Planning Comm MINS 11-16-2005
K:\Planning Commission\2005\Meeting Summary 11-16-05 Updated.doc
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
PLANNING COMMISSION
November 16, 2005 City Hall
7:00 p.m. Council Chambers
MEETING MINUTES
Commissioners present: John Caulfield, Hope Elder, Dave Osaki, Merle Pfeifer, and Lawson Bronson.
Commissioners absent: Bill Drake and Dini Duclos (excused). Alternate Commissioners present: Pam Duncan-
Pierce and Richard Agnew. Alternate Commissioners absent: none. Deputy Mayor Linda Kochmar and Council
Member Jeanne Burbidge also attended. Staff present: Development Services Director Kathy McClung, Assistant
City Attorney Amy Jo Pearsall, Senior Planner Lori Michaelson, and Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety.
Chair Caulfield called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Commissioner Elder moved (and it was seconded) to adopt the October 19, 2005, minutes with one correction (date
in Additional Business should be November 16, 2005). The motion carried (five yes).
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
None
COMMISSION BUSINESS
PUBLIC HEARING – City Center Code Amendments
Ms. Michaelson delivered the staff report. She commented that she had sent the Commissioners an updated
proposed Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-977 via email. She noted that there are 26 individual
amendments outlined in the staff report and exhibits. The purpose of the amendments is to help ready the
regulatory environment for redevelopment. This will be accomplished by amending the FWCC to be more
consistent with the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) and to incorporate recommendations from the
Interim Zoning Ordinance and the Final Code Obstacles Report by Lumsden International, Inc.
The major goals are to: remove real or perceived barriers to development envisioned by the FWCP; promote urban-
scale, vertical mix of uses including housing, maximize utility of land; improve quality of site and building design
through better urban design principals; and emphasize pedestrian-oriented design and amenities (streetscape, public
open space). The highlights of the proposed amendments are:
• Relax height limits (base heights)
• Refine height bonuses to emphasize streetscape as well as open space
• Relax ground-floor commercial and open space requirements
• Remove residential density caps
• Bring buildings to street in most cases
• Limit surface parking along the street
• Limit new single-story construction (with exceptions), but allow any amount of multiple-story buildings
(regulate “form” not “function”)
• Prohibit certain incompatible land uses
• Allow complete rebuilding of nonconforming structures destroyed or damaged by accident
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 November 16, 2005
K:\Planning Commission\2005\Meeting Summary 11-16-05 Updated.doc
Two of the proposed amendments are to prohibit gambling/card rooms and prohibit second hand sales.
Commissioner Elder expressed her concern over limiting the types of business that are allowed in the City Center,
we should be a City for all. Ms. Michaelson commented that gambling is restricted in many other cities in the state
because of the negative impacts. However, not all cities restrict gambling, it comes down to what kind of City
Center the citizens of Federal Way want. Commissioner Pfeifer asked why certain uses (such as schools and public
utilities) are excluded from the 20,000 square foot restriction. Ms. Michaelson responded that these are institutional
uses and staff feels they should not be limited.
Commissioner Bronson commented that over the last few years, he has noted that development in the City Center
consisted of public projects as opposed to private projects (i.e., improvements to Pacific Highway South, but no
new buildings). He asked how changing the zoning code will encourage new development. Ms. Michaelson replied
that the proposed code amendments are only one piece of a larger strategy. The Leland Consulting Group’s City
Center Redevelopment Strategy report addresses additional issues. The City has hired the Leland Consulting Group
to develop an overall strategy to encourage development downtown. In addition, the City Council has voted to
allocate $50,000 for City Center development.
Public Testimony
Gary Martindale, Steadfast Investments – Steadfast are the owners of The Commons. He thanked the City
staff for all they work they have done on this issue, particularly Patrick Doherty, Kathy McClung, and Lori
Michaelson. He commented that Steadfast Investments feels that overall, the proposed amendments will
work for them. They are concerned that the proposed five-foot building setback adjacent to principal
pedestrian right(s)-of-way, may not work for The Commons, but they do support the proposed amendments.
Deputy Mayor Linda Kochmar – She commented that she had not been in favor of the originally drafted
amendments, but feels the current draft is an improvement. She is most interested in how the proposed
amendments may affect business owners.
Chairman Caulfield expressed his disappointment at the level of public participation at tonight’s meeting (there is
one business/property owner in attendance). Ms. McClung stated that staff has been meeting with some business/
property owners and with the Chamber of Commerce and the proposed amendments have taken the feedback from
these meetings into account.
Commissioner Pfeifer asked if there is a time limit to the City Center Planned Action State Environmental Act
Policy (SEPA) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) staff is working on. Ms. Michaelson responded that an EIS
does not have an expiration date, but can become obsolete if circumstances change (say the comprehensive plan is
changed). Staff wants this EIS to stand for 10 years, but it depends on the amount of development that occurs
(more development would mean more change and less development capacity, and the likelihood the EIS could
become obsolete before 10 years).
The Commission discussed how to proceed in regards to voting on the amendments. There must be a majority of
the entire Commission (four yes votes) to recommend approval of an item. Since there are only five voting
members present, concern was expressed that some of the proposed amendments would not receive four yes votes.
The Commission decided that since it is almost certain the public hearing would be continued, they would wait
until the next meeting to discuss and vote upon some of the proposed amendments.
Proposed Amendments #1A and #1B – Prohibit Incompatible Land Uses
These amendments would prohibit gambling/card rooms and second hand merchandise sales. A discussion was
held on prohibiting gambling with one Commissioner stating that he sees no problem with allowing gambling and
another Commissioner stating the negative effects a nearby gambling establishment has had on his business. The
Commission asked if staff could provide some information about the effects of gambling on communities.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 November 16, 2005
K:\Planning Commission\2005\Meeting Summary 11-16-05 Updated.doc
The Commission also asked the staff to research whether second hand merchandise would include a shop selling
baseball cards and other similar collectibles.
Proposed Amendments #2A, #2B, and #2C – Multi-Unit Housing
These amendments would eliminate the density caps for multi-unit housing, relax the criteria for ground floor
commercial, and revise the recreational open space requirement. Chairman Caulfield asked staff to clarify what
multi-unit housing includes. Ms. Michaelson commented that it includes condominiums and townhomes, as well as
apartments. Commissioner Pfeifer moved (and it was seconded) to recommend adoption of proposed amendments
#2A, #2B, and #2C as written.
Commissioner Bronson asked what kind of development can we realistically expect to happen in the next 10 years
and how will these proposed amendments promote the City’s vision, as outlined in the FWCP. Chairman Caulfield
commented that the City needs to take a leadership role and one way to do so is to set the stage through street
improvements and code changes, such as the proposed amendments. He noted that the vision we have for Federal
Way’s City Center is beginning to happen in the communities around us, such as Burien, Kent, Auburn, and
Sumner. The vote was held with four yes and one no, and the motion passed.
Proposed Amendments #3A, #3B, and #3C – Building Heights
These amendments would grant limited increases to some base heights and amend the height bonus program.
Commissioner Elder moved (and it was seconded) to recommend adoption of proposed amendments #3A, #3B, and
#3C as written. Commissioner Osaki moved (and it was seconded) to amend the motion to state that the height will
be 30 feet when adjacent to a residential zone. Commissioner Osaki commented that his amendment would serve to
protect and preserve single-family development. The vote was held with three yes and two no, and the amendment
passed. The vote was held on the main motion with two yes and three no, and the main motion fails. Commissioner
Osaki moved (and it was seconded) to recommend adoption of proposed amendments #3B and #3C as written. The
vote was held with five yes and zero no, and the motion passed.
Proposed Amendments #4A and #4B – Single-Story Buildings
These amendments deal with maximum size limits and options to increase the size above 20,000 square feet.
Commissioner Elder moved (and it was seconded) to recommend adoption of proposed amendments #4A and #4B
as written. Chairman Caulfield commented that he feels there is a disconnect between proposed amendments #4A
and #4B and the FWCP. He feels these amendments encourage strip development as opposed to mixed-use
development as outlined in the FWCP. Commissioner Pfeifer stated that he views these amendments favorably
because they would place a limit on the size of single-story buildings, which are not currently limited in size. The
vote was held with two yes and three no, and the motion fails. Commissioner Osaki moved (and it was seconded)
that the Commission revisit proposed amendments #4A and #4B when the public hearing is continued. The vote
was held with five yes and zero no, and the motion passed.
Proposed Amendment #5 – New Use and Definition
The amendment proposes a new use and definition of “retail shopping center, regional.” Commissioner Pfeifer
moved (and it was seconded) to recommend adoption of proposed amendment #5 as written. The vote was held
with four yes and one no, and the motion passed.
Proposed Amendments #6A, #6B, and #6C – Site Layout
These amendments modify existing building setbacks and parking requirements. Commissioner Pfeifer moved (and
it was seconded) to recommend adoption of proposed amendments #6A, #6B, and #6C as written. The vote was
held with five yes and zero no, and the motion passed.
Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 November 16, 2005
K:\Planning Commission\2005\Meeting Summary 11-16-05 Updated.doc
Proposed Amendments #7A, #7B, #7C, #7D, #7E, #7F, and #7G – Design Guidelines
These amendments deal with definitions, mixed-use residential buildings, location of parking, façade treatment,
pedestrian circulation, drive-through facilities, and criteria for public on-site open space. Commissioner Pfeifer
moved (and it was seconded) to recommend adoption of proposed amendments #7A through #7G as written. The
vote was held with five yes and zero no, and the motion passed.
Proposed Amendments #8A, #8B, and #8C – Nonconformance
These amendments allow improvements and expansions of conforming uses that are collocated with
nonconforming uses, applies to expansion of existing single-story buildings, and allows full replacement of
nonconforming structures that are damaged or destroyed by sudden accidental cause. Commissioner Bronson
moved (and it was seconded) to recommend adoption of proposed amendments #8A and #8C as written. The vote
was held with five yes and zero no, and the motion passed. Commissioner Bronson moved (and it was seconded) to
table proposed amendment #8B to the next meeting, but later withdrew the motion since it is not needed.
Proposed Amendment #9 – Housekeeping
This amendment repeals a subsection that should have been previously repealed. Commissioner Osaki moved (and
it was seconded) to recommend adoption of proposed amendment #9 as written. The vote was held with five yes
and zero no, and the motion passed.
Proposed Amendment #10 – Street Improvements
This amendment clarifies the method by which required street frontage improvements are determined.
Commissioner Osaki moved (and it was seconded) to recommend adoption of proposed amendment #10 as written.
The vote was held with five yes and zero no, and the motion passed.
Proposed Amendment #11 – Perimeter Landscape Buffers
This amendment clarifies that no perimeter buffer is required where building front on a right-of-way.
Commissioner Osaki moved (and it was seconded) to recommend adoption of proposed amendment #11 as written.
The vote was held with five yes and zero no, and the motion passed.
Commission Pfeiffer moved (and it was seconded) that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council
extend the Interim Zoning Ordinance 30 days so the Planning Commission can finish their deliberations.
Commissioner Osaki stated that the deliberations on these amendments would need than 30 days since these
proposed amendments must also go to the Land Use/Transportation Committee and City Council. It was moved
and seconded that the motion be amended to simply state the Planning Commission needs 30 days to complete
their deliberations. The amendment was voted upon, five yes and zero no, and the amendment passed. The main
motion was then voted upon, zero yes and five no, and failed.
Commissioner Osaki moved (and it was seconded) to continue the public hearing to December 7, 2005, at 7:00
p.m. in the City Hall Council Chambers. The vote was held with five yes and zero no, and the motion passed.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
Ms. McClung informed the Commission that the staff will be taking nine proposed code amendments to the City
Council for the Annual Code Amendment Selection Process on December 6, 2005. The City received $152,000
grant from the state for Shoreline Amendments.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 9:51 p.m.