PO Box 4249
Federal Way, WA 98063
d�err�(�a,lakehaven.org
Tim Osborne, PE
Lakehaven Utility District
31627 1 Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
(253) 946-5540
tosborne�lakehaven.or�
K:�2010 Code Amendments\06-21-IO Stakeholders List.doc
John Bowman
Lakehaven Utility District
PO Box 4249
Federal Way, WA 98063
(253) 946-5401
jbowman(a�lakehaven. org
Gil Hulsmann
Abbey Road Group
PO Box 1224
Puyallup, WA 98371
(253) 435-3699
gil.hulsmann(c�,abbe r��group.com
Jennifer povey
Windermere
33405 6`� Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
(206) 423-8000
j sdovey�a�windermere. com
John Norris
Norris Homes
2053 Faben Drive
Mercer Island, WA 98040
(206) 275-1901
j ohnnorris(a� comcast.net
Mark Clirehugh
GVA Kidder, Mathews, Segner
1201 Pacific Avenue, #1400
Tacoma, WA 98402
(253) 722-1416
marckcC�evakm.com
Paul Lymberis
Quadrant Homes
PO Box 130
Bellewe, WA 98009
(425) 452-6556
PauLlvmberis(a�auadranthomes. com
Paul Manzer
Pacland Development Consulting
11235 SE 6�' Street, Suite 220
Bellevue, WA 98004
(425)453-9501
pmanzer(c��pacland. com
Rod Leland
Federal Way Public Schools
31405 18�' Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
rleland �fwsd.wednet.edu
Sid White
Federal Way Public Schools
1066 South 320`� Street
Federal Way, WA 98003
(253) 945-5935
swhite �fwps.org
Gordon Olson
South King Fire & Rescue
31617 1 S ` Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
(206) 227-9301
gordon. olsonna,southkinefire.org
Tom Raymond
South King Fire & Rescue
31617 l Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
(253) 946-7241
Tom.raymond ,southkingfire.org
Tom Pierson
Federal Way Chamber of Commerce
PO Box 4220
Federal Way, WA 98063
(253) 838-2605
tom�a,federalwa�chamber.com
Sam Pace
Sea/King County Assoc of Realtars
29839 154`� Avenue SE
Kent, WA 98042-4557
(253) 630-5541
sampace(cr�,concentric.net
Ron Tremaine
Redstone Development
Land Acquisition and Development
17417 433 Street SE
North Bend, WA 98045
redstoneron(c�hotmail.com
425-831-7730(w ` T
206-353-1761 (cel 'X��� i J �
425-831-7783 (f �AGE t :....��•
E�M � � �� �
PAGE _l___..� 1 of 3 �
Monte Powell
Powell Homes
29607 8`� Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
monte �owell-homes.com
Garrett J. Huffinan
Master Builders Association
of King/Snohomish Counties
335 116�' Avenue SE
Bellevue, WA 98004
uffman�a,mbaks.com
425-460-8236 (MBAKS)
Brant A. Schweikl, P.E.
Managing Member
Schweikl and Associates, PLLC
705 South 9`�' Street, Suite 303
Tacoma, WA 98405
bschweikl c(�.comcast.net
253-272-4451 (wk)
253-272-4495(fax)
Mike Behn
Quadrant, Development Manager
14725 SE 36�' Street, Suite #200
PO Box 130
Bellewe, WA 98009
mike.behn�n,auadranthomes. com
425-452-6563
425-753-4866(cell)
Bob Roper
bob.roper c(� ,comcast.net
253-941-6954
Dale A Roper
T'he Roper Company
Landscape Architecture/Site Planning
816 Cherry Avenue, #3A
Sumner, WA 98390
253-891-1030
253-826-3891 (fax)
rooerdale e ,aol.com
Gary Hering
1439 SW 296` Street
Federal Way, WA 98023
gjherin (cr�,comcast.net
Tim Atkins
Big Mountain Enterprises
PO Box 1001
Enumclaw, WA 98022
tim o ,bi¢xnountainent.com
K:�20I0 Code Amendments\0621-10 Stakeholders List.dce
Bill McCaffrey
WJM Studio
1911 SW Campus Drive, Suite 116
Federal Way, WA 98023
wj mccaffrevCc�comcast.net
Tom Barghausen
Barghausen Consulting Engineers
18215 72° Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
tbar hausen ,bar�hausen.com
Peter Townsend
1648 South 310`�' Street, Suite 6
Federal Way, WA 98003
253-839-2947
petert8na
Auburn, WA 98032
Mike Baily
LDG Architects
1319 Dexter Avenue, Suite 260
Seattle, WA 98109
206-283-4764
mike e ,ldgarchitects.com
Chad Weiser
OTAK
10236 NE Points Drive, Suite 400
Kirkland, WA 98033-7897
206-442-1359
chad.weiser(�a,otak.com
Christine Balyeat
New Concept Homes
PO Box 1229
Issaquah, WA 98027
hcbal,�(a��hotmail.com
Mark Freitas
33516 9 Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
253-838-8327
markfccim(c�cs.com
Tres Kirkebo
Apex En�ineering
2601 35 Street, Suite 200
Tacoma, WA 98409
253-473-4494
kirkebona,avexen in� eerin .e net
Gary Martindale
The Commons of Federal Way
1928-B South Commons Blvd
Federal Way, WA 98003
253-839-6156
g:martindale�a,tcafw.com
Jeff Greene
Greene Gasaway Architects
PO Box 4158
Federal Way, WA 98063-4158
253-941-4937
� ff�earchna,seanet.com
Steve Hammer
Browleit Peterson Hammer Architects
6920 220�' SW, Suite 200
Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043
steve e bnharch.com
Mel Easter
Johnson Braund Design Group
15200 52" Avenue South, Suite 200
Seattle, WA 98188
206-766-8300
meleCc�jbd .g com
Koong Cho
Royal Hospitality
(Hampton Inn)
15901 West Valley Highway
Tukwila, WA 98188
253-318-0908
koon��na,comcast.net
Jim Jordan
(Saghalie Heights developer)
jr�'ordan�a isomedia.com
Mike Hovland
Hovland Architects
900 Meridian Avenue East, Ste 408
Milton, WA 98354
hovarcht ,comcast.net
Dave Thorstad
406 South 289�' Place
Federal Way, WA 98003
dltarchitect(�a,comcast.net
Dan Coxall '
Hammes Co. X� � � ��� Z
(St, Francis Hospit �����
1325 4�' Avenue,
Seattle, WA 98101
dcoxall�a,hammesco.com
E��"����� C
PAGE���.
Tony Starkovich
1611 9�' Avenue North
Edmonds, WA 98020
425-775-6552
vinta�ecapital cr,hotmail.com
Brett Thomas
Connie Boyle
James Pate
Jeff Oliphant
Jerry Heinz
Jon Potter
Randy Lloyd
Rick Olson
Rob Aigner
Rob Rueber
Scott Rhodes
Sheppard Cutler
Gordon Olson
Steve Honeycutt
Gareth Roe
BCRA
2106 Pacific Avenue, Suite 300
Tacoma, WA 98402
253-627-4367
goe e ,bcradesi�n.com
brettna,mountainconst.com
connie.boyle na com
�ames�a,hazsch.com
j1o55 e ,aol.com
je , .rr��a,weverhaeuser.com
potter.nw�(c� email.com
randvllo�na,xprint.blackberr .v net
RickOlsonna,fhshealth. org
robana
arrueber e ,comcast.net
rhodesarchitecture ,(�a�g,mail.com
swc (a� fi shersons. com
Gordon.olson(cr�southkin f� ire.org
shone �� cutt(�a,wildwaves.com
Heidi Swartz
Swartz Development
5724 30`�' Avenue NE
Seattle, WA 98105
(206) 730-6933 cell
(206) 527-8999 faac
�swartz(a�comcast.net
�
EX1�����' 2
PAGE�.� � �
K:�2010 Code Amendmem.s\06-21-10 Stakeholders List.doc
EXM!�!�'�
PAGE � Pa��� �
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating
to residential off-street parking; amending FWRC 19.05.140;
amending FWRC 19.130 Article VII; and repealing FWRC
19.130.230. (Amending Ordinance Nos. 09-610, 09-607, 09-595, 09-
593, 08-585, 07-573, 04-457, 00-375, 99-341, and 90-43)
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need to periodically modify Title 19 of the Federal
Way Revised Code (FWRC), "Zoning and Development Code," in order to conform to state and
federal law, codify administrative practices, clarify and update zoning regulations as deemed
necessary, and improve the efficiency of the regulations and the development review process;
and
WHEREAS, this ordinance, containing amendments to development regulations and the
text of Title 19 FWRC, has complied with Process VI review, chapter 19.80 FWRC, pursuant to
chapter 19.35 FWRC; and
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest for the City Council to clarify appropriate
residential off-street parking surface materials within the City of Federal Way; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments would remove the undefined term of approved
impervious surface and replace with driveway or parking pad; and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendments would remove the large lot exemption and
provide equitable regulation; and
WHEREAS, non-substantive changes would consolidate similar code sections and
eliminate redundancies; and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) was properly
issued for the Proposal on June 30, 2010, and no comments or appeals were received and the
DNS was finalized on July 28, 2010; and
Ordinance No. 10- Page 1 of 6
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission properly conducted a duly noticed public hearing
on these code amendments on July 21, 2010; and forwarded a recommendation of approval with
modification to the City Council as follows: pervious asphalt and pervious concrete as examples
for alternative surfaces that may be granted a modification from the director;
WHEREAS, the Land Use/Transportation Committee of the Federal Way City Council
considered these code amendments on August 2, 2010, and September 20, 2010, and
recommended adoption of the text amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission
with further modifications as follows: (1) gravel, pavers and LID methods are parking pad
options that do not require a modification and are allowed outright; and (2) grass is an acceptable
parking pad surface material except in front yards.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY 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.
(a) These code amendments are in the best interest of the residents of the City and
will benefit the City as a whole by clarifying existing policies and intent.
(b) These code amendments comply with Chapter 36.70A RCW, Growth
Management.
(c) These code amendments are consistent with the intent and purpose of Title 19
FWRC and will implement and are consistent with the applicable provisions of the Federal Way
Comprehensive Plan.
(d) These code amendments bear a substantial relationship to, and will protect and
not adversely affect, the public health, safety, and welfare.
Ordinance No. 10- Page 2 of 6
(e) These code amendments have followed the proper procedure required under the
FWRC.
Section 2. Conclusions. Pursuant to chapter 19.80 FWRC and chapter 19.35 FWRC, and
based upon the recitals and the findings set forth in Section l, the Federal Way City Council
makes the following Conclusions of Law with respect to the decisional criteria necessary for the
adoption of the proposed amendments:
(a) The proposed FWRC amendments are consistent with, and substantially
implement, the following Federal Way Comprehensive Plan goals and policies:
LUG1 Improve the appearance and function of the built environment.
LUG3 Preserve and protect Federal Way's single-family neighborhoods.
LUP14Maintain and protect the character of existing and future single-family
neighborhoods through strict enforcement of the City's land use regulations.
HP4 Maintain a strong code enforcement program to protect residential areas from
illegal land use activities.
(b) The proposed FWRC amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public
health, safety, and welfare as it will remove ambiguity regarding what is and what is not
considered appropriate vehicle storage.
(c) The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the public and the residents of
the City of Federal Way as it provides clarity to an existing code provision, aesthetic value to
residential areas, and equity among all single-family property owners.
Section 3. FWRC 19.05.140 is hereby amended to read as follows:
19.05.140 N definitions.
"Native vegetation" includes native, undisturbed areas or rehabilitation of previously
disturbed areas that consist of trees, plants, forest litter, and understory indigenous to the Pacific
Northwest or near natives that are suitable for the Pacific Northwest climate. Invasive species,
such as Himalayan Blackberry ar Scotch Broom, are not native species.
Ordinance No. 10- Page 3 of 6
"Natural features" means physical characteristics of the subject property that are not
manmade.
"Natural materials " means materials chemically unaltered from their natural state.
"Natural surveillance " means easy observation of buildings, spaces, and activities by
people passing, living, working, or recreating nearby.
"Nonconformance" means any use, structure, lot, condition, activity or any other feature
or element of private or public property or the use or utilization of private or public property that
does not conform to any of the provisions of this title or that was not approved by the city of
Federal Way through the appropriate decision-making process required under this title.
"Nonliving groundcover" means gravel, chipped bark or similar nonpolluting material
through which water can freely percolate to the soil beneath.
"Nonmotorized vehicles " include but are not limited to travel and camp trailers, utility
trailers, truck campers, and boat or vehicle transport trailers.
"Normal maintenance " includes interior and exterior repairs and incidental alterations.
"Normal maintenance and repair" includes, but is not limited to, painting, roof repair
and replacement, plumbing, wiring and electrical systems, mechanical equipment replacement
and weatherization. `7ncidental alterations " includes, but is not limited to, construction of
nonbearing walls or partitions.
"Notice of determination " for sign regulations means the determination that the city
issues as to whether a sign conforms to this title and other sections of this Code.
"Nuisance vegetation " shall mean any tree or vegetation that, in the opinion of the city or
an expert approved by the city (such as, but not limited to, a professional forester, certified
arborist, or landscape architect), is an invasive variety, is an allergen, or due to its location is
causing or is likely to cause damage to a permanent structure, . ar other economic or
environmental harm or harm to human, animal, or plant health that cannot be mitigated without
removal of the tree or vegetation.
"Nursing home " means the same as "convalescent center."
Section 4. FWRC Chapter 19.130 Article V is hereby repealed in its entirety.
. . .
� . . �-
� - - -
. - -
- , -
- - • -
_ � ��� -
Ordinance No. 10- Page 4 of 6
Section 5. FWRC Chapter 19.130 Article VII is hereby amended to read as follows:
Article VII. r^^�m°r^;^' �'°'�;^'°�, D°^r°^+;^^^' �'°'�:^'°�, ^^ Residential Parkin�
and Vehicle Stora�e
Section 6. Chapter 19.130 Article VII of the Federal Way Revised Code is hereby
amended to add a new section Purpose and intent to read as follows:
19.130.245 Purpose and intent
The purpose of this article is to establish standards for parkin� and starage of vehicles for
residential zones and uses. These standards are intended to protect property values by reducing
visual bli�ht caused by vehicle storage and to provide reasonable size limitations for stora�e of
commercial and recreational vehicles.
Section 7. Chapter 19.130 Article VII of the Federal Way Revised Code is hereby
amended to add a new section Parking and storage of motor vehicles and nonmotorized vehicles
to read as follows:
19.130.246 Parkin� and stora�e of motar vehicles and nonmotorized vehicles
(1) All motor vehicle and nonmotorized vehicle parkin� and storage for residential uses
containin� either detached or attached dwellings shall be in a garage, carport, drivewav, or a
parkin�pad except for recreational vehicles to be used as a temporary dwellin� as specified in
FWRC 19.130.290(1Lparking pad shall accommodate the size of the vehicle and be
composed of asphalt, cement, avel, pavers, or LID methods (pervious asphalt, pervious
concrete, etc.). Grass shall be an acceptable parkin�pad surface except in the area located
between the primary dwelling unit and the front property line, and except as limited bv FWRC
19.130.240.
(2) An�_ a�rage, carport or parkin�pad shall have direct drivewav access.
(3) All vehicles considered junked wrecked dismantled, or inoperable must be stared in
a completel_y enclosed buildin�
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
Ordinance No. 10- Page 5 of 6
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 affirmed.
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 day of
, 20
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MAYOR, LINDA KOCHMAR
ATTEST:
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:
ORDINANCE NO.:
Ordinance No. 10- Page 6 of 6
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: � .._.._. ._. �G�l?�► . ��..�..2Q�O........_ _. _.. ..._ITEM #
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SuB.�c'r: Speed Limit Ordinance — Proposed Changes ,
POLICY QUESTION Should Council amend Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 8.30.040 to codify existing
speed regulations at specified locations?
COMMITTEE Land Use and Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
❑ Consent
� Ordinance
MEETING DATE: August 2, 201 O
❑ Public Hearing
❑ City Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Other
STAFF REPORT BY: Rick Perez P E City Traffic En�ineer � DEPT Public Works
_ _........ � ............. � _. _
Attachments: Ordinance
Discussion: In considering Ordinance 10-668 adopting new speed limits, Council adopted most of the ordinance
and delayed action on the portion regarding Milton Road S between SR 161 to S 376` Street and S 372° Street
between Milton Road S and Milton Road S in order to more fully consider the ramifications of maintaining the
existing speed limit of 35 mph.
In reviewing the ordinance, it was discovered that the Ordinance did not adequately distinguish the segment of
S 372° Street. The attached Ordinance specifically addresses S 372° Street in addition to Milton Road S. This
is necessary because Milton Road changes names to S 372 Street on one curve, and then changes names back to
Milton Road on the next curve.
In addition, staff has evaluated a variety of alternatives to address the stated concern of a resident on S 372"
Street that the existing speed limit of 35 mph makes it difficult to safely egress residential driveways, in part due
to the number of trucks on the roadway and their increased stopping distance. These alternatives and-their
advantages, disadvantages, and costs are presented in the following table:
s, , � � , , fi �.. �, f � s ,� , r � „
C� ' .. , s ' ���� K� �,4�1?� �5�� � ��
, �
r�. i , �5�. � ...' ,,,,.. ,�. �,
May be difficult to place
May be necessary more si ns without
Enhanced Additional signage to g
curve warning draw attention to the anyway due to interfering with sight $300
signage sharper curve updated federal distance out of driveways.
standards
Unlikel to reduce s eeds
Hidden Additional signage to
Driveway draw attention to potential May reduce City Unlikely to reduce speeds $200
signs with driveway conflicts liability
advisory speed
Cutting strips into
pavement to create audible May improve Noise impacts to adjacent
Rumble strips and tactile stimulus to $2,000
drivers to draw attention to compliance slightly residents
warning signs
K:\COiJNC[L\AGDB[LLS\2010\10-OS-10 Speed Limit Ordinance - Proposed Changes - Agenda BilLdoc
Similar to speed reader
signs employed by Police, Up to 5 mph speed
Interactive sign lights up a"Slow
curve warning Down for Curve" warning reduction Cost $10,000
s i g n s if approach speeds exceed a p p r o a c h i n g c u r v e
a iven threshold
In conjunction with the
Interactive interactive curve warning Experimental device
raised sign, LED raised May draw attention $50,000
pavement pavement markers light up to curve No demonstrated benefit
markers if approach speeds exceed for additional cost.
a iven threshold
Unlikely to modify driver
behavior. $400 +
Reduced Lower the speed limit to Satisfies citizen o on oin
25 mph, per original 85 /o of drivers would be g g
speed limit request violating new speed limit enforcement
citizen request
without continual costs
enforcement.
Lower the speed limit to
Photo 25 mph, per original Assures greater Cost $57,000/year
Enforcement citizen request, and compliance
enforce with cameras
Options Considered:
1. Approve the proposed ordinance amending FWRC 830.040 as presented, maintaining existing speed
limit, and provide enhanced curve warning signage, Hidden Driveway warning signage, and
interactive curve warnmg signs.
2. Do not approve the proposed ordinance and provide direction to staff.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends forwarding Option 1 to the October 19, 2010 City Council
Ordinance agenda for enactment.
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: j�,� � �I� IRECTOR APPROVAL: n, �./ �
'co�imittee Counc�l J Comm�ttee Council
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION N/A �
Dini Duclos, Chair Jim Ferrell, Member Jack Dovey, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION(S):
1 READING OF ORDINANCE (10/5/2010) I move to forward the ordinance to a second reading for enactment
on the 10/19/2010 City Council Consent Agenda.
2 ND READING OF ORDINANCE (10/19/2010) "1 move approval of the proposed ordinance amending FWRC
8.30.040. "
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL # 555
❑ DENIED 1sT reading
❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances on[y) ORDINANCE #
REVISED — 02/06/2006 RESOLUTION #
K:\COCJNCIL\AGDBILLS\2010\10-OS-10 Speed Limit Ordinance - Proposed Changes - Agenda Bill.doc
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating to
Speed Limits; amending FWRC 8.30.040. (Amending Ordinance Nos. 10-
668, 03-449, 00-364, 96-259, 93-177, and 94-29)
WHEREAS, The state traffic laws regulating the speed of vehicles shall be applicable upon all
streets within the city, except that the legislative authority of the city, as authorized by state law, may
declare and detertnine by order, rule or regulation, properly adopted, that certain increased or decreased
speed regulations shall be applicable upon specified streets or in certain areas, in which event it is
unlawful for any person to operate a vehicle at a speed in excess of the speed so established when
proper signs are in place giving notice thereof; and
WHEREAS, Whenever conditions are found to exist upon an arterial street or highway which
warrant an increase in the speed permitted by state law, the city council, subject to the approval of the
state highway commission in cases involving state highways, shall determine and declare a reasonable
and safe maximum speed limit for such arterial street or highway, or portion thereof, not to exceed 60
miles per hour; and
WHEREAS, Whenever it is deemed inadvisable for vehicles to operate at the maximum speed
allowed by state law on any portion of a street or public highway on account of a sharp curvation,
highway construction or repairs, excessive traffic, any dangerous condition, or other temporary or
permanent cause, the city council, subject to the approval of the State Highway Commission in cases
involving state highways, shall determine and fix a lower maximum speed or otherwise regulate a lesser
speed; provided, that in no case shall the maximum speed be reduced to less than 20 miles per hour; and
Ordinance No. 10- Page 1 of 4
Rev 1/10
WHEREAS, this ordinance is in the interest of the public health, safety and welfare;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. FWRC 8.30.040 is hereby amended to read as follows:
8.30.040 Schedule.
The maximum speed limits set forth in the following schedule of speed limits are hereby established
as the reasonable and safe maximum speed limits to be effective at all times upon the streets and
highways designated in the schedule. The ' mayor shall cause appropriate signs to be
erected on such streets and highways, giving notice of the speed limits, as provided in this chapter.
(1) Speed limit 20 mph. No person shall operate a motor vehicle upon the following described roads
in excess of 20 mph:
All internal Parks roads.
18 Place South, between South 341 Place and South 344` Street.
(2) Speed limit 30 mph. No person shall operate a motor vehicle upon the following described roads
in excess of 30 miles per hour:
9th Avenue South, between South 336th Street and South 348th Street.
1 lth Place South, between South 320th Street and South 324th Street.
20th Avenue South, between South 312th Street and South 320th Street.
16th Avenue South, between South 356th Street and South 364th Way.
23rd Avenue South, between South 312th Street and South 324th Street.
South 304th Street, between Pacific Highway South and Military Road South.
South 317 Street, between 23rd Ave S Avenue South and 28 Avenue South.
South 324th Street, between l lth Place South and 23rd Avenue South.
South 364th Way, between 12th Avenue South and 16th Avenue South.
Southwest 356th Street, between 20th Avenue Southwest and Pierce County.
Milton Road South between Enchanted Parkwav South and South 372 Street
South 372" Street, between Milton Road South and Milton Road South.
Milton Road South between South 372n° Street and South 376"' Street
(3) Speed limit 35 mph. No person shall operate a motor vehicle upon the following described roads
in excess of 35 miles per hour:
1 st Avenue South, between South 296th Street and South 356th Street.
12th Avenue South, between South 372nd Way and South 364th Way.
16th Avenue South, between South Dash Point Road and Pacific Highway South, and between
Pacific Highway South and 348th Street.
l Oth Avenue Southwest, between Southwest Campus Drive and 6th Avenue Southwest.
21st Avenue Southwest, between Southwest Dash Point Road and Southwest 356th Street.
28th Avenue South, between South 304th Street and South 317th Street.
Ordinance No. 10- Page 2 of 4
Rev 1/10
South 288th Street, between Pacific Highway South and F.A.I. #5.
South and Southwest 312th Street, between Southwest Dash Point Road and 28th Avenue South.
South and Southwest 320th Street, between 1,000 feet west of lst Avenue South and F.A.I. #5 and
between 21 st Avenue Southwest and 47th Avenue Southwest.
South 336th Street, between 1 st Way South and Weyerhaeuser Way South.
Southwest 336th Street, between 21st Avenue Southwest and 26th Place Southwest.
Southwest 336th Way, between 26th Place Southwest and 30th Avenue Southwest.
Southwest 340th Street, between 30th Avenue Southwest and Hoyt Road Southwest.
South 344th Street, between Weyerhaeuser Way South and 1,500 feet east of Weyerhaeuser Way
South.
Southwest 344th Street, between 21 st Avenue Southwest and 35th Avenue Southwest.
South 348th Street, between 1 st Avenue and Pacific Highway South.
South 356th Street, between 1 st Avenue South and 16th Avenue South.
South 359th Street, between Pacific Highway South and 16th Avenue South.
South 373rd Street, between Pacific Highway South and South 372nd Way.
South 372nd Way, between 12th Avenue South and South 373rd Street.
Hoyt Road Southwest, between Southwest Dash Point Road and Pierce County.
T�i D...,.7 �`..,,+1,crfvc�Vb�ca°iraiiGYi-c�t°•7 D.,,-1�.:..,�. C.+„�m-c�2�vvu 1, Z'7�fL, C4�-ont_
Redondo Way South, between South Dash Point Road and the South 284th Street (if extended).
Southwest Campus Drive, between 1 st Avenue South and 21 st Southwest.
South Star Lake Road, between South 272nd Street and Military Road South.
Weyerhaeuser Way South, between South 320th Street and South 349th Street.
(4) Speed limit 40 mph. No person shall operate a motor vehicle upon the following described roads
in excess of 40 miles per hour:
South and Southwest 320th Street, between 21 st Avenue Southwest and 1,000 feet west of 1 st
Avenue South and between F.A.I. #5 and 1,000 feet east of Weyerhaeuser Way South.
Southwest 356th Street, between lst Avenue South and 20th Avenue Southwest.
Military Road South, F.A.I. #5 at South Star Lake Road and F.A.I. #5 at South 307th Street (if
extended).
(5) Speed limit 45 mph. No person shall operate a motor vehicle upon the following described roads
in excess of 45 miles per hour:
Military Road South, between South 320th Street and State Route 18.
Section 2. Severabilitv. Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause, or
phrase of this chapter, or its application to any person or situation, be declared unconstitutional or
invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this
chapter or its application to any other person or situation. The City Council of the City of Federal
Way hereby declares that it would have adopted this chapter and each section, subsection, sentence,
Ordinance No. 10- Page 3 of 4
Rev 1/10
clauses, phrase, or portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections,
subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
Section 3. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this ardinance 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 4. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date
of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed.
Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days
from and after its passage and publication, as provided by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this day of
20 .
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MAYOR, LINDA KOCHMAR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK, CAROL MCNEILLY, CMC
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY, PATRICIA A. RICHARDSON
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COLTNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.:
Ordinance No. 10- Page 4 of 4
Rev 1/10
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
Member
SUB.TECT: Revisions to the Shoreline Master Program Based on Ecology Comment
POLICY QUESTION Should the City Council pass a Resolution approving revisions to the City of Federal Way
Shoreline Master Program (SMP) and authorizing submittal of th� revised SMP documents to the Department
of Ecology for their formal review as required under the Shoreline Management Act (SMA)?
COMMITTEE Land Use and Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
� Consent
❑ City Council Business
❑ Ordinance
� Resolution
STAFF REPORT BY:
MEETING DATE: October 4, 2010
❑ Public Hearing
❑ Other
DEPT:
Attachments: A. Staff Report that responds to Committee Member questions raised at the September 20, 2010
LUTC meeting; B. Resolution; and C. LUTC modifications to Section 5, "Shoreline Regulations". (Note: Due to
the size of the SMP documents, the entire SMP document is not attached to this Agenda Bill. The SMP is
available to review in its entirety in a binder located in the City Council Meeting Room.)
Options Considered:
1. Recommend City Council pass a resolution approving the revised SMP as recommended by the Planning
Commission and authorize submittal to the Department of Ecology for their formal review and approval.
2. Recommend City Council pass a resolution approving the revised SMP with specific modifications, and
authorize submittal to the Deparirnent of Ecology for their formal review and approval.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends Option 1.
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ;f� G/��JlE+� �� a.i.�`^� ;,,�,�I �IItECTOR APPROVAL:
Couunittee Council� Co C�ci1
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The Committee forwarded Option #2 recommending City Councid pass a
resolution approving the revised SMP modified to leave the setback to lakefront properties in place as it exists
today, remove the requirements for a marine bluff setback, and authorize submittal to the Department of Ecology
for their formal review and approval. /'� �
r i
Committee Chair
PROPOSED �OUNCIL MOTION: "I
Way SMP and authorize submittal o,�
required under the SMA. "
ITEM #:
Member
�adoption of a resolution approving revisions to the City of Federal
revised SMP to the Department of Ecology for review and approval as
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL #
❑ DENIED 1sT reading
❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACI'ION Enactment reading
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE #
REVISED — 08/12/2010 RESOLUTION #
�
CITY OF �
Federal Way
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT
DATE:
To:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT
September 27, 2010
Dini Duclos, Chair
Members of the Land Use/Tr s Committee (LUTC)
Brian Wilson, City Manage� ���
Greg Fewins, CDS Directq�
Janet Shull, AICP, Seniot�Planner ;�
.,
Revisions to Federal Way Shoreline Master Program Update in response to Department
of Ecology review and comment.
MEET�NG DATE: October 4, 2010
A. POLICY QUESTION
Should the City Council pass a Resolution approving revisions to the City of Federal Way
Shoreline Master Program (SMP) and authorize submittal of the revised SMP documents to the
Department of Ecology for their formal review and approval as required under the Shoreline
Management Act (SMA)?
B. INTRODUCTION
This staff report responds to questions raised by members of the LUTC during the September 20,
2010 meeting and contains additional information regarding:
1. Application of the Stringline Setback method;
2. Information on existing and proposed Shoreline setback requirements under the
King County Code; and
3. Additional information on setbacks from marine bluffs
C. BACKGROUND
The LUTC discussed the proposed revisions to the SMP at their September 20, 2010 meeting. There
was public comment from one citizen who requested that the City Council consider a modification to
the application of the stringline setback method as proposed in the SMP Update. The LUTC
discussed the request and determined that they would like staff to bring back additional information
and examples of how the stringline setback method is applied to development proposals.
In addition to the discussion centering on the stringline setback, members of the LUTC also requested
that staff return with information regarding King County's existing and proposed setback standards
for lake shoreline properties and additional information regarding the proposed 50 foot setback from
marine bluffs.
City Council Committee Staff Report Meeting Date: October 4, 2010
Revisions to Shoreline Master Program Update Page 1
D. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON APPLICATION OF THE STRINGLINE SETBACK METHOD
The following table compares the existing regulations, current SMP Update that was recently
recommended for approval by the Planning Commission, and the modifications proposed by a citizen
for consideration by the City Council.
1. Existin 2. SMP U date 3. Citizen -Pro osed
l.Applicant can propose to use 1. Applicant can propose to use l. Applicant can propose to use
stringline setback in cases stringline setback in cases where stringline setback in cases where
where structures on structures on neighboring structures on neighboring
neighboring properties are properties are located closer to properties are located closer to the
located closer to the OHWM the OHWM than the minimum OHWM than the minimum
than the minimum shoreline shoreline setback. This enables shoreline setback. This enables
setback. This enables the the proposed structure to also be the proposed structure to also be
proposed structure to also be closer than the minimum setback closer than the minimum setback
closer than the minimum as long as no closer than 30 feet as long as no closer than 30 feet
setback as long as no closer from the OHWM. from the OHWM.
than 30 feet from the OHWM. 2. No provision for applying 2. In cases where existing
2..In cases where existing stringline method in cases where structures on either side of a
structures on either side of a neighboring structures are vacant parcel are further back
vacant parcel are further back located further back than the than the minimum setback, the
than the minimum setback, minimum setback. proposed structure must be
the proposed structure must setback to be at least as far back
be setback to be at least as far as the neighboring structures
back as the neighboring based on stringline method, but
structures based on stringline no greater than 100 feet.
method.
There are essentially two ways.the stringline setback method can be applied.
1. Stringline Method applied as an optional method of determining setback. An applicant may
request to use the stringline method of determining minimum setback in order to build closer to the
OHWM than the established minimum setback in cases where structures on adjacent parcels are built
closer to the OHWM than the minimum setback. However, there is a limit to the application of the
stringline method in that a new structure can not be located closer than 30 feet from the OHWM unless a
Shoreline Variance is granted. This stringline provision is the same in both the e�sting and the proposed
SMI' and the citizen requested modification would not change this provision.
2. Stringline Method as a required minimum setback standard. This second stringline setback
provision is not optional. The stringline method of determining setback becomes a required minimum
exceeding the specified standard minimum setback in cases where a vacant parcel has development on
adjacent parcels that are located further back from the OHWM than the required minimum shoreline
setback.
In the current SMP regulations (Title 15, FWCC}, there is no specified maximum application of this
standard. In the proposal submitted by a citizen, there would be a ma�cimum application of this provision
of 100 feet.
� T'his is the SMP Update approved by the City Council in June, 2007 and submitted to DOE for review.
City Council Committee Staff Report Meeting Date: October 4, 2010
Revisions to Shoreline Master Program Update Page 2
Please see the attached e�ibits X-X that depict various potential applications of the stringline setback
method.
E. KING COUNTY SHORELINE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR LAKE SHORELINE DESIGNATIONS
Staff consulted with our Department of Ecology Shoreline Planner, David Pater, who in turn
consulted with his colleague working with King County who supplied information regarding existing
and proposed setback sta.ndards that would apply to lake shoreline areas within our PAA. The
egisting and proposed minimum setback is 115 feet. The standard buffer for shorelines designated
"Urban" is 20 feet. However in the case of lake shorelines the 115 buffer is overlaid due to its
designation as a Type S water. There is an additional building setback from the buffer that must be
maintained.
F. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON PROPOSED SETBACK FROM A MARINE BLUFF
Staff have consulted with our Department of Ecology representative and done some additional research as
to what other jurisdictions planning under the SMA aze looking at for setbacks from marine bluffs. The
table below, provides a summary of fmdings:
Com arison of Marine Bluff Setback with other 'urisdictions that have this rovision
NRISDICTION Federal Wa Des Moines Tacoma Thurston Co.
Setback from 50-foot minimum 50-foot minimum 50-foot minimum 2X height of slope
Marine Bluff (Nate: minimum (Note: minimum for slopes over 10 or 50-foot,
shored�ne setback shoreline buffer is feet in height whichever is
isSOfeetfrom I15feetfrom (Note: minimum greater.
QFITT�''Min OHWMin buffer ranges from
residential residential SO to 200 feet for
environrrterz�} environment) Marine shoreline.)
Method for Shareline Variance With geotechnical 50 foot may be Reduction allowed
modification to analysis, may reduced to 30 foot to the 2X height
the marine Bluff ` reduce the setback minimum for ratio with geotech
setback. to minimum of 10 slopes less than 20 study, but no
feet. feet height. With reduction to the
geotechnical 50 foot minimum
analysis, may except through
reduce the setback Shoreline
to minimum of 10 Variance.
feet.
Some jurisdictions do allow for a buffer reduction when a geotechnical report can prove that a reduced
buffer will not result in hazard to proposed development, development on neighboring properties or to the
critical area environment. Staff has consulted with the Department of Ecology on this matter and they
have indicated that they favor the draft regulations as currently presented where the 50 foot setback is a
minimum and reductions are subject to the Shoreline Variance.
G. COUNCIL OPTIONS FOR MOVING FORWARD
The LUTC has the following options to proceed with the Shoreline Master Program:
1. Move to forward the revisions to the SMP UPdate to the full City Council with a recommendation
to approve it as recommended by the Planning Commission and authorize staff to forward the
approved SMP on to the Department of Ecology for review and approval; or
City Council Committee Staff Report Meeting Date: October 4, 2010
Revisions to Shoreline Master Program Update Page 3
2. Move to modify the proposed revisions to the SMP Update and forward the modified SMP
Update to the full City Council with a recommendation to approve it as modified and authorize
staff to forward the SMP on to the Department of Ecology for review and approval.
H. RECOMMENDED ACTION
Staff recommends that the proposed revisions to the SMP Update, including: Section 1- Introduction;
Section 3- Goals and Policies; Section 5- Shoreline Regulations; Section 6- Restoration Plan; Section 7
- Definitions; and Appendix A- Cumulative Impact Analysis, as forwarded by the Planning Commission,
be recommended for approval to the City Council.
E�ibit A: Aerial photo showing potential application of citizen proposal of stringline setback.
Exhibit B: Aerial photo showing potential application of 50 foot minimum shoreline setback .
K:�Shoreline Master Program�2010 RevisionsU.UTC\Oct 4 LLTTC Report.DOC
City Council Committee Staff Report Meeting Date: October 4, 2010
Revisions to Shoreline Master Program Update Page 4
Legend
Kutscha Pro �$a� Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM)
p _ _ _ Typicai 50° Setback
Stringline Setback (Kutscha Proposal)
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Legend
2007 Approved SMP Update r� Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM)
_ Typical 50' Setback
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING INTENT TO
ADOPT UPDATES TO THE FEDERAL WAY SHORELINE
MASTER PROGRAM FOLLOWING REQUIRED DEPARTMENT
OF ECOLOGY REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
WxEREAS, the City adopted its Shoreline Master Program (SMP) in 1994 and amended it in 1998; and
WHEREAS, the Washington Shoreline Management Act (RCW 90.58, referred to herein as "SMA")
recognizes that shorelines are among the most valuable and fragile resources of the state, and that state and
local government must establish a coordinated planning program to address the types and effects of
development occurring along shorelines of state-wide significance; and
WHEREAS, the City of Federal Way ("City") is required to update its Shareline Master Program
("SMP") pursuant to the SMA and WAC 173-26; and
WHEREAS, the updated SMP includes a scientific inventory and characterization report, goals and
policies, shoreline environmental designations, regulations and administrative procedures, a restoration plan,
and a cumulative impacts analysis; and
WHEREAS, the updated SMP is in the best interest and general welfare of the City of Federal Way because
it provides for the protection of sensitive shoreline areas while allowing appropriate uses and activities in
shoreline areas and includes a plan to restore degraded areas of the shoreline; and
WHEREAS, the updated SMP will apply to all jurisdictional shorelines within City limits and will apply to
all jurisdictional shorelines within the city's Potential Annexation Area (PAA), upon the effective date of
annexation of the PAA or any portion of the PAA; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), on March 31, 2007, a Deternunation
of Nonsignificance was issued by the city's SEPA Official and the appeal period expired on Apri128, 2007;
and
Resolution No. 10- Page 1 of 4
Rev 1/10
WxExEAS, the city has incorporated public input into the update process by preparing a Public
Participation Plan, holding a public open house, forming a Citizens Advisory Committee, holding public
Planning Commission meetings, holding a public hearing before the Planning Commission, developing an
SMP update web page, providing notice of ineetings by mail and other means, and maintaining an SMP mail
list; and
WHEREAS, the city incorporated technical feedback on the SMP update by forming a Technical Advisory
Committee to review draft products and provide comments and feedback; and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission considered the updated SMP at their meetings of February 14,
2007, March 28, 2007, and held a public hearing on April 4, 2007, and farwarded a recommendation to
approve, with minor modifications, the updated SMP; and
WHEREAS, following passage of Resolution 07-500 by the City Council, the updated SMP was
transmitted to the Department of Ecology for formal review; and
WxEREAS, following Department of Ecology review, the City of Federal Way received official review
comments in January 2009; and
WHEREAS, city staff, the city's SMP consultant, and Department of Ecology staff worked collaboratively
to prepare draft revisions to the SMP that responded to the official Department of Ecology review; and
WHEREAS, former members of the SMP Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC), Shoreline Property Owners, Public Agencies, and other parties of interest were notified of
the availability of the revised SMP documents; and
WHEREAS, on August 4, ZO 10, a public information meeting was conducted to discuss the revisions to the
SMP; and
WHEREAS, on August 25, 2010, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the proposed
revisions to the SMP and forwarded a recommendation to approve the proposed revisions; and
WHEREAS, on September 20, 2010 and October 4, 2010, the City Council Land Use/Transportation
Committee considered the proposed revisions to the SMP and recommended approval of the proposed
Resolution No. 10- Page 2 of 4
Rev 1/10
revisions as recommended by the Planning Commission with further modifications to SMP Section 5,
Shoreline Regulations, as follows: (1) retain the existing stringline setback requirement for lake shoreline
properties; and (2) remove the requirement for a minimum marine bluff setback; and
WHEREAS, following passage of this resolution the revised SMP Update will be transmitted to the
Department of Ecology for formal review and approval; and
WHEREAS, following Department of Ecology review and approval, the City Council shall pass an
ordinance adopting the approved SMP;
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, RESOLVES AS
FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Public Interest. The best interests and general welfare of the City of Federal Way are served
by enacting the updated SMP because the SMP provides for the protection of sensitive shoreline areas while
allowing appropriate uses and activities in shoreline areas and includes a plan to restore degraded areas of the
shoreline. Additionally, the updated SMP addresses Potential Annexation Areas so that residents in these areas
have predictability with regard to future SMP requirements and policies.
Section 2. Department of Ecolo�y Review/Approval. Following passage of this resolution, the
updated SMP will be transmitted to the Washington State Department of Ecology (WDOE) for formal review
and approval. Following WDOE review and approval, the City Council shall pass an ordinance adopting the
approved SMP.
Section 3. Severabilitv. If any section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this resolution should be held to
be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall
not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or phrase of this resolution.
Section 4. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this resolution are� authorized to make
necessary corrections to this resolution including, but not limited to, the correction of scrivener/clerical errors,
references, resolution numbering, section/subsection numbers, and any references thereto.
Resolution No. 10- Page 3 of 4
Rev 1/10
Section 5. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this
resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed.
Section 6. Effective Date. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage by the Federal
Way City Council.
RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON this
day of , 2010.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MAYOR, LINDA KOCHMAR
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK, CAROL MCNEILLY, CMC
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY, PATRICIA A. RICHARDSON
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
RESOLUTION NO.:
Resolution No. 10- Page 4 of 4
Rev 1/10
Changes to Section 5- Regulations per LUTC Recommendation
(changes per LUTC recommendation are indicated in bold double underline and �g
��)
Chapter 15.05
SHORELINE MANAGEMENT
15.05.030 Additional definitions.
"Veqetation conservation area" means an upland area adiacent to the
ordinarv high water mark or top of bluff where existinq native veqetation and
native trees shall be retained per the requirements of the Federal Wav Shoreline
Master Proqram The width of the veqetation conservation area is consistent
with setback requirements for specific uses and shoreline environment
desianations.
15.05.040 General development standards.
(4) Critical areas.
(b) Geoloqically hazardous areas. Regulated geologically hazardous areas
located in the shoreline jurisdiction include seismic hazard areas, landslide
hazard areas, steep slopes and erosion hazard areas. If a geologica� hazardous
area is located within the shoreline jurisdiction, all activities on the site shall be in
compliance with the requirements and restrictions of Articles I, II, III, and IV
��c=s+��,o„� �,', �, �^^' ^ of A�e�A Chapter 15.10 FWRC fn addition to the
development standards outlined in Chapter 15.10 FWRC, the followinq shall
applv with reaard to activities and development in geoloqicallv hazardous areas
found within shoreline jurisdi�tion:
(i) Creation of new lots shall be prohibited where development and
use on new lots would cause a foreseeable risk from qeoloqical conditions durinq
the life of the development.
(ii) New development that causes riskfrom geoloqical conditions
should not be allowed.
{iii) New development on sites with steep slopes and bluffs is
required to be set back sufficiently to ensure that shoreline stabilization is unlikelv
to be necessarv durinq the life of the proiect as demonstrated bv a qeotechnical
analysis.
15.05.050 Shoreline modifications
(1) Shoreline stabilization.
�Creation of new lots shall be prohibited where development and use on
new lots would require structural shoreline stabilization over the life of the
development � The followina standards shall apply to new develoqment.
(i) New development that would reauire shoreline stabilization which
causes significant impacts to adiacent or down-current properties and shoreline
areas should not be allowed.
(ii) New development includinq newly created parcels, are required to
be desiqned and located to prevent the need for future shoreline stabilization as
documented bv a geotechnical analysis.
�iii) New development on steep slopes and bluffs is required to be set
back sufficientiv to ensure that shoreline stabilization is unlikely to be necessarv
durinq the life of the project as demonstrated bv a qeotechnical analvsis. �
15.05.080 Shoreline residential environment.
(3) General requirements.
(d) Setbacks. Development shall maintain a minimum shoreline setback of
the first 50 feet of property landward from the ordinary high water mark, or other
designated minimum setback necessarv to protect desiqnated critical areas per
FWRC 15.05.040(4), whichever is greater.
This minimum setback area shall be retained as a vegetation conservation area,
subject to provisions referenced in subsection (�e).
(5) Shoreline uses.
(a) Allowed uses within shoreline residential designated areas include the
following:
(i) Residential development.
(C) Setbacks.
(I) Single-family residential development on marine shorelines
shall maintain a minimum shoreline setback of 50 feet from the ordinarv hiqh
water mark Sinale-familv residential development on lake shorelines shall
maintain a minimum setback behind the strinaline setback or 50 f eet from
he ordinarv hiah water mark whichever is areater If the site contains one or
more desiqnated critical areas the setback shall be the minimum necessarv to
protect such designated critical areas per FWRC 15.05.040(4), or the strinaline
setback, or 50 feet from the ordinary high water mark, whichever is qreater.
Where critical area setbacks do not applv the standard 50 foot minimum setback
mav be modified pursuant to the following exception:
(a) If sinqle-familv residential development is proposed on a
lot where properties on at least one side of the lot are developed in sinqle-familv
residences located less than 50 feet from the ordinarv hiqh water mark, then the
proposed residential development may be located the same distance from the
ordinarY hiqh water mark as the adjacent residences (using the strinqline setback
method as defined in FWRC 15.05.030) but shall in no case be closer than 30
feet from the ordinary high water mark.
(II) Multifamilv residential development on marine shorelines shall
maintain a minimum setback of 75 feet from the ordinarv hiqh water mark.
Multifamilv residential develonment on lake shorelines shall maintain a
minimum setback behind the strinaline setback or 75 feet from the ordinarv
hiah water mark whichever is areater. If the site contains one or more
__
designated critical areas the setback shall be the minimum necessarv to protect
such desi critical areas per FWRC 15.05.Q40(4), or the stringtine
setback or 75 feef from the ordinarv hiqh water mark, whichever is qreater.
Where critical area setbacks do not apply the standard 75 foot minimum setback
may be modified pursuant to the followinq exception:
�a) If multi-familv residential development is proposed on a
lot where properties on at least one side of the lot are developed in multi-familv
residential uses located less than 75 feet from the ordinarv hiah water mark, then
the proposed residential development mav be located the same distance from
the ordinarv hiqh water mark as the adjacent residential uses (usinq the strinqline
setback method as defined in FWRC 15.05.030) but shall be no closer than 50
feet from the ordinarv high water mark.
15.05.090 Urban conservancy environment.
(3) General requirements.
(d) Setbacks. Development shall maintain a minimum shoreline setback
of the first 50 feet of property landward from the ordinary high water mark as--�
or other desiqnated minimum setback necessarv to protect
designated critical areas per FWRC 15.04.040(4) whichever is qreater. This
minimum setback area shall be retained as a-vegetation conservation area,
subject to provisions referenced in subsection (�e�.
(5) Shoreline Uses.
(a) Allowed uses within urban conservancy designated areas include the
following:
(i) Residential development. �
(A) Setbacks. Residential development on marine shorelines shall
maintain a minimum setback of 50 feet from the ordinary high water mark, e�-�5
fce� fr�m +ho +,,., nf hl� ,��, or other established minimum setback necessarv to
protect designated critical areas per FWRC 15.05.040(4), whichever is greater as
. Residential develoament on lake shorelines
shall maintain a setback behind the strinaline setba or 50 feet from the
ordinarv hiah water mark or other establishe minimum setback necessarv
�.�rotect desianated critica areas oer FWRC 15 05 040(4). whichever is
� Exceptions to minimum setback requirements included in FWRC
15.05.080(5)(a)(i)(C), for both single-family and multi-family development, shall
apply, -
(v) Office and commercial development
(�� O�ce and commercial development on marine shorelines
shall maintain a sefback of 75 feet from the ordinary high water mark, or other
established minimum setback necessary to protect desiqnated critical areas per
FWRC 15.05.040(4), _ , whichever is
greater. Office and commercial develoament on lake shorelines shall
r�aintain a setback behind the strinaline setback or 75 feet from the
Qrdinarv hiah water mark or other established minimum setback necessarv
�o protect desianated critical areas aer FWRC 15.05.040(4). whichever is
r r. The minimum setback may be reduced using the stringline method,
when applicable, but in no case shall the minimum setback be less than 50 feet
from ordinary high water mark, _ ,
Chapter 15.10
CRITICAL AREAS
Article I. Generally
G 15.10.030 Jurisdiction.
This chapter a{�per�-i� applies to the subject property if it:
(1) Contains or is within �� feet of a geologically hazardous
area;
4. Article IV: Geologically Hazardous Areas Development
i4: 15.10.160 Limitations.
(1) This section regulates development activities and clearinq
and gradinq on or within �� feet of a
geologically hazardous area. Refer to FWRC 15.05.040(bl(iii) for
ditional reauirements related to oroaerties with steep sloue
and bluffs.
(2) Development activities, clearin� and aradinq,
�edi#isa#�sr�s or the installation and maintenance of landscaping
normally associated with residential, commercial or park use may
not occur on or within � 25 feet of a geologically hazardous area
unless no reasonable alternative exists and then only if the
development activity or clearinq and qradinq k�ase
will not lead to or create any increased slide, seismic
or erosion hazard.
(3) Before approving any development activity or clearinq and
rg ading under this section, the city may
require the applicant to submit the following information:
(a) A soils report prepared by a qualified professional
engineer licensed in the state which describes how the proposed
development will impact each of the following on the subject
property and nearby properties:
(i) Slope stability, landslide hazard and sloughing.
(ii} Seismic hazards.
(iii) Groundwater.
(iv) Seeps, springs and other surface waters.
(v) Existing vegetation.
(b} Recommended foundation design and optimal
location for roadway improvements.
4
(c) Recommended methods for mitigating identified
impacts and a description of how these mitigating measures may
impaet adjacent properties.
(d) Any other information the city determines is
reasonably necessary to evaluate the proposal.
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010
MEETING DATE: October 4, 2010
SUB,TECT: 2011 Asphalt Overlay Program Preliminary Project List and Authorization to Bid
POLICY QUESTION Should the Council approve the 2011 Asphalt Overlay Program Preliminary Project List and
authorize staff to proceed with the design and bid of the proposed 201 Asphalt Overlay Program?
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
COMMITTEE Land Use and Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
� Consent
■'.
■
Ordinance
❑ City Council Business
Resolution
�
■
ITEM #:
Public Hearing
Other
STAFF REPORT BY: Marwan Salloum, P.E. De u Public Works Dire DEPT Public Works
_ .........................................................._............._............._._.....................................................__...................................z........�..... .
_ ..............................................................._......_.................._......_.
_ .................................._..._..._........._._.............__..__...........----._..._........._..------._.....
Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated October 4, 2010.
Options Considered:
_ ................................................................................._..........................................._......................._....
1. Approve the list of streets for the 2011 Asphalt Overlay Project as presented. Furthermore, authorize staff to
bid all or part of the 2011 Asphalt Overlay Project, returning with a request for permission to award the
project within the available 2011 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 19, 2010 City Council Consent
Agenda for approval.
v
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: �b�� � DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
Committee Council ����
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION I move to forward the 2011 Asphalt Overlay Project Preliminary Project
List and Authorization to Bid to the October 1
Dini Duclos. Chair
Consent Agenda for approval.
Jim"�'errell, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION `7 �e approval of the list of streets for the 2dkL�fsphaZ�6verlay Project as
presented. Furthermore, I authorize staff to bid all or part of the 2011 Asphalt Overlay Project, returning with a
request for permission to award the project within the available 2011 Asphalt Overlay Budget to the lowest
responsive, responsible bidder. "
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICEJ
COUNCIL ACTION:
❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL #
❑ DENIED 1sT reading
❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE #
REVISED — 02/06/2006 RESOLUTION #
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
October 4, 2010
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Brian Wilson, Interim City Manager
Cary M. Roe, P.E., Director of Parks, Public Works and Emergency Management
Jeff Huynh, Street Systems Engineer �"
2011 Asphalt Overlay Program Preliminary Project List and Authorization to Bid
BACKGROUND'
Public Works staff has developed a list of recommended streets for the 2011 Asphalt Overlay Program. The total
estimated budget for the program is $2,479,767 and is comprised of the following:
• 2011 Proposed Overlay Budget $1,513,500
• 2011 Structures Budget $146,267
• 2010 Carry Forward (estimate) $500,000
• Proposed reimbursement $320,000
agreement with Quadrant Corporation for
S 32Q�' Street overlay
TOTAL FUNDING AVAILABLE $2,479,767
The $146,267 from the structures budget is for the City's annual Sidewalk Maintenance Program, and will cover
the costs associated with the replacement of substandard wheelchair ramps, and repairing existing curb, gutter,
and sidewalks within the overlay project area.
The following is a preliminary list of streets to be included in the 2011 Asphalt Overlay Program. The streets
were selected 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 detailed area maps are attached for your information.
SCHEDULE
A
DESCRIPTION
S 320`� Street — I-5 limited access to Weyerhaeuser
Way
S 320`� Street — Weyerhaeuser Way to City Limit
S320th Street — 3'� Pl SW to 6`" Ave S.
Madrona Trails
E Lakota Trails
F Decauter Glen
G 21 Ave SW — SW 337` Pl to SW 346`�' St
H 21S` Ave SW — SW 346�' St to SW 348'�' St
ESTIMATED SUBTOTAL CONSTRUCTION PROJECT COSTS:
.
�
10% Construction Contingency
Pavement Management System
In-house Design
Construction Administration
City's Administrative Fee
Printing and Advertising
ESTIMATED TOTAL PROGRAM COST:
AMOUNT
$307,800
$127,400
$427,000
$416,000
$262,300
$222,000
$417,800
$133,400
$2,313,700
$231,370
$40,000
$63,000
$115,000
$72,000
$3,500
$2,838,570
October 4, 2010
Land Use and Transportation Committee
2011 Asphalt Overlay Program
Page 2 of 2
The estimated cost of $2,838,570 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 2011 Asphalt Overlay Project will be awarded within the available overlay program
budget.
Once Council approves the list of streets for the Overlay Program, staff will begin the final design. The
anticipated date for advertising is February 2011, with construction beginning in May 2011.
k:\Iutc�2010\IO-04-10 2011 Asphalt Overlay list.doc
�
�
�
�
�
N
��
�
A - S 320th St
B - S 320th St
C - S 320th St
D - Madrona Trails
E - Lakota Trails
F - Decauter Glen
G- 21 st Ave SW
H-21stAveSW
Map made by �il
2011 Asphalt Overlay
Preliminary List
N
Federal Way
CityMap
Map Printed-Sep 29 2010
Note: Triis map is lrrtended for us�e as a graphical rep�esentadon only.
rne crry otr-�� w8r m�x� �o �,��ry as ro���y.
N
� A - S 320th St
N B- S 320th St
A - S 320th St
B - S 320th St
Fede�al Way
CityMap
Map Printed-Sep 29 2010
Note: This map is intended for use as a graphical repraseMation only.
Map made by -kan The Cily of Federa! Way makes m warra�y as to its accu�acy.
N
C- S 320th St Federal Way
CityMap
Map Prirrted-Sep Z9 2010
N�e: This map is Intended for us�e as a graphical representation oMy.
Map made by -kcm The Ci[y of Fede�al Way makes ra warranty as to its accuracy.
i_
_.
D- Madrona Trails Federal Way
CityMap
Map Printed-Sep 29 2010
Note: This map is intended for use as a graphical �epreserrtatlon only.
Map made by accm The City of Federa! Way makes �a wa�irty as to its accuracy.
N
E- LakOta TI'ailS Federa� wa
CityMap
Map Printed-Sep 29 2010
N�e: This mep is intended fw use as a g►aphical represeMatlon only.
Map mads by -kcm The City of Federal Way makes no wa�rar►ly as to its accuracy.
316
w ST �
N (�
a 317 >
� ST M
317
PL
15
��
SW 316 ST c�
�
�
317 ST N
SW 317 PL SW 317 PL
� S T SW 318
y � �8 ST
ry � ¢
PL > d; � SW 318 P!
¢
° SW 320 ST
"' SW 320 S
N
SW 320 PL °'
<
SW 321 LN
�
a '�!?� � SW 322 ST z
� J
� 32 ? N � �,
PJ g� S T SW 322 PL 322 PL
I, SW 322
�
s � 3 Z 3 ST PL N `� � J N T
� �v 23 P SW 323 S
c� N a �
� qL � p�' S �1��' S� � � /� `�'n c~.�
�j �j � v / J
c,� SW''� `'' � a a'
0
9G c�n y a Q ` V SW 324
u'� ¢ 325 � `� N i SW 325 PL
�� �
N
F- Decauter Glen Federal Way
CityMap
�
Map mads by �kcm
Map PrintedSep 29 2010
Note: This map is intended for use as a graphlcel represeMaHon only.
The City of Federa/ Way makes no wananty as to its accurecy.
i_
��
� G-21stAveSW
N H- 21 st Ave SW
G- 21 st Ave SW
H- 21 st Ave SW
Federal Way
CityMap
Map Printed�ep 29 2010
Note: fiis map is iMended for use as a graphica/ represerrta6on onty.
Map made by accm The Gty of Federal Way makes no warraMy as to its accuracy.
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 19, 2010
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
ITEM #:
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF CHELAN, WASHINGTON AND THE CITY OF
FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON FOR THE HOUSING OF INMATES IN THE CHELAN COUNTY JAIL.
PoLICY QiIEST'ION: Should the City of Federal / Federal Way Police Department enter into an agreement with
Chelan County for Jail Services?
CoMMITTEE: Parks, Recreation, Human Services and Public Safety
Council Committee - (PRHS&PS)
CATEGORY:
� Consent
❑ Ordinance
MEETING DATE: 10/12/10
❑ Public Hearing
❑ C Council Business ❑ Resolution ❑ Ot her
STAFF REPORT BY: Steve Arbuthnot, Coinmander DEPT: Police
Attachments:
l. PRHS&PS Staff Memo
2. Interlocal Cooperative Agreement for Jail Services with Chelan County
Options Considered:
1. Accept the Interlocal Cooperative Agreement for Jail Services
2. Reject the Interlocal Cooperative Agreement for Jail Services
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Option #1
U
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: ���I(�,v�� 30 �����I� DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
wwe
Committee Council Comrni ee
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: "I MOVE TO FORWARD THE INTERLOCAL COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY AND CHELAN COUNTY FOR THE HOUSING OF INMATES IN THE CHELAN COUNTY REGIONAL
JAIL, TO THE OCTOBER 19, 201 O, CITY COUNCIL CONSENT AGENDA, FOR APPROVAL ".
� � w
Coinmittee Chair �
er
Committee Member
�PROPO5ED COLTNCIL MOTION: " I move approval of the Interlocal Cooperative Agreement hetween the Ciry
of Federal Way and Chelan Counry for the housing of inmates in the Chelan County Regional Jail, and
authorize City Manager/Police Chief, Brian Wilson, to sign such Agreement. "
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
❑ APPROVED COUNCIL BILL #
❑ DENIED 1
❑ TABLED/DEFERREDlNO ACTION Enactment reading
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinanr.es only) ORDINANCE #
REVISED — 08/12/3010 RE50LUTI01�' #
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COLTNCIL COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 12, 2010
T0: Parks, Recreation, Human Services and Public Safety Council Committee
VIA: Brian J. Wilson, City Manager/Chief of Police
FROM: Andy Hwang, Assistant Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Interlocal Agreement between the City of Federal Way and Chelan County for the
housing of inmates in the Chelan County Jail
Background
The City of Federal Way currently has Interlocal agreements with several jurisdictions for jail
services, (Auburn, Buckley, Enumclaw, Fife, King County, and Yakima County), to house our
misdemeanor inmates. The City of Federal Way primarily utilizes the Yakima County Jail for
sentenced inmates. The 2010 average daily population (ADP) of Federal Way inmates in Yakama
County Jail is 45. The current rate for housing inmates in the Yakima County Jail is $75.00 per
day. Beginning in 2011, Yakima County will raise their rates to $110.00 per day for housing
inmates. This represents a 46% increase to our 2011 jail budget.
As a result of this cost increase by Yakima, the City is proposing not to renew our contract with
Yakima, but enter into a new Interlocal Agreement with Chelan County. The proposed contract
with Chelan County will allow the City to begin housing most of Federal Way's misdemeanant
inmates, on a space available basis, through the end of 2010, at a cost of $70.00/inmate/day.
Beginning in 201 l, the City would commit to a 30 bed minimum arrangement with additional beds
on a`space available' basis, at the same daily rate. The fees for our inmates in the Chelan County
Jail will remain $70.00/day, through the contract expiration date on October 31, 201 l, at which
time the City anticipates moving all of our misdemeanant inmates into the new SCORE facility.
This proposal includes a plan to begin moving our inmates out of the Yakima County Jail as soon
as the new Chelan contract is approved.
All other jail contracts have ah been renewed and will remain in place until the new SCORE
facility becomes operational.
CITY OF
,'�., Federal
CITY HALL
W �� 33325 8th Avenue South • PO Box 9718
Federa{ Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www crt yoffederalway com
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN CHELAN COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND THE CITY OF
FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, FOR THE HOUSING OF INMATES IN THE CHELAN COUNTY
REGIONAL JUSTICE CENTER
THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT is made and entered into on this day of
, 20 by and between the City of Federal Way, Washington, a Washington
municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as "City", and Chelan County, Washington,
hereinafter referred to as "Chelan County", each party having been duly organized and now
existing under the laws of the State of Washington.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, The Chelan County Regional Justice Center and the City Manager are authorized by law to
have charge and custody of the County Jail and the City prisoners or inmates, respectively; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to designate the CCRJC as a place of confinement for the
incarceration of one or more inmates lawfully committed to its custody; and
WHEREAS, Chelan County Department of Corrections is desirous of accepting and keeping in
custody such inmate(s) in the CCRJC for a rate of compensation mutually agreed upon by the parties
hereto; and
WHEREAS, RCW 39.34.080 and other Washington law, as amended, authorizes any county to
contract with any other county or city to perform any governmental service, activity or undertaking which
each contracting county is authorized by law to perform; and
WHEREAS, the governing bodies of each of the parties hereto have determined to enter into this
Agreement as authorized and provided for by RCW 39.34.080 and other Washington law, as amended,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above and foregoing recitals, the payments to be
made, the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, and for other good and valuable
consideration, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. GOVERNING LAW
The parties hereto agree that, except where expressly otherwise provided, the laws and
administrative rules and regulations of the State of Washington shall govern in any matter relating to an
inmate or inmates confined pursuant to this Agreement.
2. DURATION
This Agreement shall enter into full force and effect from November 1, 2010 and end October 31,
2011, subject to earlier termination as provided by Section 3 herein. This Agreement may be renewed
automatically for like successive periods under such terms and conditions as the parties may determine.
Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to require the City to house inmates in Chelan County
continuously.
3. TERMINATION
Interlocal Agreement Between
Chelar, �ounty ar,d the City of =ederal tNay
Page 1 of 9
GITY OF
'�..., Federal
CITY HALL
� A/�� 33325 8th Avenue South • PO Box 9718
� Federa{ Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7Q00
www diyoffedera/way com
(a) By either party. This Agreement may be terminated by written notice from either party to the
other party delivered by regular mail to the contact person identified herein, provided that termination
shall become effective sixty (60) working days after receipt of such notice. Within said sixty (60) days,
the City agrees to remove its inmate(s) from the CCRJC.
(b) Bv the Citv due to lack of fundin�c . The obligation of the City to pay Chelan County under the
provision of this Agreement beyond the current fiscal year is expressly made contingent upon the
appropriation, budgeting availability of sufficient funds by the City. In the event that such funds are not
budgeted, appropriated or otherwise made available for the purpose of payment under this Agreement at
any time after the current fiscal year, then the City shall have the option of terminating the Agreement
upon written notice to Chelan County, except that all services provided to that point shall be
compensated at the agreed rate. The termination of this Agreement for this reason will not cause any
penalty to be charged to the City.
(c) Termination for Breach. In the event the City breaches or fails to perform or observe any of
the terms or conditions herein, and fails to cure such breach or default within seven (7) days of County's
giving the City written notice thereof, or, if not reasonably capable of being cured within such seven (7)
days, within such other period of time as may be reasonable in the circumstances, County may terminate
the City's rights under this Agreement in addition to and not in timitation of any other remedy of County at
law or in equity, and the failure of County to exercise such right at any time shall not waive County's right
to terminate for any future breach or default.
(d) In the event of termination of this agreement for any reason, the City shall compensate Chelan
County for prisoners housed by Chelan County after notice of such termination until the City retakes its
inmates in the same manner and at the same rates as if this Agreement had not been terminated.
4. MAILING ADDRESSES
All notices, reports, and correspondence to the respective parties of this Agreement shall be sent
to the following: �
Chelan County: Chelan County Regional Justice Center
401 Washington St., Level 2
Wenatchee, WA 98801
Primary Contact Person: Phil Stanley, Director
Secondary Contact: Ronda McCallister, Administrative Program Manager
City of Federal Way:
Federal Wav Police Department
33325 8 Ave South
Federal Way, WA 98003
Primary Contact Person: Beth Meshkoff, Jail Coordinator
Secondary Contact: Kristin Gregory, Jail Coordinator
Page 2 of 9
Interlocal Agreement Between
Chelan County and the City of F2deral V,'a��
CITY OF
�, Federal Way
CITY HALL
33325 8th Avenue South • PO Box 9718
Feclerai Way, WA 98063-9718
(253)835-700Q
www atyaffederalway. com
Notices mailed shall be deemed given on the date mailed. The parties shall notify each other in writing of
any change of address.
5. DEFINITIONS
The parties hereby agree that the following terms shall have the specified meanings unless
indicated otherwise herein: ,
(a) �. One prisoner day shall be each day or portion thereof which a prisoner appears in
custody on the jail management system. The count shall be conducted by the jail management system
and each participating jurisdiction shall be charged for each prisoner who is detained in the Regional
Justice Center on a charge and/or conviction from the participating jurisdiction.
(b) Inmate Classifications shall be pursuant to the Chelan County Objective Jail Inmate
Classification System which is modeled after the National Institute of Corrections Jail Classification
System:
(i) "Minimum" classification shall apply to those inmates who present a low risk to staff
and the community.
(ii)
(iii)
Page 3 of 9
"Medium" classification shall apply to those inmates who present a moderate risk to
staff and the community.
"Maximum" classification shall apply to those inmates who present a substantial risk
to staff and the community.
6. COMPENSATION
(a) Rates. Chelan County agrees to accept and house the City's inmates for compensation per
inmate at the rate of $70.00 per day (also see #12 below). This includes minimum and medium
classification inmates. The parties agree that Chelan County will not charge a separate booking fee in
addition to such rate. The date of booking into the CCRJC of the City's inmates, no matter how little time
of a twenty-four (24) hour day it constitutes, shall count as one day and shall be billed to the City as a day
of custody in Chelan County.
(b) Minimum Charae: Beginning January 1, 2011, Chelan County shall make available for
Federal Way, a minimum of thirty (30) inmate beds per day, and shall accept and house a minimum
of thirty (30) Federal Way inmates each day. The City of Federal Way agrees to commit to and pay
for thirty (30) beds per day, at the rate set forth in Section 6(a) above. Chelan County also agrees to
make additional beds, in excess of thirty (30), available to Federal Way on a"first come, first served"
or "space available" basis, at the same rate set forth in Section 6(a).
(c) Billing and Pavment. Chelan County agrees to provide the City with an itemized bill listing
all names of inmates who are housed, the number of days housed (including the date and time of
booking and date and time of release), and the dollar amount due for each. Beginning January 1,
2011, the bill shall reflect the minimum charge provided for in Section 6(b) above, and charges for
any inmates in excess of thirty (30) inmates per day. Chelan County agrees to provide said bill by
the 10 of each month. The City agrees to make payment to Chelan County within 30 days of receipt
of such bill for the amount billed for the previous calendar month.
�nterlocal Agreement Between
Cheia.i County and the City ot Federal 1Nay
CITY OF
'�.�,,�...., Federal Way
7. RIGHT OF INSPECTION
CITY HAIL
33325 8th Avenue South • PO Box 9718
Federai Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
www atyoftedera►way com
The City shall have the right to inspect, at all reasonable times, all Chelan County facilities in
which inmates of the City are confined in order to determine if such jail maintains standards of
confine�nent acceptable to the City and that such inmates therein are treated equally regardless of race,
religion, color, creed or national origin; provided, however, that Chelan County shall be obligated to
manage, maintain and operate its facilities consistent with all applicable federal, state and local laws and
regulations.
8. FURLOUGHS, PASSES, AND WORK RELEASE
Chelan County ag�ees that no early releases or alternatives to incarceration, including furloughs,
passes, electronic home detention or work release shall be granted to any inmate housed pursuant to
this Agreement without written authorization by the committing court.
9. INMATE ACCOUNTS
Chelan County shall establish and maintain an account for each inmate received from the City and
shall credit to such account all money which is received and shall make disbursements, debiting such
accounts in accurate amounts for the inmate's personal needs. Disbursements shall be made in limited
amounts as are reasonably necessary for personal maintenance. The Director of the CCRJC shall be
accountable to the City for such inmate funds. At either the termination of this Agreement, the inmate's
death, release from incarceration, or return to either the City or indefinite release to the court, the
inmate's money shall be transferred to either the inmate's account in care of the City, at such time the
City shall be accountable to the inmate for said fund, or to the inmate.
10. INMATE PROPERTY
The City may transfer to Chelan County only limited amounts of personal property of the City's
inmates' recovered from or surrendered by inmates to the City upon booking. Personal property in
excess of one simple "grocery bag" shall at no time be transferred to or back from Chelan County.
11. RESPONSIBILITY FOR OFFENDER'S CUSTODY
It shall be the responsibility of Chelan County to confine the inmate or inmates; to provide
treatment, including the furnishing of subsistence and all necessary medical and hospital services and
supplies; to provide for the inmates' physical needs; to make available to them programs and/or
treatment consistent with the individual needs; to retain them in said custody; to supervise them; #o
maintain proper discipline and control; to make certain that they receive no special privileges and that the
sentence and orders of the committing court in the State are faithfully executed; provided that nothing
herein contained shall be construed to require Chelan County, or any of its agents, to provide service,
treatment, facilities or programs for any inmates confined pursuant to this Agreement, which it does not
provide for similar inmates not confined pursuant to this Agreement. Nothing herein shall be construed
as to require Chelan County to provide services, treatment, facilities or programs to the City's inmates
above, beyond or in addition to that required by applicable law.
12. MEDICAL SERVICES
(a) Inmates shall receive such medical, psychiatric and dental treatment when emergent and
lnterlocal Agreement Between �age 4 of 9
Chelar. t,ountv and the Citv of Feda� al `��Jav
CITY OP
;� Federai
CITY HALL
W �� 33325 8th Avenue South • RO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253)835-7000
�vywv. c+tyoffederahvay. com
necessary to safeguard their health while housed in the CCRJC. Chelan County shall provide or arrange
for the providing of such medical, psychiatric and dental services. Except for routine minor medical
services provided in the CCRJC, the City shall pay directly or reimburse Chelan County for any and all
costs associated with the delivery of any emergency and/or major medical service provided to the City's
inmates. The City shall be responsible for any and all medical, psychiatric and dental treatment provided
outside of the CCRJC and shall be billed therefore. Examples of inedical services which may be
provided in the CCRJC but which are not routine, and for which the City shall be billed include, but are
not necessarily limited to, HIV/AIDS treatment, chemotherapy, dialysis treatment, and hemophiliac
treatment. No psychiatric or dental treatment can be provided in the CCRJC; all psychiatric and dental
treatment of the City's inmates shall be billed to the City.
(b) An adequate record of all such services shall be kept by Chelan County for the City's review at
its request, to the extent consistent with confidentiality regulations. Any medical or dental services of
major consequence shall be reported to the City as soon as time permits.
(c) Should medical, psychiatric or dental services require off-site care or hospitalization, the City
agrees to compensate Chelan County dollar for dollar any amount expended or cost incurred in providing
the same; provided that the care is pre-approved by the City. Any/all Federal Way inmates who are
removed f�om the Chelan County Jail for any medical reason/purpose not pre-authorized by Federal Way
are to be immediately considered released from Federal Way custody. The City will be notified by
contacting the on-duty Patrol supervisor at (253) 835-6851, as soon as practicable.
The inmate will be advised to return to the Chelan County Jail to complete their sentence upon
release from the medical facility.
13. DISCIPLINE
Chelan County shall have physical control over and power to execute disciplinary authority over all
inmates of the City's. However, nothing contained herein shall be construed to authorize or permit the
imposition of a type of discipline prohibited by applicable law.
14. RECORDS AND REPORTS
(a) The City shall forward to Chelan County before or at the time of delivery of each inmate a copy
of all inmate records pertaining to the inmate's present incarceration. If additional information is
requested regarding a particular inmate, the parties shall mutually cooperate to provide any additional
information in a timely manner.
(b) Chelan County shall keep all necessary and pertinent records concerning such inmates in the
manner mutually agreed upon by the parties hereto. During an inmate's confinement in Chelan County,
the City shall upon request be entitled to receive and be furnished with copies of any report or records
associated with said inmate(s) incarceration.
15. REMOVAL FROM THE JAIL
An inmate of the City's iegally confined in Chelan County shall not be removed from Chelan
County by any person without written authorization from the City or by order of any court having
jurisdiction. The City hereby designates the Police Chief, DeputyChiefand/oranyavailable Federal
Way Command Staffinemberas "the official" authorized to direct Chelan County to remove the City's
inmates from the CCRJC. Chelan County agrees that no early releases or alternatives to incarceration
Interlocal Agreement Between Page 5 of 9
Chelan County and the City of �cder�! VUay
CITY Of
,'�._. Federal
CITY HA�L
��� 33325 $th Avenue South • PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98�63-9718
(253}835-7000
www. crtyotfederarway con,
including furloughs, passes, work release, work c�ews or electronic home detention shall be granted to
any inmate without written authorization from the committing court. This paragraph shall not apply to an
emergency necessitating the immediate removal of the inmate for medical, psychiatric, dental treatment
or other catastrophic condition presenting an eminent danger to the safety of the inmate or to the inmates
or personnel of Chelan County. In the event of any such emergency removal, Chelan County shall
inform the City of the whereabouts of the inmate or inmates so removed, at the earliest practicable time,
and shall exercise all reasonable care for the safe keeping and custody of such inmate or inmates:
16. ESCAPES
In the event any City inmate escapes from Chelan County's custody, Chelan County will use all
reasonable means to recapture the inmate. The escape shall be reported immediately to the City.
Chelan County shall have the primary responsibility for and authority to direct the pursuit and retaking of
the inmate or inmates within its own territory. Any cost in connection therewith shall be chargeable to
and borne by Chelan County; however, Chelan County shall not be required to expend unreasonable
amounts to pursue and return inmates from other counties, states or countries.
17. DEATH OF AN INMATE
, (a) In the event of the death of a City inmate, the Chelan County Coroner shall be notified. The
City shall receive copies of any records made at or in connection with such notification.
(b) Chelan County shall immediately notify the City of the death of a City inmate, furnish
information as requested, and follow the instructions of the City with regard to the disposition of the body.
In the case of an unattended death, suspicious death, or criminal case, the Chelan County Coroner
would have authority over the deceased and would coordinate with local law enforcement to finish the
investigation prior to the release of the deceased inmate. The City hereby designates the Police Chief,
Deputy Chief and/or any available Federal Way Command Staff inember, as "the official" authorized
to request information from and provide instructions to Chelan County regarding deceased inmates. The
body shall not be released except on written order of said appropriate official of the City. Written notice
shall be provided within three (3) working days of receipt by the City of notice of such death. All
expenses relative to any necessary preparation of the body and shipment charges shall be paid by the
City. With the City's consent, Chelan County may arrange for burial and all matters related or incidental
thereto, and all such expenses shall be paid by the City. The provisions of this paragraph shall govern
only the relations between or among the parties hereto and shall not affect the liability of any relative or
other persons for the disposition of the deceased or for any expenses connected therewith.
(c) The City shall receive a certified copy of the death certificate for any of its inmates who have
dies while in Chelan County's custody.
18. RETAKING OF INMATES
Upon request from Chelan County, the City shall, at its expense, retake any City inmate within
thirty-six (36) hours after receipt of such request. In the event the confinement of any City inmate is
terminated for any reason, the City shall, at its expense, retake such inmate at the CCRJC Facility.
19. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION
Chelan County agrees to hold harmless, indemnify and defend the City, its officers, agents and
Interlocal Agreement Between Page 6 of 9
Cnelan .'',our.tv anJ the Citv of Federai V1iav
CITY Of
'�,,,�..;, Federal
CITY HALL
■ w ��� 33325 8th Avenue South • PO Box 97i8
;; V Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253) 835-7000
wivw atyolfedera/way com
employees, from.and against any and all claims, losses, or liability, for injuries, sickness or death of
persons, or damage to property, arising out of any willful misconduct or negligent act, error, or omission
of Chelan County, its officers, agents, or employees, in connection with the services required by the
Agreement, provided, however, that:
(a) Chelan County's obligations to indemnify, defend and hold harmless shall not extend to
injuries, sickness, death or damage caused by or resulting from the sole willful misconduct or negligence
of the City, its officers, agents or employees or sub-consultants; and
(b) Chelan County's obligations to indemnify, defend and hold harmless for injuries, sickness,
death or damage caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence or willful misconduct of the
Chelan County and the City or of Chelan County and a third party other than an officer, agent or
employee of Chelan County, shall apply only to the extent of the negligence or willful misconduct of
Chelan County.
20. RIGHT OF REFUSAL AND TRANSPORTATION
(a) Chelan County shall have the right to refuse to accept any inmate from the City when, in the
opinion of Chelan County, its inmate census is at capacity that there is a substantial risk that, through
usual operation of the jail, the reasonable operational capacity limits of the jail might be reached or
exceeded.
(b) Chelan County shall further have the right to refuse to accept any inmate from the City who, in
the judgment of Chelan County, has a current illness or injury which may adversely affect the operations
of the CCRJC, has a history of serious medical problems, presents a substantial risk of escape, or
presents a substantial risk of injury to other persons or property, or is classified as a maximum security
inmate pursuant to Chelan County's Objective Jail Classification System. The inmate should be an
inmate who has already been sentenced by the jurisdiction, and should not be on pre-trial status.
(c) City prisoners incarcerated in Chelan County pursuant to this Agreement shall be transported
to or from the City twice per week, on Wednesdays and Fridays, by Chelan County and at the expense of
Chelan County and shall be returned, if necessary, to the City by Chelan County personnel and at the
County's expense provided that notice of the necessity of transport is received by Chelan County three
(3) days prior to the time of expected transport. The City may request additional transport days as
necessary and will follow the same three (3) day notice to Chelan County for scheduling. Additional
transports both to and from the City will be at the expense of Chelan County. The City hereby designates
Kristen Gregory or Pam Hall as the City's official authorized to notify Chelan County of the dates for
transport and the specific inmates to be transported.
21. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
In providing services underthis contract, Chelan County is an independent contractorand neither
it or its' officers, agents or employees are employees �f the City for any purpose, including responsibility
for any federal or state tax, industrial insurance or Social Security liability. Neither shall the provision of
services under this Agreement give rise to any claim of career service or civil service rights, which may
accrue to an employee of the City under any applicable law, rule or regulation.
22. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Interlocal Agreement Between Page 7 of 9
Che!an County and ±he City oi ��dera: UVay
ClTY OF CITY HALL
�., Federa I Way 33325 8th Avenue South • PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253)835-7U00
www cityotlederalway. com
(a) Severabilitv. In the event any provisions of this Agreement shall be determined to be
unenforceable or otherwise invalid for any reason, such provisions shall be enforced and valid to the
extent permitted by law. All provisions of this Agreement are severable and unenforceability or invalidity
of a single provision herein shall not affect the remaining provisions. �
(b) Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by the�laws of the State of
Washington, and venue for any lawsuit shall be the Chelan County Superior Court.
(c) Attorney's Fees. In the event it is necessary for either party to utilize the services of an
attorney to enforce any of the terms of this Agreement, such enforcing party shall be entitled to
compensation for its reasonable attorney's fees and costs. In the event of litigation regarding any terms
of this Agreement, the substantially prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition other relief, to such
reasonable attorney's fees and costs as determined by the Court.
(d) Waiver of Breach. The waiver by either party of the breach of any provision of this Agreement
by the other party must be in writing and shall not operate nor be construed as a waiver of any
subsequent breach by such other party.
(e) Savings Clause. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed so as to require the
commission of any act contrary to law, and wherever there is any conflict between any provisions of this
Agreement and any statute, law, public regulation or ordinance, the latter shall prevail but in such event,
the provisions of this Agreement affected shall be curtailed and limited only to the extent necessary to
bring it within legal requirements.
(fl Fil This Agreement shall be filed with the Chelan County Auditor's Office pursuant to RCW
39.34.040.
23. INTERPRETATION
This Agreement has been submitted to the scrutiny of all parties and their counsel, if desired, and
it shall be given a fair and reasonable interpretation in accordance with its words, without consideration or
weight given to its being drafted by any party or its counsel. All words used in the singular shall, include
the plural; the present tense shall include the future tense; and the masculine gender shall include the
feminine and neuter gender.
24. ACCESS TO RECORDS CLAUSE
The parties hereby agree that authorized representatives of the parties shall have access to
any books, documents, paper and record of the other party that are pertinent to this Agreement for
the purposes of making audits, examinations, excerpts and transcriptions. All such records and all
other records pertinent to this Agreement, and work undertaken pursuant to this Agreement shall be
retained by the parties for a period of three (3) years after the final expiration date of this Agreement
or any amendments hereto, unless a longer period is required to resolve audit, findings or litigation.
In such cases, the parties may expressly agree by an amendment or separate agreement for such
longer period for record retention.
25. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This Agreement represents the entire integrated Agreement between the City and Chelan
County and supercedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral.
Interlocal Agreement Between Page 8 of 9
Chelan Cou�t� and ihe City of Fede�al �1�'ay
CITY OF
'�,�,,�..., Federal Way
CITY HALL
33325 8th Avenue South • PO Box 97i8
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
(253)835-7000
www cifyoffederahaay mm
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the above and foregoing Agreement has been executed in
duplicate by the parties hereto and made affective on the day and year first above written.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WA
BOARD OF CHELAN COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
By:
Brian J. Wilson, City Manager/Police Chief
ATTEST:
City Clerk
DATED:
Approved as to Form:
City of Federal Way Attorney
Keith Goehner, Chair
Ron Walter, Commissioner
Doug England, Commissioner
ATTEST:
JANET K. MERZ
Clerk of the Board
DATED:
PHIL STANLEY, Director
Chelan County Regional Justice Center
Approved as to Form:
GARY A. RIESEN, Chelan County Prosecutor
Page 9 of 9
Interiocal Agreement Between
Chelar: County and the City o� Federal Way
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 19th, 2010
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
ITEM #:
Sus.rECT: Purchase three new Honda police motorcycles to replace four expired lease Harley-Davidson
motorcycles using Replacement Reserve money allocated for these vehicle replacements.
PoLICY QvES�TON: Should the Ciry of Federal Way /Police Department use available Replacement Reserve
monies to purchase three (3) new Honda police motorcycles, replacing end of term leased Harley-Davidson
motorcycles, for the Police Traffic Section?
CoMMITTEE: Parks, Recreation, Human Seroices and Public Safety
Council Committee - (PRHS&PS)
CATEGORY:
� Consent
❑ Ordinance
❑ City Cou B usiness ❑ Resolution
STAFF REPORT BY: CHRIS NORMAN, COMMANDER
Attachments:
1. PRHS&PS Staff Memo
MEETING DATE: 10/ 12/ 10
❑ Public Hearing
❑ Other
DEPT Police Department
Options Considered:
1. Purchase three new Honda motorcycles — to replace expired lease Harley-Davidsons.
2. Attempt to renew the lease on the existing Harley-Davidson Motorcycles.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Option 1.
CITY MANAGER APPROVAL: �L.,t �►!•�.+ q��1��`� � w��II� IRECTOR APPROVAL: �w � ��
.r..
Cortunittee Council � Committee Coui cil
CoMM�'rTEE RECOM1v�ENnATIO1v: I move to forwa�°d this purchase request, for three additional Honda
motorcycles, to the October� 19, 2010 City Council meeting, consent agenda, for approval.
Committee Chai ` '� �ommi�e,ilC�Ig�iber Committee Member
.�'¢ROPOSED COiTNCIL MOTION "I move approval of the request by the Police Department to use available
Replacement Reserve money to purchase the requested replacement vehicles for the Traffic Section and
authorize the Police Chief to make the purchase. "
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
❑ APPRO VED COUNCIL BILL #
❑ DENIED 1sTreadiug
❑ TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading
❑ MOVED TO SECOND READING (or�dinances only) ORDINANCE #
REVISED — 02/06/2006 RESOLUTION #
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE STAFF REPORT
DATE: October 12, 2010
TO: Parks, Recreation, Human Services and Public Safety Council Committee
VIA: Brian J. Wilson, City Manager/Chief of Police
FROM: Andy Hwang, Assistant Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Purchase of Three (3) Honda ST 1300P Police Motorcycles
Background
For the last several years the Police Department has been leasing Harley-Davidson motorcycles. The
last remaining leases, for four (4) Harley-Davidson motorcycles, will end on December 4` 2010.
Harley-Davidson no longer offers a lease program and their current product line does not compete
favorably with the current offerings from Honda and Kawasaki.
In the last few years, several other local police agencies in our region have converted, or are in the
process of converting their motorcycle fleet over, to the new Honda ST1300P police motorcycle.
These agencies include Auburn, Bellevue, Centralia, Everett, Kent, King County, Kirkland,
Lakewood and Snohomish County. The available data from these agencies indicates that the Honda
ST is a more reliable and cost effective vehicle than the Harley-Davidson. All agencies now using the
Honda ST are experiencing a decrease in maintenance costs, compared to the Harley-Davidson.
Early in 2010, the City Council approved the purchase of three (3) new Honda 1300P Police
Motorcycles to replace several expired Harley-Davidson leases. Since then, the Traffic Section has
been very pleased with the Honda product and continues to anticipate lower maintenance costs and
improved safety.
Proposal — Purchase Three (3) Honda ST 1300P motorcvcles
The Traffic Unit is requesting permission to purchase an additional three (3) new Honda ST 1300P
police motorcycles to replace the last of the leased motorcycles.
The Traffic Section is authorized to utilize eleven (11) Police motorcycles. This new replacement
request will result in the Traffic Section having only ten (10) available Police motorcycles, which
currently matches the number of actual motorcycle riders in the Unit, but will eliminate the availability
of a `spare' Police motorcycle.
We plan to "piggy back" on the Washington State Patrol's competitive bid process in order to
identify a qualified Honda dealership for purchasing these replacement motorcycles.
Fundin� Source
The funds for these purchases are available from the regular Replacement Reserve monies set aside
for vehicle replacements. As of January 1, 2011 there will be $72,000 available in the identified
Replacement Reserve accounts to complete this purchase plan. The cost for purchasing three (3) new
Honda ST motorcycles is conservatively estimated to be $72,000.