LUTC PKT 09-21-1998
~~
(,iL\' or Fedcral \\'a\'
. .,
Cit" Council
Land [,!se/Transl)orhtlioll Committee
September 21, I c)c)8
5 .~O pm
City 11::111
Cnum:il Chambcrs
MEETING AGENDA
1.
CALL TO ORDER
2.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3.
PUBLIC COMMENT (3 minutes)
4,
COMMISSION COMMENT
5.
BUSINESS ITEMS
A.
SeaTac Phase II/Public Works
Trust Loan Flllld
Action
PrattJl 5 min
B
Joe's Creek Flow Control
StructurelF'ina! Acceptance
Action
PratUS min
c.
1998 Comprehensive Plan Update
Action
Clark/Perez/90 min
6.
FUTURE MEETING AGENDA ITEMS
SWManagementJDept of Ecology Ordinance &
Manual Package
Open Cut of ROW vs Boring
Endangered Species Act Update
Non Residential Design Guidelines
Adult Entertainment Regulations
RTA Process
Land Use PermitJBuilding Fee:>
7.
ADJOURN
Committee Members:
Phil Watkins, Chair
Jeanne Burbidge
Mary Gates
City Staff:
Greg lv/oore, Director, Community Development Services
Sandy Lyle, Administrative Assistant
253,661.4116
I:\LU- TRANS\SEP21LUT.AGN
Cilv of Fcderal Way
J .
CilV Council
Land t:se/T.oaIlSI)ortation Committee
September 14. 199M
7:00pm
City lIall
Council Ch~lmbcrs
SUMMARY
In attendance: Committee members Phil Watkins (Chair), Mary Gates and Jeanne Burbidge; Collllcil Member Linda Kochmar;
Director of Community Development Services Greg Moore; Deputy Director of Community Development Services .Kathy
McClung; Assistant City Attorney Bob Sterbank; Senior Planner Margaret Clark; Traffic Engineer Rick Perez; Development
Services Manager Stephen Clifton; Street Systems Engineer Ken Miller; Street Project Engineer Trent Miller; Administrative
Assistant Tina Piety.
1. CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 7:02pm by Chairman Phil Watkins.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the August 17, 1998, meeting were approved as presented.
3. PUBLIC COMMENT
There was no public comment on any non-agenda items.
4. COMMISSION COMMENT
There was no additional comment from any of the City Commissions.
5. BUSINESS ITEMS
A. South 34Oth Street/Military Road Street & Traffic Si2llal Inwrovements - Authorization to Award Bid - The South
304th Street and Military Road Improvement Project was funded as a part of the 1995 voter approved bond issue. This
project will install left turn lanes and an asphalt shoulder on Military Road and South 304th Street at the intersection.
The intersection of South 304th Street and 28th Avenue South will be lowered approximately 4 feet to improve site
distance. The Committee mfs/c recommendation to approve to Council the construction contract to Scocollo
Construction in the amount of $837,544.42 with a 10% construction contingency in the amount of $83,754.42. Also
authorized was use of $91 ,481 of traffic mitigation money collected in 1993 from the Auburn Supermall as general
mitigation and $87,317.67 from the unallocated street bond funds.
B. Militaty Road at Star Lake road Si~3lization Project - The Committee mfs/c recommendation of approval to Council
to award Military Road at Star Lake Road Signalization Project to Totem Electric of Tacoma, Inc., the lowest
responsive, responsible bidder, in the amount of $146,868 and approve a 10% contingency of $14,686.80. The
Committee also recommended authorization of transfer of $12,990 from the Non-Motorized account (with emphasis that
money would not be deducted from the trails portion of that account) and $10,824 from the South 373rd Street/Hylebos
Creek Bridge account to fully fund this project.
C. South 336th Street (13th Avenue South to 18th Avenue South) Street Widenin¡: Project/Authorization to Reiect Bids -
The South 336th at SR99 Right Hand Turn Lane Project was funded as a part of the 1995 voter-approved bond issue.
On February 25, 1997 Council approved expanding the project to include a westbound left turn lane and extending the
additional right hand turn lane on South 336th to 13th Avenue South. Based upon the bids received the project would
be $130,283 over budget. There also remains one parcel of right of way outstanding. The Committee m/s/c to
recommend to Council to reject all bids and to rebid the project during the first quarter of 1999 or at such time the right
of way acquisition/condemnation process is complete.
D. Unresolved Code Amendments U¡xlate - The Committee discussed the schedule for completing 1998 Work Plan. The
Comprehensive Plan update is behind anticipated completion. The Shoreline amendment has been delayed due to a
request for delay by Weyerhaeuser in order to hold a meeting with neighbors related to a proposed shoreline
amendment. The meeting is planned for October 13, 1998. There will be a special Land Use/Transportation
Committee meeting held on October 26, 1998, to discuss the Shoreline issue. A letter will go out to those neighbors
about the Shoreline amendment. Staff informed the Committee that Residential Design guidelines have been through
the Planning Commission and will be considered in the near future by the Land Use/Transportation Committee. The
Sensitive Areas amendment is waiting for the wetlands inventory to begin. Late fall is the best time to complete a
wetlands inventory and three proposals have been submitted for that work. The Committee instructed staff to proceed
at this time with the wetlands inventory. The junk car/citation process amendment is in draft form but still needs work
prior to scheduling for the Planning Commission. Because of the delays, staff are not able to start new amendments
with the Planning Commission. Sam Pace of the Seattle/King County Association of Realtors spoke about the City
bringing housing targets into compliance with the Growth Management Act in the Comprehensive Plan. There are four
vacancies on the Planning Commission and there are currently two applications for those vacancies.
E. 1998 CoII!¡)rehensive Plan UJXlate - The Committee discussed the Transportation Chapter. Dale Myers of Renton
spoke about his concern about using the property he owns on SW 356th if 21st Avenue SW were to be extended south
beyond SW 356th Street. Consensus was reached on several concepts including building sidewalks on both sides of the
street, access management as a means to reduce traffic accidents, allowing U-turns and changing RTA to Sound Transit
in the text. The Committee wished to view the Sound Transit Station Criteria and review the draft at the next meeting.
Discussion of transportation issues will be concluded at the September 21, 1998, meeting, followed by discussion of
capital facilities. A special invitation will be extended to those working on Capital Facilities in the community. They
include Geri Walker, Federal Way School District; Jim Hamilton, Federal Way Fire Department; Mary Ausburn,
Lakehaven Utility District; Jeff Pratt, Surface Water Manager; Rick Perez, Traffic Engineer; Jennifer Schroder,
Director, PARCS Department; Annette Spicuzza, Public Safety Department.
6. FUTURE MEETINGS
The next meeting will be held on September 21, 1998, at 5:30 pm.
7. ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 9: 17pm.
I:\SEP14LUT.SUM
1999 Public Works Trust Fund Construction Loan Program
Alphabetical List of Projects Recommended For Funding By Public Works Board on August 18, 1998
.------....-.-...--------.-
LOAN
AMouNT
Alderwood Water District SPD W Water Reservoir No.1 Cover Snohomish $3,420,060
Annapolis Water District SPD W Water Seiford/Greendale Water Pipeline Replacement Kitsap $524,250
Aubum City W Water Corrosion Control Facilities King $3,850,000
Buckley City W Water Stabilize Main Water Supply Transmission LIne Pierce $500,000
Burlington City W Sewer WWTP Expansion and Improvements Skagit $556,875
Camas City W Sewer Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrade (Construction) Clark $3,452,590
Chelan River Irrigation SPD E Water New Domestic Water System Chelan $1,553,989
District
Clark Public Utilities SPD W Water CPU Reservoir Upgrades Clark $387,485
Cowlitz County County W Sewer CSOB System Improvements Cowlitz $7,000,000
Des Moines City W Storm Marine View Drive Bridge and Culvert Replacement King $2,349,500
DuPont City W Sewer Historic Village Water and Sewer Rehabilitation Pierce $1,451,968
Federal Way City W Storm SeaTac Mall Area Drainage System Improvement King $2,750,000
Goldendale City E Water Phase 1: Goldendale Watershed Improvements Klickitat $1,213,000
Grandview City E Water Water Source Well Replacements Yakima $539,000
Kettle Falls City E Water 1999 Water System Improvements Stevens $1,651,539
King County Water SPD W Water Lea HiIIlntertle Project King $1,850,613
District No, 111
King County Water SPD W Water Water Well and Reservoir King $1,116,240
District No, 54
Kitsap County Sewer SPD W Sewer Wastewater Pump Station Improvements Kitsap $1,117,350
District No, 5
Kitsap County Sewer SPD W Sewer Retsil Wartime Sewer Replacement Phase 1 Kitsap $1,119,600
District No.5
Lacey City W Road Pacific Avenue/Lacey Boulevard One Way Couplet Thurston $1,610,000
Leavenworth City E Sewer Chelan County Regional Co-Compost Facility Chelan $735,461
Moxee City E Sewer Moxee Wastewater Treatment Facility Improvements Yakima $439,650
Naches City E Sewer Wastewater Treatment Facility Improvements Yakima $535,500
North Perry Avenue SPD W Water Comprehensive Water System Improvements Kitsap $1,070,757
Water District
Palouse City E Water Back-Up/Emergency Well Whitman $237,899
Pateros City E Sewer Sewer Plant Replacement Okanogan $505,000
Port Townsend City W Sewer San Juan Sewer Trunk Line Replacement/Gaines Street Lift Station Jefferson $1,593,739
1999 Public Works Trust Fund Construction Loan Program
Alphabetical List of Projects Recommended For Funding By Public Works Board on August 18, 1998
PUD No, 1 of Chelan SPD E
County
Pullman City E Water Water Well No.7 Whitman $622,534
Rock Island City E Water New 0.4 MG Reservoir Construction Douglas $492,800
Scatchet Head Water SPD W Water 1998 Capital Budget Water Quality and Emergency Storage Island. $365,640
District
Selah City E Sewer Wastewater Treatment Facility Improvements Yakima $2,261,000
Silver Lake Water District. SPD W Water Clearview Reservoir, Transmission Main, and Pump Station Snohomish $6,208,160
South Bend City W Water Membrane Filtration Treatment Plant Pacific $889,700
Stevens County PUD SPD E Water 1998 Long Lake Water System Improvements Stevens $130,550
Terrace Heights Sewer SPD E Sewer Keys Road Sewer Main Improvements Yakima $610,470
District
Vashon Sewer District SPD W Sewer Wastewater Treatment Plant Improvements King $2,150,000
Walla Walla City E Sewer Wastewater Improvements Phase I Walla Walla $7,000,000
Willapa Valley Water SPD W Water Water Treatment and Supply System Repairs and Replacements Pacific $420,000
District
Woodland City W Sewer Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) Improvements Cowlitz $4,271,760
Yakima County County E Bridge Bridge Replacement Yakima $5,000,000
Yakima County County E Road Gravel Road Improvement Yakima $2,000,000
TOTAL LOANS: $76,163,079
DATE:
September 15, 1998
TO:
Phil Watkins, Chair
Land Use/Transportation Committee
Jeff Pratt, P.E. ~
Surface W ater Manag~
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Joe's Creek Flow Control Structure - Final Acceptance
Background:
Prior to release of retainage on a Public Works project, the City Council is required to accept the
work as complete to meet State Departments of Revenue and Labor and Industries requirements.
The final cost for construction of the Joe's Creek Flow Control Structure Project is $41,647.77,
which is $2,850.72 below the approved construction contract budget of $44,498.49, including
the 10% construction contingency.
Recommendation:
Forward the following item to the October 6, 1998 City Council meeting with the recommendatiæ
to approve:
1.
Acceptance of Roadway Construction, Joe's Creek Flow Control Structure contract
HAG 98-161 as complete.
K:\SWM\MINORCIPVOECREEK\ACCEPT. WPD
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
September 17, 1998
TO:
Land Useffransportation Committee (LUTe)
FROM:
Gregory D. Moore, AICP, Director of Community Development Services
Margaret H. Clark, AICP, Senior Planner
SUBJECT:
1998 Comprehensive Plan Update
I.
BACKGROUND
This is a follow-up to the August 17, and September 14, 1998, Land Useffransportation
Committee (LUTe) meetings.
II.
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
At the August 17, 1998 meeting, the LUTC requested that they be provided with the planning
commission minutes on the comprehensive plan. These minutes are included in your packet.
III.
SOUND TRANSIT CRITERIA
During the September 14, 1998 meeting, the committee requested that the Sound Transit criteria
for siting stations be provided for the next committee meeting. This criteria is being provided
under separate cover from Traffic Engineer Rick Perez
IV.
CONTINUATION OF DISCUSSION ON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
The LUTC decided that at the September 21, 1998 meeting, discussion would continue on
Chapter III (Transportation); transportation related code amendments to Chapter 20
(Subdivisions) and Chapter 22 (Zoning); and Chapter VI (Capital Facilities Plan). Please
find enclosed a new Chapter VI (Capital Facilities Plan). Since you received the comprehensive
plan amendments document, Chapter VI has been amended in response to comments in the
March 8, 1996, letter from the Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development
(DCTED) (previously provided to you as Exhibit D) which stated that the financial plans within
the Capital Facilities Element must identify actual arid probable funding sources for capital
projects.
These newly proposed changes are shown as double underline (new changes) and redline and
strike out (deletions). This is to differentiate them from the proposed amendments to the adopted
November 1995 Comprehensive Plan made by the planning commission, which are shown as
underline and strike out. Map VI-II (Federal Way Fire Department Capital Facilities Element)
has been modified to list fire stations by number and to identify two potential locations for new
Land Useffransportation Committee
September 17, 1998
Page 2
fire stations. These changes are being made for clarification purposes. In addition, Table VI-4
(Surface Water Management - CIP) has been updated based on input from Surface Water.
Management.
Please replace the text, Map VI-II, and Table VI-4 in Chapter VI. Except for Map VI -11, all
other maps should be retained. Staff would be happy to put the new Chapter VI together for you
if you would like to bring in your comprehensive plan prior to the September 21, 1998, LUTC
meeting.
Also at the September 14, 1998 meeting, the LUTC requested that representatives from city
departments and outside agencies who participated in the preparation of Chapter VI (Capital
Facilities) be invited to attend the September 21, 1998, LUTC meeting. This would give the
LUTC opportunity to ask questions and for the agency and department representatives to provide
additional input if desired. The following were invited:
Mary Ausburn, Program and Policy Analyst, Lakehaven Utility District
Jim Hamilton, Federal Way Fire Depanntne Administrator
Commander Annette Spicuzza, Public Safety Department
Geri Walker, Management Information Specialist, Federal Way School District
Jennifer Schroder, City of Federal Way PARCS Director
Rick Perez, City of Federal Way Traffic Engineer
Jeff Pratt, City of Federal Way Surface Water Manager
I:\DOCUMENT\O92 I 98.L TC/September 17, 1998
City of Federal Way
PLANNING COMMISSION
May 6, 1998
City Hall
SUMMARY
Commissioners present: Robert Vaughan (Chair), Peter Morse, Lu Joslin, Todd Suchan, Dean
Greenough, and Karen Kirkpatrick. Commissioner absent: Tim Carr. Staff present: Senior
Planner Margaret Clark, Traffic Engineer Rick Perez, Contract Planner Nancy Ryan, and
Administrative Assistant E. Tin~ Piety.
Chair Vaughan called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m.
ÁPPROV AL OF MINUTES
None.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None.
ADMINISTRATIVE REpORT
Ms. Clark updated the commission on the status of various past amendments. The
Environmentally Sensitive Areas Amendments are on hold pending a wetland inventory.
Enchanted Parks is now part of the city. The Shoreline amendments soon goes to the LUTC.
When the Comprehensive Plan Amendments are done, the next issue before the commission will
be the Residential Design Guidelines.
Ms. Clark gave the commission an update on current projects. Weyerhaeuser is doing quite a few
projects, some of which are office buildings. The Applewood Annexation as been withdrawn.
SeaTac Village is being redeveloped. The following projects are close to obtaining building
permits: Walmart, Waremart, Marriott Hotel, and Holiday Inn.
COMMISSION BUSINESS- Comprehensive Plan Amendments
The Public Hearing was opened at 7:15 p.m. Ms. Clark gave the staff report. She noted that a
complete copy of the SEP A determination is available for review at City Hall. There have been
some changes since the Comp Plan Amendments were mailed. Ms. Clark passed out a handout of
those changes. One major change was that Pro Refrigeration (Site Specific Request #2) was
Planning Commission
May6,1998
2
withdrawn. A second was that Quadrant requested that the commission add their site specific
request. Mr. Perez noted that there are changes to the Transportation Chapter. These changes will
be mailed with the next agenda packet.
The Comprehensive Plan Amendments consist of updates to various chapters, the official
Comprehensive Plan Map (including site specific requests), and Federal Way City Code
Chapters 20 and 22 (in order to reflect the comp plan changes). All outside agencies (Lakehaven
Utility District, Federal Way School District, TCI, Puget Sound Energy, etc.) currently included
in the comp plan were given an opportunity to update their portion. The commission decided to
deal with the site specific requests first, then go into the chapters. With that in mind, Ms. Clark
gave a quick explanation of each site specific request.
The Public Testimony was opened at 7:40 p.m.
Donald Barovic, 35429 Pacific Hwy South - Regarding Site Specific Request #6. He
was very upset. He complained that the church next to his property had cut down trees,
built a trail, and lowered the berm (which they are not maintaining) all without
obtaining permits. He claimed that his property had been down zoned some five times
since he (along with a limited partnership) purchased it. The city had sent a biologist
(from Adolfson and Associates) to survey the property for wetlands. Mr. Barovic
claimed the biologist spent only 30 minutes on the property and one of the identified
wetlands resulting ftom this survey is really no more than a mud puddle. It appeared to
be a wetland only because the land is currently saturated. In regards to sewer
availability, he has a letter ftom Lakehaven stating that grinder pumps would be an
acceptable alternative. He feels that his land is being taken without compensation. He
feels that the various state, county, and city agencies he has dealt with (and/or have
dealt with him) have made false promises and/or decisions detrimental to him and his
limited partnership. In light of this, he has prepared a sign stating, "Notice - No federal,
state or local license and/or authority will be recognized for intruding and/or
trespassing." He wants cluster zoning. He wants to take a small portion of the property
and cluster zone it. He would then be willing to donate the rest to the city for a public
park. He claimed that no one ftom the city has been willing to discuss his plans for the
property.
Jerry Hillis, 1221 2nd Ave, 500 Galland Bldg, Seattle - Representing Weyerhaeuser,
regarding Site Specific Requests #1,3, and 4. He feels the staff report is thorough and
accurate. Weyerhaeuser plans to develop town homes on request #1 (it is currently
outside the city limits, but inside the P AA). For requests #3 and 4 (#3 is currently
outside the city limits, but inside the P AA, and #4 is inside the city limits) they feel
single family would be better because of the nc:--arby wetlands. Sewer will be provided
and will be sized to handle the proposed development.
Planning Commission
May 6, 1998
3
Mr. Lovegren requested that discussion his request (Site Specific Request #7) be postponed until
the commission's next meeting so that his nephew could be present. The commission agreed.
Discussion was held on the Weyerhaeuser requests. Concern was expressed over limiting access
to 320th. Currently, the proposal is for one development with limited access. It was mIs/c
(unanimous) to accept the staff recommendation for Site Specific Requests #1, 3, and 4.
Site Specific Request #5 (Waremart) was discussed. There are two wetlands on the site that do
not constrain development. Discussion was held as to why the zoning needs be changed from BN
to BC. The commission requested copies of the concomitant agreement. The staff will research
why the zoning needs to be changed. Discussion will continue at the next meeting.
Site Specific Request #6 (Barovic) was discussed. Mr. Barovic stated that he could bring in a
more detailed idea of what he wants to do with the property. He invited the commission to visit
his property. The commission agreed to postpone further discussion until the next meeting. It
was noted that if the city changed his zoning, it could be seen as spot zoning. Staff will research
what can be done on the site.
The Public Testimony was closed at 9:15 p.m. It was m/s/c to continue the public hearing to May
20, 1998, in the City Hall Council Chambers.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
Commissioner Greenough state that he will not be in attendance at the May 20, 1998, meeting.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None.
ADJOURN
It was mIs/c to adjourn the meeting at 9:22 p.m.
K: \COMMON . ADIADMIN I IPLANCOMlO50698S. WPD
City of Federal Way
PLANNING COMMISSION
May 20, 1998
City Hall
SUMMARY
Commissioners present: Robert Vaughan (Chair), Peter Morse, Todd Suchan, and Karen
Kirkpatrick. Commissioner absent: Lu Joslin, Dean Greenough, and Tim Carr. Staff present:
Senior Planner Margaret Clark, Public Works Director Cary Roe, Traffic Engineer Rick Perez,
and Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety.
Chair Vaughan called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m.
ApPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of April 1, 1998 were approved.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None.
ADMINISTRATIVE REpORT
Ms. Clark informed the commission that there have been no changes in the status of code
amendments. She remarked that the commission's work program would go to the City Council
on June 16, 1998.
COMMISSION BUSINESS- Comprehensive Plan Amendments - Continued
The Public Hearing was reconvened at 7:10 p.m. Ms. Clark explained that the King County
Realtors letter (which was sent with the agenda packet) dealt with changes they claim are needed
for the city to meet housing unit goals. Staff is working on a response. She then handed out a
supplemental staff report and a letter from Leonard Schaadt. Mr. Schaadt is requesting a change
in zoning from BP to BC. The commission requested that staff research the issue and bring it
back to the next meeting with a recommendation.
The Public Testimony was opened at 7:23 p.m.
Leonard Schaadt, 1026 Bellevue Way, SE, Bellevue - Discussed his request. For the
1995 Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Commission approved his request, but the City
Planning Commission
May 20, 1998
2
Council reversed, and the change was not made. He remarked that BC zoning follows
Pacific Highway South horn the north of the city down to 356th, except a small portion
that has his property on it. He noted that a wetland divides the property. He wants the
area on Pacific Highway South to be changed to BC. This would provide greater
opportunity to market the property. It did have this type of zoning before incorporation.
The commission discussed Site Specific Request #5 (Waremart). The staff report addresses the
questions the commission had at the last meeting. Ms. Clark went over those responses. It was
m/s/c (unanimous) to accept the staff recommendation.
The commission discussed Site Specific Request #6 (Barovic). The staff report addresses the
questions the commission had at the last meeting. In addition, staff has meet with Mr. Barovic.
Ms. Clark noted that if the commission recommends the zoning be changed to RS 35.0, it should
recommend that the surrounding parcels also be changed in order to avoid the appearance of spot
zoning. The letter horn Lakehaven regarding sewer availability was given to the commission.
Donald Barovic, 35429 Pacific Hwy South - He commented that he remembers that
the 100 feet off of Pacific Highway South was designated business/commercial, not
office park as the city states. Went over the history of his purchase. He noted that when
he and the limited partnership purchased the property in the early 1970's, Lakehaven
promised there would be sewer service within nine years. They still do not have sewer
service. He again claimed that the wetlands found by the city's biologist near Pacific
Highway South are not really wetlands. He reiterated that he wants to cluster zone part
of the property and donate the rest to the city for what would be a beautiful park. He
fears that he will lose his property because taxes are to high and he is unable to develop
it with the current zoning.
The commission further discussed this request. It was moved/seconded that the property in
question, and surrounding property that is zoned SE, should be change to RS 35.0. It was m/s/c
(yay - 2, nay - 1, abstain - 1) to amend the motion to state that if such a change requires that
SEPA review be reopened, then it should be reopened. The motion carried (yay - 3, nay - 1) as
amended.
The commission discussed Site Specific Request #7 (Lovegren). Ms. Clark described the request.
Mr. Lovegren had submitted a letter. In the letter, he changed his request horn a change to BN to
a change to business commercial. Ms. Clark stated that the staff's review is consistent and the.
recommendation would remain the same (to deny the proposal). She remarked that the comp plan
policies do not support a change in zoning.
Mr. Lovegren, 10862 Garden Place South, Seattle - He read his letter. The letter
disputes the finding of the wetland (as discovered by the city's biologist).
Planning Commission
May 20, 1998
3
The commission further discussed the wetland and adjacent zoning. The commission requested
the Lovegrens to bring back information to the staff about the Pierce County zoning. Staff will
work with them on possible uses for the property.
Sam Pace, 3905 154th Avenue SE, Bellevue - Noted there is some confusion in the
state about the adopted definition of wetland and asked if the city was sure they are
using the right one. Also stated that one aspect to keep in mind when making decisions
was how many total jobs are there in the city. (Ms. Clark stated she would double check
what definition of wetland the city is using, but she feels confident we are using what
we are suppose to be using.)
The Public Testimony was closed at 9:20 p.m.
The commission began discussion on the Transportation Chapter. Mr. Perez went over the more
substantive changes. The commission asked about the struck out paragraphs on page 1II-9. They
would like the first two and the last one reinstated. Mr. Perez explained vlc and LOS (page 111-
38). The commission noted that Table 111-6 (page 111-38) did not seem to correspond to the text
describing it. Mr. Perez said that he would provide a different table that would be more clear.
The commission asked on map 111-10, why isn't 348th shown as congested? Mr. Perez
commented that it comes down to a policy question. The map is based on weekday traffic. On
weekends the volume is higher. So the question is, what do you design for?
It was m/s/c to continue the public hearing to June 3, 1998, in the City Hall Council Chambers.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
Commissioner Morse stated that he will not be in attendance at the June 3, 1998, meeting.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None.
ADJOURN
It was mls/c to adjourn the meeting at 10:00 p.m.
K :\CO MM 0 N .ADIADMIN 1 \PLAN CO M\OS 2098S. WPD
.. ..
City of Federal Way
PLANNING COMMISSION
June 3, 1998
. ..
.City.Jlall
SUMMARY
Commissioners present: Robert Vaughan (Chair), Lu Joslin, Todd Suchan, Dean Greenough, and
Karen Kirkpatrick. Commissioner absent: Peter Morse and Tim Carr. Staff present: Senior
Planner Margaret Clark, Public Works Director Carr Roe, Traffic Engineer Rick Perez, and
Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety.
Chair Vaughan called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m.
ApPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of May 5, 1998, and May 20, 1998 were approved.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None.
ADMINISTRATIVE REpORT
Ms. Clark reported that the Shoreline Amendment went to the LUTC Monday night. They had
some questions and staff will be responding to them. The Planning Commission Work Program
went to the City Council on Tuesday night. It was approved and will be presented to the
commission at the next meeting. The city received Weyerhaeuser's two 10% annexation petitions
which correspond to Site Specific Requests #1 and 3.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
The commission discussed Commissioner Carr's absences. Commission Suchan offered to call
him to discuss the commission's concerns.
- Comprehensive Plan Amendments
The public hearing was reconvened at 7:15 p.m. and the Public Testimony was opened at 7:17
p.m.
Ms. Clark presented the staff report. She went over Mr. Schaadt's request. The staff recommends
that no more requests be accepted for consideration. This recommendation includes the Quadrant
request. It is based on the LUTC's direction to not accept any more requests. She remarked that
Planning Commission
June 3, 1998
2
she had spoken to Mr. Schaadt and Quadrant and they had no objections. It was m/s/c (no nays)
to accept the staff recommendation.
In regard to Mr. Barovic's request (Site Specific Request #6) the change to RS 35.0 zoning does
not require a comprehensive plan designation change because the property already has the
comprehensive plan designation for RS 35.0. (Ms. Clark provided a chart ofland use
classifications that listed the comprehensive plan designation and the corresponding zoning.) Mr.
Barovic can make an application to the city for a rezone through the city's Process V.
Donald Barovic, 35429 Pacific Hwy South - He asked for clarification of what RS
35.0 means. He commented that his property was originally zoned for a higher density
and all he is requesting is to get that back. He asked for clarification of the city's
meaning of cluster zoning. He then showed a picture of his concept of cluster zoning on
his property. He left feeling the commission had done nothing to help him.
It was m/s/c (no nays) to leave the comp plan designation as it is and to rescind the commission's
earlier motion to change the zoning as it is outside their purview. The commission requested Ms.
Clark send Mr. Barovic a letter outlining how he can obtain a rezone through the city's
permitting process.
Ms. Clark gave background information on the Lovegren request (Site Specific Request #7). The
commission had requested that the staff compare the city's zoning to the nearby Pierce County
zoning. Ms. Clark presented the commission with a chart comparing Pierce County's Mixed Use
District (MUD) with three City of Federal Way zoning classifications: Neighborhood Business
(BP), Community Business (BC), and Business Park (BP). Federal Way's BP is most similar to
Pierce County's MUD. The commission discussed the issue and it was mls/c (no nays) to
recommend that the comprehensive plan designation be changed to Business Park (which
corresponds to BP zoning).
Leonard Schaadt, 1026 Bellevue Way, SE, Bellevue - Stated that he had come down
to withdraw his request. He did not comment earlier because he was late due to traffic.
He thanked the commission for listening to him at the last meeting.
The Public Testimony was closed at 8:15 p.m.
Mr. Perez gave his presentation on the Transportation Chapter. He remarked that many safety
problems are due to congestion and a number of the projects in the Transportation Improvement
Program and Capital Improvement Program are intended to address congestion. He then went
over the major changes in the Transportation Chapter.
For TP21 on page III-52, the commission noted that the sentence was poorly constructed; staff
will clarify. The commission requested that the term "multi-use path" (in TP21-d) be clarified
and made consisted with the term used on page III-32.
Planning Commission
June 3, 1998
3
TP35 and TP36 on page III-53 were discussed. The commission that combining the two policies
weakens both. They would like TP35 left as it was and TP36 reinstated with the words, "in order
to reduce driver frustration and speed" added.
In the last paragraph of the fIrst column on page III-60, the commission felt the term
"transportation disadvantaged" was too vague. Does it mean someone cannot afford bus fare?
The commission suggested it be changed to "mobility impaired." Staffwill check to see if the
term fits ADA definitions.
Mr. Perez explained that Map 111-19 reflects a major policy shift from requiring bike lanes on all
arterials to providing bike connectivity to the City Center. Requiring bike lanes on all arterials is
very costly and therefore, rarely done. Map III-22 represents a shift away from DART service to
regular fixed-route bus service.
On page III -105, the staff is recommending the addition of a transportation impact fee (TIF) as a
way of addressing the disadvantages of other local funding sources for transportation
improvements.
It was mls/c (one nay) to extend the meeting to 10:10 p.m.
Mr. Roe commented that the budget amounts on page III-I03 need to be updated to 1997 dollars.
For the paragraph on page 111-105 (second column) that deals with TIF, the commission would
like the last two sentences changed to a positive outlook. The first sentence in the first column of
page III -106 has the word "should" twice, one should be removed. On page III -107, TP ll-c, the
commission suggests adding the word "sufficient."
It was m/s/c to continue the Public Hearing to June 17, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. in the city's Council
Chambers.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
None.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None.
ADJOURN
It was m/s/c to adjourn the meeting at 10: 10 p.m.
K : \COMMO N . ADIAD MIN I \PLANCO M\0603 985. WPD
City ofF~der~lWay.. ".
PLANNING COMMISSIØN ...
"': .,<,'A':. '."""':':'.,:;:'.~;.:i:.
'</:':'.:" ',"
..' , :;::;,>';:',:'..:..::i:.':;::
Jüne17~ 1998
m.
.,:.::::"ç~~f,,;y,al~:,.
.:f::' ,: 'mm...,.' .::,.;m.m.
.m..:::~:::':;::"?:',: ,
:'::::;:;f;~'~::::"~':':':;;:;", m..
SUMMARY
Commissioners present: Robert Vaughan (Chair), Tim Carr, Todd Suchan, Dean Greenough, and
Karen Kirkpatrick. Commissioners absent: Peter Morse and Lu Joslin. Staff present: Senior
Planner Margaret Clark, Public Works Director Carr Roe, Traffic Engineer Rick Perez, and
Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety.
Chair Vaughan called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
ApPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of June 3, 1998, were approved.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None.
ADMINISTRATIVE REpORT
Mr. Perez infonned the commission that the city has received applications from Weyerhaeuser to
develop office buildings on the Weyerhaeuser Corporate Park. The city has also received an
application for an Extended Stay America hotel.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
The commission was pleased to welcome back Commissioner Carr. He has been absent lately
due to union contract negotiations.
Ms. Clark presented the commission's work program.
- Comprehensive Plan Amendments
The public hearing was reconvened at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Perez presented the Transportation Site
Specific Requests.
Tl-
This is a request to delete the proposed extension of SW 342nd Place. As proposed, it
would divide a proposed development. In addition, the proposed development is for
Planning Commission
June 17, 1998
2
senior housing which would not generate much traffic. The staff recommends approving
this request. The commission discussed the issue. It was mls/c (no nays) to accept the
staff recommendation.
T2-
This is a request to delete the proposed extension of South 308th Street. Potential buyers
have been discouraged from purchasing in the area due to the proposed extension. The
area is at least a Y4 mile from thru streets in either direction. In addition, it is near
undeveloped area that could potentially add traffic in the future. The staff recommends
denying the request. The commission discussed the issue. It was mls/c (no nays) to accept
the staff recommendation.
T3-
This is a request from staff to reconfigure the network of collectors in and around
Celebration Park. The staff feels the reconfiguration would better serve the park and
surrounding area. The staff recommends approving this request. The commission
discussed the issue. It was mls/c (no nays) to accept the staff recommendation.
Mr. Perez introduced the code revisions. These are proposed changes to Federal Way City Code
Chapters 20 and 22 in order to make them consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Perez
then explained the major changes. For Sec. 20-156(a), where the words, "and neighborhood
circulation" were added, the commission expressed the concern that it be made clear that this
includes the city center. Staff will wordsmith the section to make this clear. The commission
discussed Sec. 20-185(a) and requested the staff to end the sentence after the words "design
standards. "
Mr. Perez noted that a great deal of the Sight Distances at Intersections division of chapter 22 is
to be deleted. The reason for this is that the city will be using the AASHTO requirements instead
(this represents a policy change). The commission found it difficult to understand Sec. 22-
1160(a) and asked that the sentence be broken up and made more clear. For Sec. 22-1474(a), the
last sentence says, ".. .improvements shall be required to provide improvements..." This is
confusing. Staff will rewrite it to remove one of the improvements.
The commission discussed the size of residential driveways (Sec. 22-1542). Concern was
expressed that 20 feet would not be wide enough for a three car garage. It was decided that
deleting the word "larger" in Sec. 22-1542(3) would take care of this concern, as well as allow
for boats, RV's, etc. It was m/s/c (no nays) to accept the code revisions as ame~ded.
Mr. Perez commented that the City Council recently adopted City Center Design Guidelines and
these will be added to the code. The staff will provide the commission with a copy.
Ms. Clark went back to the Comprehensive Plan amendments. There are quite a few changes, for
which the staff did not have the time to provide the commission with a written copy. Ms. Clark
went over these during her presentation. She also showed an overhead of a matrix of each page in
Planning Commission
June 17, 1998
3
the chapter that has a change and whether it is a housekeeping change or a response to the
Washington State Department of Community, Trade, and Economic Development (DCTED)
letter of March 8, 1996.
Chapter 1 - Introduction
Ms. Clark went over the changes. The commission suggested dropping the first two sentences in
the last paragraph on page 1-1 in order to bring it up to date. Ms. Clark went over a few more
proposed changes that are needed to bring the chapter up to date.
Chapter 2 - Land Use
Ms. Clark went over proposed changes, many which are needed to bring the chapter up to date
(for example, add a subtitle to Chart II-I stating that the information is based on 1995 zoning).
The commission requested that the numbers in the first paragraph under section 2.1 The Land
Use Concept, be rounded up (for example, change 54.91 percent to 55 percent). On page II-6, the
staff added 'property rights' to the list ofGMA goals. Discussion was held on the definition of
property rights. Concern was expressed over property needed for right-of-way. The commission
requested staff to check the source of this definition. It was noted that Chart II-3 differs from
Chart II-I. This is because Chart II-I comes from older data. Discussion was held on Single
Family High Density and the change from reflecting this as feet to acres. Staff will rewrite this
section to make it more clear. Ms. Clark remarked that the staff will be rewriting section 2.9
Essential Public Facilities, because the city now has an essential public facilities process.
Ms. Clark told the Planning Commission that the staff will give them a copy of the amended
Comprehensive Plan that shows all of the changes and commission amendments before it goes
on to the City Council.
It was m/s/c to continue the Public Hearing to July 1, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. in the city's Council
Chambers.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
None.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None.
ADJOURN
It was m/s/c to adjourn the meeting at 10:00 p.m.
K:\COMMON.ADIADMIN IIPLANCOMl061798S. WPD
City of Federal Way"",'
PLANNING COMMISSION'
Jull" 1998"
y, " ,
',; ", m', ,', ,:,.. ,
,', City Hall
SUMMARY
Commissioners present: Robert Vaughan (Chair), Tim Carr, Lu Joslin, Todd Suchan, Dean
Greenough, and Karen Kirkpatrick. Commissioners absent: Peter Morse. Staff present: Senior
Planner Margaret Clark, Traffic Engineer Rick Perez, and Administrative Assistant E. Tina Piety.
Chair Vaughan called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m.
ApPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of June 17, 1998, were approved.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None.
ADMINISTRATIVE REpORT
Ms. Clark infonned the commission of new development within the city and provided a copy of
the City Center Street Design Guidelines.
COMMISSION BUSINESS - Comprehensive Plan Amendments
The Public Hearing was reconvened at 7:15 p.m. and Public Testimony was opened at 7:16 p.m.
Ms. Clark presented the staff report. The commission requested that the last sentence of the
GMA's definition of property rights be added to the defInition in the comprehensive plan. It was
m/s/c (no nays) to accept the staff's proposal for Public Facilities as stated in the staff report.
The commission discussed Mr. Barovic's request. As stated in the staff report, a discrepancy was
discovered on the comprehensive plan map that the staffused. Mr. Barovic's property is
designated Single Family Low Density, not Single Family Medium Density as previously stated.
Because the commission's past decision on this issue was based on the wrong designation, staff
brought t~e issue back. It was mIs/failed (two yeas, three nays) to deny the request. It was m/s/c
(three yeas, two nays) to approve a change to Single Family Medium Density and appropriate
zoning. It was m/s/c (no nays) to include the entire area so as to avoid spot zoning.
Planning Commission
July 1, 1998
2
It was mls/f (one yea and four nays) to accept the staff recommendations for the Comprehensive
Plan Amendments.
Chapter 6
Ms. Clark and Mr. Perez went over Chapter 6 (Capital Facilities Plan), including staff
housekeeping changes. Ms. Clark noted that many of those who contributed to this chapter (and
Chapter 10, Private Utilities) were in the audience and available to answer any questions the
commission may have.
Geri Walker, Federal Way School District - She had a few housekeeping changes to
make to the chapter. These included moving a word and a few typos made in the charts.
Jim Hamilton, Federal Way Fire Department - He remarked that changes in the
department are driven by city annexations. Clarified how many fire stations are in
Federal Way and those in King County that service Federal Way. Discussions were
held regarding response time and possible changes to the department due to a possible
end of a contract due to an annexation.
Chapter 10
Ms. Clark went over Chapter 10 (Private Utilities), including staff housekeeping changes. It was
mIs/c (one nay) to change the wording in PUP3 to say all utilities. It was mIs/c (no nays) that for
the third paragraph in the second column on page X-22, the last three sentences shall be struck
(beginning with, "This right of access issue. . . "). It was mIs/c (no nays) in the fIrst whole
paragraph in the first column on page X-23, the second to the last paragraph, the words "Puget
Power" will be struck and "PSE" put in their place. Also, the last part of the sentence (that starts,
".. . and has recently worked...") shall be struck. Discussion was held on undergrounding utilities.
It was mls/c (no nays) to wordsmith PUB19, since the recent wireless ordinance addresses siting
facilities. It was mis/withdrawn to add the words "pursuant to Federal Way code" to PUPI5.
Chapter 7
Ms. Clark went over Chapter 7 (City Center), including staff housekeeping changes. It was mls/c
(no nays) to make the language ofCCP16 consistent.
Chapter 8
Ms. Clarkwent over Chapter 8 (Potential Annexation Areas), including staff housekeeping
changes. Staff may remove the six year figure from LU29.
Chapter 9
Ms. Clark went over Chapter 9 (Natural Environment), including staff housekeeping changes. It
was m/s/c (one nay) to add non-residential activities to NEP64.
Planning Commission
July 1,1998
3
It was mls/c (no nays) to incorporate all changes and approve the staff recommendations for the
Comprehensive Plan Amendments.
The Public Testimony was closed at 9:50 p.m. and the Public Hearing was closed at 9:51 p.m.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
None.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None.
ADJOURN
It was mls/c to adjourn the meeting at 9:52 p.m.
K:\COMMON.ADIADMINI\PLANCOM\O70 1985. WPD
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
6,.0
INTRODUCTION
The City of Federal Way is expected to gfflW add
between 13,425 and 16,566 housing units and
13,300 and 16,400 jobs 6ver the next 20 )'ears
between the vears 1992 and 2002. This growth will
stimulate the local economy and maintain a diverse
and vibrant community. Unfortunately, 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 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 ser-
vices exist or can be provided in an efficient
manner.
12. 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.
In the pages that follow, this chapter complies with
the GMA requirements for a capital facilities plan.
level of Service
To prepare a Capital Facilities chapter, one of the first
decisions a jurisdiction must make involves the level
of service (LOS) standard. The level of service
standard refers to the amount and quality of services
and facilities that a community wants for itself. For
example, the LOS for a parks system is usually
described in terms of the number of acres of park land
per 1,000 population. If a community has a strong
desire for a good parks system, it will establish a high
LOS standard for itself maybe something on the order
of20 acres of park per 1,000 residents. On the other
hand, 20 acres of developed park land is expensive to
acquire, develop, operate, and maintain. As a result,
the community may be forced, for financial reasons,
to accept a lower LOS standard along the order of five
acres per 1,000 population. In any event, the City must
adopt LOS standards for all the services and facilities
it provides so that it can: 1) evaluate how well it is
serving its existing residents, and 2) determine how
many new facilities will have to be constructed to
service new growth and development. The signifi-
cance of this decision, and the associated cost
implications, will become obvious in the following
discussion.
Concurrence
In addition to mandating that a Capital Facilities
chapter be included in the Comprehensive Plan, the
GMA also introduced the concept of concurrence. In
general teríns, concurrence describes the situation
where adequate and necessary public services and
Revised September 1998
VI-1
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
facilities are available "concurrent" with the impacts
of new development, or within a specified time
thereafter.
Concurrence has two levels of applicability. The first
is at the planning level and refers to all services and
facilities, over the long term, and at the citywide scale.
Planning level concurrence is what this chapter is all
about. It inventories all existing facilities and services,
establishes a LOS standard for each, estimates new
facility requirements to accommodate projected
growth, and develops a financing plan which identifies
the revenues necessary to pay for the all the new
facilities. Ifthe necessary revenues are not available,
then the jurisdiction fails the planning level
concurrence test and must take appropriate action.
Those actions include lowering the LOS standard,
raising taxes, restricting growth, or a combination of
these actions. This chapter satisfies the planning level
concurrence requirement as outlined in the GMA.
The second level of concurrence analysis is project
specific and only required for transportation facilities.
Specifically, the GMA (RCW 36.70A. 070[6e]) states:
"...local jurisdictions must adopt and enforce
ordinances which prohibit development approval
if the development causes the level of service on a
transportation facility to decline below the
standards adopted in the transportation element of
the comprehensive plan, unless transportation
improvements or strategies to accommodate the
impacts of development are made concurrent with
the development."
That same section goes on say that "concurrent with
the development" shall mean that improvements or
strategies are in place at the time of development, or
that a financial commitment is in place to complete
the improvements or strategies within six years. To
satisfy the project level concurrence requirement, the
last section ofthe Transportation chapter, chapter
three, contains a concurrency management discussion.
As mentioned previously, project level concurrence is
only required for transportation system facilities.
However, the procedural criteria for adopting com pre-
hensive plans (WAC 365-195-060[3]) states that,
"...concurrence should be sought with respect to
public facilities in addition to transportation facilities.
The list of such additional facilities should be locally
defined." This section goes on to say that the City
could enact ordinances that require a project level
concurrence test for other services and facilities if it
chooses to. At this point, the City of Federal Way is
not proposing any additional concurrence require-
ments. It is, however, a goal the City may want to
consider in the future.
Impact Fees
The GMA allows local jurisdictions to assess impact
fees for parks, transportation, and schools. It was
clearly the intent of the legislature to have new growth
pay its share of the impact on public facilities.
Impact fees must be based on an adopted capital
facilities plan. In addition, the collected fees must be
used for projects that benefit the development paying
the fees. The fees must also be used within five years
of the date they were collected or returned to the
payee. Furthermore, impact fees can only be used to
mitigate the impact of new development. They cannot
be used to make up existing system deficiencies as is
the case when a jurisdiction is actually providing a
lower LOS than its adopted LOS standard. To impose
an impact fee program, the City must have a plan in
place to make-up any existing system deficiencies.
Countywide Planning Policies
The Countywide p;elanning ~ Policies (CWPP's)
originally adopted in 1992, and amended in 1994,
contain a number of goals and policies regarding
capital facilities and the provision of urban services.
Those relevant C6t1ftty".vidc 1'6lieies CWPP's are the
following:
COt
Jurisdictions shall identify the full range of
urban services and how they plan to provide
them. '
Revised September 1998
VI-2
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
CO2
CO3
CO4
CO5
CO7
COIO
Jurisdictions and other urban service pro-
viders shall provide services and manage
natural resources efficiently, through regional
coordination, conjunctive use of resources,
and sharing of facilities. Interjurisdictional
planning efforts shall evaluate approaches to
share and conserve resources.
Service provision shall be coordinated to
ensure the protection and preservation of
resources in both rural areas and in areas that
are developing, while addressing service
needs within areas currently identified for
growth.
All jurisdictions acknowledge the need to
develop a regional surface water management
system which crosses jurisdictional boun-
daries and identifies and prioritizes program
elements and capital improvements necessary
to accommodate growth and protect the
natural and builti! environment. The GMPC
shall develop and recommend a financing and
implementation strategy to meet this need.
Water supply shall be regionally coordinated
to provide a reliable economic source of water
and to provide mutual aid to and between all
agencies and purveyors. The region should
work toward a mechanism to address long-
term regional water demand needs of agencies
and water purveyors.
Water reuse and reclamation shall be
encouraged, especially for large commercial
and residential developments and for high
water users such as parks, schools, golf
courses, and locks.
In the urban area identified for growth within
the next ten years, urban water and sewer
systems are preferred for new construction on
existing lots and shall be required for new
subdivisions. However, existing septic
systems, private wells, and/or small water
systems may continue to serve the develop-
ments so long as densities and physical
conditions are appropriate, the systems are
CO13
FW13
FW32
LU29
allowed by the relevant jurisdictions, and
management keeps the systems operating
properly and safely.
Urban sewer system extensions in unincor-
porated King County shall be permitted
consistent with the provisions of the King
County Sewerage General Plan, Countywide
Planning Policies, and the policies of the
jurisdiction in whose potential annexation
area the extension is proposed.
Cities are the appropriate provider of local
urban services to urban areas, either directly
or by contract. Counties are the appropriate
provider of most countywide services. Urban
services shall not be extended through the use
of special purpose districts without approval
of the city in whose potential annexation area
the extension is proposed. Within the urban
area, as time and conditions warrant, cities
should assume local urban services provided
by special purpose districts.
Public capital facilities of a Countywide or
Statewide nature shall be sited to support the
Countywide land use pattern, support
economic activities, mitigate environmental
impacts, provide amenities or incentives, and
minimize public costs. Amenities or incen-
tives shall be provided to neighborhoods/
jurisdictions in which facilities are sited.
Facilities must be prioritized, coordinated,
planned, and sited through an interjurisdic-
tional process established by the GMPC, or its
successor.
All jurisdictions shall develop growth phasing
plans consistent with applicable capital
facilities plans to maintain an urban area
served with adequate public facilities and
services to maintain an urban area to meet at
least the six year intermediate household and
employment target ranges consistent with
LU67 and LU68. These growth phasing plans
shall be based on locally adopted definitions,
service levels, and financing commitments,
consistent with State GMA requirements. The
Revised September 1998
VI-3
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
phasing for cities shall not extend beyond
their potential annexation areas. Interlocal
agreements shall be developed that specify the
applicable minimum zoning, development
standards, impact mitigation, and future
annexation for the potential annexation areas.
LU30 Where urban services cannot be provided
within the next 10 years, jurisdictions should
develop policies and regulations to:
.
Phase and limit development such that
planning, siting, densities, and infra-
structure decisions will support future
urban development when urban services
become available.
.
Establish a process for converting land to
urban densities and uses once services are
available.
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
at a point where it may have to consider raising
additional revenues 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 taxes, im-
pact fees, and business and occupation taxes. The
other category of funds are 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 ISTEA, lAC, 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
Revised September 1998
adopted City policy that one time funds be used. onl~
for capital improvements. As is discussed later lD this
chapter, the City proposed two bond issues to finance
capital facilities in the Fall of 1995. As part of that
bond issue, voters were asked to approve a permanent
utility tax to pay for the maintenance and operations
costs associated with the new capital facilities.
6.1
PARKS AND RECREATION
Inventory of Existing Facilities
The City of Federal Way adopted the Comprehensive
Park, Recreation, and Open Space Plan in December
of 1991. The City updated the Plan in 1995 (which is
adopted by reference in this plan). The Parks Plan
covers not only the City of Federal Way proper, but
also includes the ftfeft City's Potential Annexation
Area (FAA) east ofInterstate 5.
The original 1991 Parks Plan identified 39 parks and
open spaces totaling some 998 acres in the planning
area which eo/erg some 998 acres. The 1995 Plan
updated the inventory to include new parks added to
the City's system. The Plan also lists school district
facilities, State, and County facilities as well as
private recreation facilities. Map VI-I describes the
location of major parks and open space within the
Federal Way planning area. Table VI-I summarizes
this inventory as of July 1997.
When the City incorporated in 1990, there were
approximately eight acres of park land available per
1,000 residents in Federal Way. Since that time, the
City has purchased additional property and developed
new facilities. These include the Lake Klahanee
Community Senior Center, Dumas Bav Centre
(formerly Visitation Retreat Center}, Celebration Park,
and Steel Lake Annex facilities. These facilities are
described in greater detail in the City's Park Compre-
hensive Plan. The result is that the City is now
providing 10.9 acres of parks per 1,000 residents. ~is
represents a fairly dramatic increase in the LOS bemg
provided to local residents.
VI-4
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Table VI-l
Summary of Existing Parks and Open Space
AGENCY ACRES SITES
CITY PARKJRECREA TION AREAS ~ 803.44 45
COUNTY PARKIRECREATION AREAS 23.65 4
STATE PARKIRECREATION AREAS 295 2
SCHOOL DISTRICT AREAS 134.68 21
PRIVATE PARKS/RECREATION AREAS 184.13 10
TOTAL PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ~ 1440.9 82
Table VI-2
Parks & Recreation Needs - Year 2010
PLANNING AREA PROPOSED PARK LAND PROPOSED OPEN SPACE
A 24.0 80.0
B 45.0 0
C 25.0 25.0
D 3.0 0
E 5.0 42.0
F (OUTSIDE CITY) N/A N/A
G(50% OUTSIDE CITY) 2.5 30.0
H (OUTSIDE CITY) N/A N/A
TOTAL 104.5 177
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 now
jointly operates and maintains a major community
park in conjunction with Saghalie Junior High School.
Also, the City has agreements to provide recreational
programs and schedule play fields at several
elementary schools. These facilities are now formally
available nights and weekends, year around for use by
local residents.
When one considers all of the parks and recreation
facilities which are now available through interlocal
agreements in the parks planning area, City residents
now have access to approximately 17 acres of parks
and open space per 1,000 residents. This inventory
includes all City, County, State, and School District
facilities. This is a substantial increase in the LOS
over the past fl¥e seven years. However, for the
purposes of parks planning, the LOS standard adopted
in the City's Parks Plan and this Capital Facilities
chapter is 10.9 acres of city owned park land per 1,000
population. This LOS standard is generally consistent
with the LOS that the City is presently providing.
Revised September 1998
VI-6
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Forecast of Future Needs
Based on population estimates included in this Plan,
and the adopted LOS standard for parks and open
space, the City estimates that it will need to acquire
and develop 104 acres of new parks and an additional
177 acres of open space between now and the year
2010 in the Plan. These estimates are summarized in
Table VI-2.
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 800 seats. The City
has converted a portion of Dumas Bay Centre into the
Knutzen Familv 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-2 indicates the location of the parks, recrea-
tion facilities, and open space subareas the City will
need to maintain the adopted LOS. The Parks Plan
breaks the planning area 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 1995 Parks and Recreation Plan.
Finance Plan
Table VI-3 describes the proposed parks projects that
will be needed between now and the year *M ~.99>2
2003. together with cost estimates programed byy~~.
1:¡mlgJ1;~~;!RPJ'~)"~~~~:;¡II+§,;I:i~.!~_.il
.j:~.. Table VI-3 also identifies the revenues that
will be available during the ttl~~~l;lm~ the same
time period to finance theserÎ~wfacmties. The only
re-¡enue sourccs identified are those that hfY/e bcen
seeured fur fiseal year 1995 and a $7.5 million bond
issue ttlmed do.ln by the voters in NðVcmber, 1995. If
the bond issue had been approved, the Cit}. -.vould
complete Phasc I improvcments to Celebration Park.
These impro". ements -Nauld add six play fields and
four baseball fields tð the Cit) , s ili"/entory of faeilitics
and help to maintain the LOS fur parks (}Ver the ncxt
six years. Ch..en the bond issue "¡.as not appro. ed,
park's LOS vlill most likely decline givcn the prespeet
of ne'", gro".vth and de. elopment 6ver the next six
yean The City may place the Parks bond issue 6n a
ballot in 1996 for reconsideration by thc voters. In
1997. the City Council passed a utility tax. A portion
of the revenue from this tax is being used for the con-
struction of the improvements to Celebration Park.
The City annually updates its Parks & Recreation
capital improvements program. These updates reflect
new project priorities, eliminate projects that have
been completed, and add new projects to the program.
6.2 SURFACE WATER
Inventory of Existing Facilities
Natural Systems
The Federal Way area consists of two major drainage
basins, the Hylebos Creek and Lower Puget Sound.
The Hylebos Creek Basin consists of the West Branch
Hylebos Creek, East Branch Hylebos Creek, and the
Lower Hylebos Creek Sub-Basins. The Lower Puget
Sound Basin consists of the North Lower, Central
Lower, and South Lower Puget Sound Sub-Basins.
Map VI-3 describes the planning area boundary, basin,
and sub-basin boundaries. Map VI-4 shows the major
features of the natural system. The natural systems
have been reviewed on a sub-basin level. This sub-
basin information is contained in the City's Compre-
hensive Surface Water Facility Plan.
Man-Made System
As part of its 1994 Surface Water Facilities Plan, the
City completed an inventory of the storm water
drainage trunk system. There are ten major trunk lines
in the system, and one can find more details about
their capacity and location in the Surface Water Plan.
Revised September 1998
VI-7
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Table VI 3
Parks & Reereati8B FiBaBeiBg PlaB
-
-
~
.........
.1üCü
==
"""'"
~
~
:"":"",":,,,"":' ,"
~2;-194
~
~
~
-
~
~
- :~ II' ",," ""',,,'
";~
"",,;,, ..
", ""~~:ï"
'.
"...,",",
C,..,...I f.."d
~
lIelr,a, (aIH f"ad
~
1..'0I:3[ ED,..;..gJ
~
~
(ia~ Coni; (h,ad
~
~
:1':*8:1:'1)"" :!:~" ":'~~~i:
~
,'" ,
.,,:"
co, A...,,!..
~
6Mftto
~
C....'" CUBe:
~
S,h""1 FJis";'1
~
Olh,. 1;""..""
: "..,,~, ""'
"'~
~'iI""""""
S~".~I=.~§""";:"':""":"""""'~
~ ~-"é~ ,"""
I~~~~~~_.':~,I~,
~
~
PRe :C'F~;
'"
Op,a Sp."
,'.e~'Ð, .elep
~
~
~
Sft!h.li, Po.l!
~
.
',I"'I~,"'" ",!.f-',,'"
~
Ald"d.l. J'o.l.
~
.\A,loid, Po.l.
~
:¡~t
~
BP.\ To.il [) Ip .'1:
~
~
S,he.1 fi<irl L'PI,rRlI<!
~
~
""'i."".::.',"
':.11
.., II
P..hA,q"i,ilio" ~ ~ ,~'" '
~',ighh"",..,,,1 ~::,>"
l.allOlal'..1I ~ ~:':
R, d"p.."..! ' "
~ ~~;'
Speeift! U" f..ili,i., ~ "
C,¡,h'ftlionp..ltUlp ~ ~ ~ ~
Trnil.'.'qa;, &E»lp ~
2% f<>r III, .\'" ~ I~
C.""",,"i!; C."le, ~ I,
ReI.. I ("Ill" ~
, ,
roa,h.. 1.01.. ~
~
r;,h,,', ro"d ne,lp ~
',:'~" "";/~~i;'i'~,,""':l:.',-,~g¡;ii!lfrI~¡:í',,',,',,"",,¡!W,,.'~_~'¡,~"iV:i.;'~'ié",," '¡'~""",," ""i'~;"',t,:tII"""i"",,'I"""'i~iI&1i11~~,,~,, ,.:..:.,,' 'III!'
, ~ 1';~~i ' ',,' ~~;i~I(""îþr~":~' ... "- !~~ ~f~~~. ~.j8 ~ ~~
VI-9
Revised September 1998
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Table VI-3
Parks & Recreation Financing Plan
FUNDING SOURCES 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
BEGINNING FUND BALANCE ! 8.439.752 $ 175,850 ! 220.850 $ 685.850 ! 950,850 $ ~
Bonds ! 249,706
Donations ! 550.537
Fee in Lieu ! 70,000 ! 10,000 $ 10,000 ! 10.000 ! 10,000 ! .!Q,QQ;
Funding TBD by CounciP ! 550.000 $ 600.000 ! 750,000 ! 750,000 $ ~
General Fund ! 445,575 TBIÝ TBIÝ TBIÝ TBIÝ TIm
Grants ! 572,806 ! 800.000 ! 150.000 ! l50,OOO! ~
Interest Earnings ! 93,724
State Tax (Gas) ! 5,000 ! 5,000 ! 5.000 ! 5.000! W
Utility Tax ! 680,668
PROJECTS 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Community Parks
AcQuisition ! 150,000 ! 150.000 ! 100,000 ! lQQ,Qlli
Design ! 40,000
Deve I opment/Renovation ! 8.234,260 ! 250,000
Facilities
AcQuisition
Design ! 100.000
Deve I 0 pment/Renovation ! 2,016,741 $ 110,000 ! 500.000
Neighborhood Parks
AcQuisition $ 100,000 ! 100.000 ! 100,000
Design ! 2Q.QQ:
Deve I opment/Renov ati on ! 87,692 ! 50,000
Open Space Parks
AcQuisition
Design
Development $ 319.706 $ 70,000
Sports Field
Design ! 300.000
Renovation ! 19.277 ! 1,000,000 ! 1 00000
Revised September 1998
VI-10
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
1998
1999
Trails
Acquisition
Design
!
249,242
Development/Renovation
2000
2001
2002
2003
$
700,000
I Dcpanr:'cn! bu~scl plOp',..1 II> ,he City Cuuncil
2. City Cuuncil approved budget.
The City has made a significant number of improve-
ments to the man-made system since incorporation in
1990. One of the morc significant oftfl:c3c projects is
thc Panther Lttlœ retcntionldetcntion systcm. The
Panther Lake project -.vill aeeommodatc storm "arer
flov.'s from the 100 reM' :Horm, ineltldes an aqtlifer
recharge component, and pro,..ides a reereational trail
ftfOI:1ftd the facility. Most of the projects completed to
date corrected existing localized flooding problems.
As a result of resolving these "spot" problems, the
City and its surface water utility have significantly
improved the LOS on a system-wide basis. The City
has gone to a regional system for detention/retention
of surface water. Several reg;ional detention/retention
facilities have been. or will be. constructed to handle
storm water runoff. However. individual developments
must treat storm water on site prior to releasing it to
the regional system.
System Capacity
As another part of the Surface Water Facilities Plan,
the City developed a model of its surface water
facilities including the natural part of the system, the
various lakes, streams, and wetlands. This model uses
the following design or LOS standards:
. M 25 year storm conveyance capacity on lateral
systems;
. 25 year storm conveyance capacity on major trunk
systems;
. 25 year storm storage capacity in local retention/
detention facilities; and
. 100 year storm storage capability in regional
retention/detention facilities.
Based on these LOS standards and the data on existing
facilities, the model helps utility engineers identify
deficiencies in the existing system and the most cost
effective way to resolve them. The model also allows
engineers to describe the new facilities that will be
needed in the future to accommodate new growth and
development as outlined in the Land Use chapter.
Forecast of Future Needs
Based on model results, utility engineers prepared
annually update a detailed 20 year capital facilities
plan. The plan identifies projects, prioritics prioritizes
them, estimates the cost, and re-examines the utility
rate structure to ensure that there is sufficient funding
available over the next 20 years to construct these
projects.
Locations and Capacities of
Future Facilities
Table VI-4 includes the surface water facilities project
list. For more complete discussion of this list, and
maps describing project locations, please refer to
Chapter IV of the City's Comprehensive Surface
Water Plan. As noted earlier, these projects address
existing system deficiencies as well as the new facil-
ities that will be needed in the fumre to accommodate
projected growth.
Revised September 1998
VI-11
<II
CD
~
ï:ï
<U
u.
(ij
...
'ã.
<U
U
I
c:
<U
ã:
CD
>
'iii
c:
CD
.s=
CD
"-
Co
E
0
u
>-
<U
3:
(ij
Q;
't
CD
U.
I
~
II Î i I i I
i
i I I- i I i i i I
~
~ I: i I- I J
~ ! i 1 I i I
¡ I i f I
B i I I I i
~ ; I i I II
¡ I I I- II I I I I I
00
0)
0)
...
Q;
.c
E
CD
...
C'
(
IJ.
't
CD
<II
's;
CD
a:
N
...
,
:>
III
CD
~
'¡j
'"
u.
-¡¡;
....
ëi
'"
u
I
C
'"
ã:
CD
>
'ëii
c
CD
.c
CD
a.
E
0
u
>
'"
~
ci3
"C
CD
U.
II i i 1I1I1 t II i Iii i } i I
i
LO
~
;;
I
I .
i
i
~
¡
00
OJ
OJ
t
.c
E
CD
....
Co
CD
(f)
"C
CD
III
.:;
CD
a:
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Finance Plan
The City has created a surface water utility to manage
storm water drainage, prevent flooding, and improve
water quality. The City charges eaeh householð
busiftess for eaeh employee, property owners an
annual surface water fee which is based upon the
amount of impervious surface on the {>ropertv. These
fees, along with any outside grant monies and low
interest loans, provide the revenues that pay for capital
facilities projects.....and operateion and maintaiftenance
the of its surface water system.
As outlined in Table VI-4, projects are scheduled
based on anticipated revenues. The capital facilities
spreadsheet indicates project scheduling based on
available funding and priority ranking. The City
annually updates the capital facilities plan for surface
water. The Comprehensive Surface Water Plan, which
includes the capital facilities plan, is adopted by
reference in this plan, including changes made during
the City's annual update.
6.3 TRANSPORTATION
The GMA requires that local jurisdictions prepare a
transportation chapter as part of the Comprehensive
Plan. The GMA also authorizes jurisdictions to assess
impact fees for transportation system improvements
that are necessary to accommodate the traffic created
by the new development. In order to assess impact
fees, the capital facilities plan must include the list of
transportation improvements and associated costs that
necessitate the impact fees.
The Tmftsporttttioft ehapter eofttftifts the City's Tl'ftfts
portfttioft Impro-¡ement Plan (TIP). Table III 19 eoft
ffiifts the TIP rer Feaeml Way eovering the years 1995
2010. Table VI-5 contains the City's Transportation
Improvement Plan (TIP) which is a six year finance
t>lan for transportation projects. The Transportation
Chapter also contains a Capital Improvement Plan
(CIP) which is a 20 vear transportation facilities plan.
Inventory of Existing Facilities
Chapter three ofthis aoeumeftt is the City's tmftspor
ffitioft plan ftftð it describes the complete inventory of
the City's transportation facilities. Map VI-5 indicates
the City's street ftl'terittl classifications system.
One of the motivations for incorporation in 1990 was
that the City had grown significantly over the past
decade without benefit of necessary transportation
system improvements. 1ft short, r,Residents were
dissatisfied with the declining LOS in transportation.
In response, the City acted quickly to make road
improvements. The City added capacity to the system
by widening and improving South 356th Street, 16th
Avenue South, and 348th Street. It also coordinated
the traffic signals along South 320th Street to improve
traffic flows and lobbied for the Dial-A-Ride Transit
service in Federal Way. The result is that the LOS for
transportation services in the City has been stabilized
and improved. With this in mind, the City Council has
adopted the 1995 LOS as the standard for service
delivery into the future.
Forecast of Future Needs
Based on the adopted LOS standard for transportation,
the City used the EMME2 computer transportation
modeling program to evaluate future transportation
system needs. Please review chapter three for details
associated with this analysis. The conclusion is the
City will have to construct the projects identified in
the 1995 transportation improvement program (refer
to the Transportation chapter) in order to maintain the
existing LOS between now and the year ~ 20 I 5.
locations and Capacities of
Future Facilities
The Tl'ftftsportfttioft Improvement Pregnun TIP is a
prioritized list of capital projects that have been
identified for the period -l995 1998 through ~
2004. The projects have been identified by location,
with the project costs indicated by anticipated year of
expenditure (for multi-year projects).
Revised September 1 998
VI-16
..:r:~:"j.:":--'"
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY FACILmES PLAN - 1 aaa TO 201 3
SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT COMPONENT
1997 1998 1999 2000 1001 2001 2003 2004 2005 1006 2007 1008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total
SWM SOURCES
~ FiuA::iag
F orw ani 4,144,005 5,438,779 713,079 3,676.757 2,765,229 2,303,767 1,470,827 1,008,223 469,823
°ees with GMA Projected Growth 2,903,435 2,956,829 2,979,005 3,001,348 3,023,858 3,046,537 3,069,386 3,092,406 3,115,599 3,138,966 3,162,S09 3,186,227 3,210,124 3,234,200 3,258,456 3,282,895 3,307,517 52,969,297
st Earnings 40,358 41,100 41,408 41,719 42,032 42,347 42,664 42,984 43,307 43,632 43,959 44,289 44,621 44,955 45,293 45,632 45,974 736,273
fer In - Street Fund 138,527 139,913 141,9SO 144,009 146,090 148,193 lSO,317 152,464 154,633 156,823 159,035 161,270 163,526 165,804 168,105 170,427 172,771 2,633,856
, Works Trust Fund Loan I Mitigation Fees 62,956 2,7SO,ooo 2,812,956
Subtoal Rnawes and F'DIIIICing: 7,289,280 8,576,621 6,625,442 6,863,833 5,977,208 ~,540,843 4,733,194 4,296,077 3,783,362 3,339,411 3,365,S03 3,391,786 3,418,271 3,444,960 3,471,854 3,498,954 3,516,262' 81,142,870
idcd 673,625 733,974 915,184 1,083,341 980,654 1,139,472 1,544,667 1,305,878 1,232,697 9,609,493
Total Rec¡uiRd Soun:es: 1,8SO,SO1 7,863,543 2,948,685 4,098,604 3,673,441 4,078,016 3,724,972 3,826,255 4,456,987 4,073,395 4,280,687 4,475,117 4,398,915 4,584,432 5,016,510 4,804,832 4,758,959 72,9OS,88O
SWM USES Amma1 Expeoditnre Incrcasc 3.5%
IIUIÇC and Operations
It 1,461,043 1,512,180 1,565,106 1,619,884 1,676,580 1,735,261 1,795,995 1,858,855 1,923,915 1,991,252 2,060,945 2,133,079 2,207,736 2,28S,007 2,364,982 2,447,757 2,533,428 33,173,004
is and OpcrationslCapitll Additions 200,000 207,000 214,245 221,744 229,SO5 237,537 245,8S1 254,456 263,362 272,S79 282,120 291,994 302,214 3,211,606
Subtotal Maintenance and Opemions: 1,461,043 1,512,180 1,565,106 1,619,884 1,876,580 1,941,261 2,010,240 2,080,598 2,153,419 2,228,789 2,JO6, 797 2,387,534 2,471,898 1,5S7,587 2,647,102 2,739,751 2,835,642 36,395,610
Prognms -
Capital Improvanent Projects 110,336 114,198 118,195 122,331 126,613 131,045 135,631 140,378 145,291 lSO,377 155,640 161,087 166,72S 172,561 178,600 184,851 191,321 2,5OS,181
md Retrofit Projects 44,134 45,679 47,277 48,932 SO,645 52,417 504,252 56,151 58,116 6O,ISO 62,2S5 64,434 66,690 69,024 71,439 73,940 76,528 1,002,063
md Stream Restoration Projects 33,101 34,260 35,459 36,700 37,984 39,314 40,690 42,114 43,588 45,113 46,692 48,326 SO,O18 51,769 53,580 55,456 57,397 751,559
Quality Improvanent Projects 115,692 119,741 123,932 128,270 132,759 137,406 142,215 147,193 152,344 157,676 163,195 168,907 174,819 180,937 187,270 193,824 200,608 2,626,789
Works Trust Fund Debt Service 86,195 86,195 238,195 238,195 238,195 238,195 238,195 238,195 238,195 238,195 238,195 238,195 238,195 238,195 238,195 238,195 238,195 3,745,315
Subtotal Amma1 Prognms: 389,458 400,072 S63,OS8 574,428 586,196 598,376 610,983 624,030 637,534 651,511 66S,m 680,9SO 696,446 712,48S 729,085 746,266 764,049 18,630,906
CIP PROJECT COSTS - '94 DOLLARS
I'rojec:t List Design Acquisition Construction Total
>-C1P-O2 : SeaTac Mall Detention 457,8S7 200,000 3,659,143 4,317,000 4,681,291 4,681,291
'-ClP-O3 : SW 3S6th Street Drainage Study 525,000 525,000 623,535' 623,535
-ClP-O1 : W. Hylcbos Channel StIbilization 72,000 193,000 349,000 614,000 196,986 550,882 747,868
:IP-O I : SW 34Oth Street Detention Focilitics 84,429 128,000 674,571 887,000 1,200,000 1,200,000
CIP-O I : Lakota Cccck Channel StIbilization 33,000 243,000 276,000 351,149 351,149
::tP-O1 : SW 32Oth St Tnmk Crossing Replacement 35,143 281,857 317,000 417,428 417,428
ClP-Ol: 272ndStS Tnmk UPSW: 53,143 424,857 478,000 27,000 I 522,257 549,157
CIP-Ol : West Branch Lakota Cœck Stabilization 168,8S7 1,351,143 1,520,000 I 859,516 1,111,951 1,971,467
:::IP-O2 : Orifice replacement, channel rehab. 12,8S7 104,143 117,000 i 159,458 159,458
ClP-O2 : SW 32Oth St Tnmk Replaccment 9,000 73,000 82,000 I 111,757 111,757
-CIP-O3 : Storm Drain UPSW: 33,429 268,571 302,000 ! 411,595 411,595
OP-02 : S. Star Lake Road Tnmk Upsîzc 64,714 516,286 581,000 34,000 ; 634,647 668,647
:IP-Ol : GolfCoursc Flood Wall 25,714 204,286 230,000 ! 313,466 313,466
::u4I~ : Lake Jeane Oudet Control Structure 78,857 630,143 709,000 107,473 888,878 996,351
:IP-O2 : Lake Lorene Outlet Control Structure 18,429 146,571 165,000 I 232,748 232,748
OP-OI: S 36Oth StRcgional Detention Pond 9SO,OOO 9SO,ooo 1,386,971 1,386,971
:IP-Or: SW 325th St Culvcrtlfnmk Replacement 12,8S7 104,143 117,000 176,795 176,795
OP-O3 : Star Lake Road Pipe Installation 3,857 30,143 34,000 2,000 i 37,053 39,053
ClP-04 : S 276th Place Pipe Installation 4,714 36,286 41,000 2,000 ! 44,604 46,604
OP-O5 : Star Lake Road Pipe Crossing 1l,571 93,429 105,000 5,ooo ! 114,848 119,848
:;¡P-O2 : Lower Jacs Creek Channel Stabilization 56,143 135,000 610,857 802,000 i 279,062 923,046 1,202,108
CIP-Ol : Lake Ponce de Leon Tnmk Replacement 61,714 493,286 555,000 I 93,254 771,477 864,731
CIP-O2 : SW 332nd St Tnmk Replacement 38,143 304,857 343,000 ' 536,436 536,436
ClP-OI : S 308th St LaœraI Drainage Intercept 11,143 87,857 99,000 ¡ 160,2S0 160,250
-ClP-O2 : East 15-inch Lateral Detention 7,286 33,000 58,714 99,000 160,250 160,250
-ClP-O1 : 3rd Place S Pipe Replacement 28,286 226,714 255,000 412,767 411,767
-CIP-O2 : S. 3 16th Place Detention FICility 22,286 216,000 177,714 416,000 673,376 673,376
CIP-02 : AIdcrda1e Park Trunk Replaccment 84,000 671,000 755,000 ¡ 140,729 1,163,504 1,304,233
ClP-O3 : SW 34Oth PI Trunk Replacement 26,571 211,429 238,000 I 398,733 398,733
-CIP-02 : 1st Way S Tnmk Replacement 45,857 367,143 413,000 ; 691,919 691,919
CIP'()1 : E Branch Lakota Creek Channel Stabilization 72,000 15,000 914,000 1,001,000 ¡ ISO,856 1,640,333 1,791,189
OP-02 : Outlet Channel Modification 9,429 74,571 84,000 ! 156,029 156,029
Lake Flood ProofinglRclocating Structure 25,000 175,000 200,000 I 371,497 371,497
OP-O3 : Easter Lake Berm Construction 10,714 86,286 97, 000 : 180,176 180,176
.-ClP-O2: Lake#1 OvertlowChannel 21,429 171,571 193 ,000 358,495 358,495
CIP-04 : SPLSTO135 to SPLSTOI60 Trunk Replacement 15,000 121,000 136,000 252,618 252,618
-CIP-O2 : 2Jst Ave SW Detention Facility 14,571 363,000 115,429 493,000 ¡ 947,793 947,793
-CIP-04 : Low Flow Diversion I InfiltIation Trench 9,857 80,143 90,000 ; 173,025 173,025
-CIP-OI : TributaJyOOl3 Floodplain Study 20,000 20,000 ' 38,450 38,4SO
Subtotal CIP thru 2013 (Assumed LOS): 18,656,000 5,951,291 82O,S21: 1,904,291 1,210,665 1,529,379 1,103,749 1,121,626 1,666,033 1,193,095 1,307,913 1,406,643 1,231,381 1,314,360 1,640,333 1,318,815 1,159,268 25,879,363
,-
V6,XL.8
Page 1
.
Fede.,
day Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Table VI-5
Transllor13tionlwproyement Plan (TIP) - 1998 to 2004
MAp ID CAPITAL PROJECT LIST 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 TOTAL
I S 320th St @ SR 99: Add turn lanes 136.200 1,482.900 1,619.100
.2 S 336th St: 13th Ave S - 18th Ave S: Widen to 4/5 lanes 693.500 693,500
.3 Military Rd S @ S 304th St: Add turn lanes 704.000 704,000
.4 Military Rd S @ S Star Lake Rd: Signalize. add left-turn lane 180.000 180.000
5 SR 99: S 3 12th St - S 324th St: Add HOY lanes 200.000 554.600 8.395.400 9,150,000
.6 S 3l2th St: SR 99 - 23rd Ave S: Widen to 5 lanes 3.336.1 00 1,200.000 4,536,100
1 SW 340th St @ Hovt Rd SW: Signalize. add turn lanes 83.900 271.100 355,000
~ 23rd Ave S: S 317th St - S 324th St: Widen to 5 lanes 800.000 3.172.000 1.601.000 5,573,000
.9 SR 509 @ 8th Ave SW: Signalization. left turn lanes 279.000 279,000
10 21st Ave SW @ SW 334th St: Relocate fire signal 180.000 180,000
II SR 99 @ S 330th St: Signalization. left-turn lanes 100.000 140.000 240,000
12 S 288th St @ SR 99: Add left-turn lanes 1.115,300 1,115,300
13 S 3 12th St@ 14th Ave S: Signalization 180.000 180.000
14 SR 99: S 324th St - S 340th St: Construct HOY lanes 950.000 10.722.000 11,672.000
15 S 336th St @ Weverhaeuser Way S: Realign intersection 648.700 648.700
16 S 320th St@ 1st Ave S: Add 2nd left-turn lanes WB and NB 1.739.000 1.739.000
17 SR 99: S 284th St - SR 509: Construct HOY lanes 960.000 8.672.000 9.632.000
18 S 356th St: 1st Ave S - SR 99: Widen to 5 lanes 400,000 6.805.000 7.205,000
19 S 320th St @ 20th Ave S: Add NB right-turn lane. 2nd WB left-turn lane 1.358.000 1,358,000
Revised September 1998
VI-18
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
20 S 320th St @ 23rd Ave S: Add 2nd left-turn lanes on 320th 3.900.000 3.900.000
21 S 348th St: 9th Ave S - SR 99: Add HOY lanes. EB rieht-turn lane at SR 99 3.096.000 3.096.000
**22 21st Ave SW/SW 357th St: SW 356th St - 22nd Ave SW: Extend 2-lane collector 750.000 750.000
**23 SW 312th St: 1st Ave S - SR 509: Widen to 3 lanes 3.775.000 3,775.000
SUBTOTAL CAPITAL PROJECfS 6.992.700 6,780.600 10.136,400 9.050,300 10,722.000 10.712,700 14.186,000 68,580,700
MAp ID NON-MOTORIZED CAPITAL PROJECT LIST 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 TOTAL
**24 BPA Trail Phase III: SW Campus Dr - SW 256th St: Extend trail 375.000 164,000 1.408.000 1.947.000
25 SW 312th St: SW Dash PtRd -1st Ave S: Shoulder improvement 60.000 60.000
26 Weyerhaeuser Way S: S 320th ST - S 349th St: Shoulder improvement 652.700 652.700
SUBTOTAL NON-MoTORIZED CAPITAL PROJECfS 435.000 164.000 0 1,481.400 Q 652.700 2.444.000 2.977,500
TOTAL CITY EXPENDITURES 7,427.700 6,944.600 10.136.400 10,458,300 10,722.000 11,365,400 1,418,600 71,240,400
'Projects identified in the 1995 Streetffraffic Bond issue. These projects were selected to address safety and con~estion in various parts of the City for a total 0£$7,5 million.
"Delete from the TIP to derive Arterial Street Imorovement Plan (ASIP).
Note: Pro~çosts are inflated at 3%~r year,
Revised S...otember 1998
VI-19
+
pugetSound
.
.
,
"
,
"
"
,
"
,
"
.
.
.
8
8-
. . . J
,
"
,
"
,
"
,
"
,
"
,
"
,
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FUNCTIONAL
CLASSIFICATIONS
OF EXISTING STREETS
AND HIGHWAYS
CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT
Legend
/"../ Federal Way City Limits
. . . Potential Annexation Area
8 A.; Freeway
/'v' Principal Arterial
~ Minor Arterial
,'~'..,..' Principal Collector
/'V Minor Collector
- SCALE-
1 Inch equals 6,800 Feet
.:¡:~
~~
MAP VI-5
fN/oDmal)8Ar.xola...aml
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
The transportation projeet list indw:les the 10 pro
posed projeets, a mal' of the projeet loeation, Md
estimated eost of the projects to be funded by the 1995
bond isstle. For the most part, these ten projects will
not add eapacity to the transportation s)stem. Rather,
they.. ill permit the system to funetion more
effieiently as disetlssed in the Transportation Systems
Management section of the transportation plan. Sped
fie projeet infurmation is also ineluded in the plan.
Financing Plan
The transportation projects prðposed in the City's TIP
are based on ftlnding a.ailable through a $7.5 milliðn
dðllM bond issue passed by the voters in the fall of
1995. Allprðjeets sho..n Me dependent on this bond
measul'C. All other identified projeets Me seheduled to
take place be) ODd the initial six )'ear time frame of
this plan.
Pages 111-112 to 111-114 of~he Transportation
chapter describes the City's--!-995 adopted TIP,
including the revenue sources and project costs.
6.4 POLICE SERVICES
Sinee incorporation in 1990, the City has eontraeted
vtith King Count). to provide poliee serviees. The City
tlses a "Patrol Unit Cost" model to determine anntlal
eost of poliee serviees from the County. This me
eo'¡ers the direct cost of the officer plu3 a pre rata
shMe of the eost of administrative and Stlpport
personnel and speeial services sueh as SWl1T, Major
Crime In¡estigation, VICE, Dh'e team, helieopter, K
9, Mid spedal emphasis traffie unit.
In 1992, the eost per tlnit of serviee ..,...1t3 $117,030 and
the total (Jost for 53 patrol offieers .VIt3 $6,326,511. In
1993, the tlnit eost inereased by 14.34 percent Md in
1994 it inereased M additional 12.94pereent. The
1994 eost fur poliec se~ iee '..as o'y'er $8.2 million.
Dtle in la~ge ptirt to these eost increases, whieh '."Iere
signifieantl)' higher than local eost of li'/ing inereases,
the City started diseussing the possibility of starting
its o..'n police department. These diseussions also
identified a loeal interest in a "eommunit) based"
polieing modei for Fetkral '.Vti).
Based on this histor, and these diseussions, the City
Couneil voted unanimously in !\.fa)' of 1995 te
terminate the poliee eontraet with King County
effceti.e Deeember 1996, and furm its own City
police department.
At this time, the Cit) is ju3t in the beginning stages of
setting öp a police depM'tment and mo3t of the major
decisions It3sodatcd with this nc'"" direetion hfY/e net
Jet been made. However, the City has deeided that it
,....'1tftts to maintain the existing LOS fur police
serviees, This meMS that the City will be hiring
appreximately 112 ne.. emplo)ces to staff the new
department. The existing Cit)' Hall is at capacity and
eannot aeeommodate the ne n department. As a result,
the City antkipates that it '.vill hate to buy or lcase a
böilding to house the ne n deptirtment. This decision
';¡iIl have ob. ious 16~g tcrm eapital faeility impaets
whieh Y. ill be described in the 1996 version of this
Capital Facilities ehapter.
In Mav. 1995. the Federal Way City Council voted to
end the police services contract with the King County
Sheriffs Department and to establish its own city
police department at the end of the contract period in
November. 1996. The City's management and staff
immediately began planning and transitional process
to implement the Council's decision.
With a staffing model. rank structure. vision and
values statement. and transitional budget established.
the City hired a police chief in January. 1996.
followed with the hiring: of employees to fill other
allocated positions. Full staffing of 93 officers and 29
non-sworn positions was achieved in July. 1997.
The formation of a new department was accomplished
within the allocated transition budg:et and the newly
formed department began traffic enforcement and
records and evidence management on September 16.
1996. The new department assumed responsibility for
all police services including: patrol and criminal
investigations on October 16. 1996.
Revised September 1998
VI-21
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
The ,dcpmtmcftt' s 1997 ðperatÎ8~;budget is
$9 ~375; egO, i'e3ultiftg; Î8 a; ri~;ðft1œr"e63t;M:8ì~øe.~ø6.
This eð:ff j~.pftl'tiall~'.,~ffse~;~1.~ttftt3.tðtftH.,appre:x¡"
matel!$900.090,in 1997.
The department consists of two divisions. Support
Services and Field Operations. Suooort Services
includes Administration. Records. Crime Prevention.
Property Evidence. Criminal Investigations. and
Community Resources. Field Operations includes
Patrol and Traffic. The deoarbnent's 122 emolovees
are supplemented by more that 30 community
volunteers who provide a wide range of services.
reducing the city's costs while involving community
members in the department's day to day operations.
The caoital olan for the Public Safety Program
contains the oreliminary facility and eQuioment needs.
and funding sources in the delivery of Federal Way's
oolice service. Table VI-6 summarizes this olan. The
City is currently contracting for jail and court with
King County and emergenCV communication services
with Valley Communications Center. There are
oossibilities that the City mav start its own municioal
court and/or emergency communications center during
the six year olanning horizon. Should the City Council
decide to make such changes. a comoanion funding
olan will need to be established.
A total of $4.5 million was set aside from the General
Fund between 1994 and 1996 to orovide funding for
the various ooerating eQuioment. hardware/software.
and oersonnel transitions. At the end of 1997. with the
transition substantially comolete. all maior eQuioment
~ software are in o~ace and~305.000
remaining. The transition budget did not include
funding for a new facility. The City assumed the lease
from King County and continued ooeration at the
same location. In 1998. the City Council allocated the
remaining balance from the start uo fund to the
orooosed new facility.
Facilities
In 1997 the Ci Council a roved a 16.15 million
~ issue for various orojects. inc~
for a oublic safety building. As we are near the eve of
the second anniversary of the ooeration. the new
deoartment has become familiar with the community
exoectations. service consumotion. and deoartment
ooerations. However. it is recognized that the service
orograms and the deoarbnent staffing level are still
evolving and the facilitY needs today may not meet the
needs five years from now. Therefore. it has been
recommended that the design and olanning of the
oublic safety facility be delayed by three to five years.
EauiDment
The City's fiscal oolicy requires reolacement reserves
aooroximating the reolacement cost established for
ooeration eQuioment. This oolicy covers office
eQuioment. vehicles. teleohone systems. and comouter
hardware and software {when it is valued at more than
~has more tþan two years of useful life. and
will require reolacement after its initial useful life).
The requirement aoolies to all eQuioment regardless if
it is acquired through ourchase. lease. donation. or
grant. The annual reolacement reserve budgeted in the
Public Safety Deoartment as Dart of its ooerating cost
is aooroximate~36.000 in ~
1999. The City exoects the reserve will substantially
meet the needs ofthe deoartment's future eQuioment
reolacement. New eQuioment and software needs will
be evaluated and funded within the City's ooerating
budget.
6.5
SCHOOL FACILITIES
This section summarizes information in the Federal
Way School District No. 210, 1994/95 1997/98
Capital Facilities Plan (School Plan) and adopts the
School Plan by reference. This Plan covers the entire
Federal Way School District which includes the City
of Federal Way. portions of the incorporated City of
Kent. CitY of Des Moines. and unincorporated areas of
King County to the east of Interstate 5. The District
provides educational programs to all students who live
in the School District service area, whether they live
in Federal Way, Kent, Des Moines. or unincorporated
King County. A school outside the Federal Way City
limits may provide service to students who live within
the City limits and vice versa.
Revised September 1998
VI-22
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
- ---- - - -------
Prior Year Current Six-Year Projection Six-Year
Item (000 omitted)
Balance 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total
BEGINNING BALANCE ~ 5.109 ~ 5,620 ~ 6,347 S 7,106 ! 7.000 S 5.560 ! 2,465 ~ 5,620
Sources
Department Startup Balance $ 305
Department Capital ( General Fund Operating) $ 222 ! 45 ~ 10 ~ 45 ! 1O ! 110
Replacement Reserve! ~ 304 $ 436 ~ 476 1 482 ! 490 ! 515 1 540 ! 574 ! 3,076
1997 Bond Proceeds for Public SafetY Building ~ 4,500
Interest & Miscellaneous 1 75 ~ 281 1 317 ~ 355 1 350 1 278 1 123 1 1. 705
Sources 1 5.109 1 733 1 757 1 799 1 890 1 875 1 863 1 707 1 4,891
TOTAL fuNDING SOURCES ! 5.109 1 5,842 ! 6,377 1 7,146 1 7,996 ! 7.875 1 6.423 S 3,172 1 10.511
Proposed Facility
Public SafetY Building 1 250 ! 2.000 1 3.500 1 25Q $ 6,000
Eauipment
New Patrol Vehicle w/MDT (Four in 1998) ! 160 1 35 ! 35 $ 705
Replacement Vehicles! 1 621 1 180 1 288 1 180 1 1,269
New DP/Com Hwr/SwrÆauipment 1 62 1 10 1 10 1 10 1 10 1 40
Replacement DP/Com HISwÆauipment' 1 30 1 40 1 80 ! 125 1 125 1 125 ! 525
CountY Wide 800 MHZ Ea. ReplacementZ 1 400 $ 400
Total PS Capital Needs 1 222 1 30 1 40 S 996 1 2,315 1 3,958 1 965 $ 8,304
ENDING BALANCE 1 5.109 $ 5.620 1 6,347 ! 7.106 $ 7,000 1 5,560 1 2.465 ~ 2,207 $ 2,207
s
Table VI-6
f Six-Year C
J:
~
Revised ~~...tember 1998
VI-23
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Inventory of Existing Facilities
Map 1'7-6 shows the location of every school in the
District. Table VI 5 ~ VI- 7 summarizes the Dis-
trict's student capacity. At this time, the District has
sufficient capacity in the existing schools and portable
buildings to house all of the students in the District.
Program Capacity
The School District has established a be& Standard of
Service. similar to LOS. for itself which it calls
"program capacity." The District's program capacity
is based on: 1) the number of students per classroom;
2) the number of classrooms per school; 3) the number
of classes that can be held in each classroom per day;
and 4) other operational conditions.
"Program Capacity" assumes that the average class
will serve the following numbers of students:
Grades-+-3- K 24 Students per classroom
Grades ~ 1-6 27 Students per classroom
Grades 7-12 25 Students per classroom
GA TE* 25 Students per classroom
Special Education 12 Students per classroom
Portables 25 Students per classroom
IEP** 15 Students per classroom
* GATE is the Gifted and Talented Education program
** IEP are the Individual Education Programs
The School District uses portables at many school
sites as an interim measure to house new students until
permanent facilities can be built.
There are other administrative measures that the
School District could use to increase school capacity.
These measures may include double shifting, modified
school calendar, and year-round schooling. These
measures have been used in the District on aft cxl'eri
meffiftl a limited basis, but not District wide.
Forecast of Future Needs -
Student Forecasts
The School District has a relatively sophisticated
methodology for forecasting student population
increases. The methodology has historically projected
student population increases with a 98 percent rate of
accuracy based on the following variables:
. Number of housing units in the District.
. Students moving from one grade to another.
. Students transferring in from other schools.
. Students remaining in their current grade.
Table VI 6 Kb:!K VI-8 describes increased enrollment
through the year ~ 2003. It shows that the School
District's student population will grow steadily every
year with the highest growth in elementary schools.
Table VJ. 5 ~ VI-7
Summary of Existing Facilities Capacities*
CAPACITY 1994 1997 i995 t996 ~ i998 i999 ~
Actual 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Elementary School ClifJlieit) ~ Hffi4 Hffi4 H-;æ4 H-;æ4 H-;æ4 H-;æ4
11.202 11.176 11.150 11.124 11.098 11.582 11.582
Junior High Capaeit) 5;00+ 5;00+ 5;00+ 5;00+ 5;00+ 5;00+ 5;00+
4,721 4.721 4.721 4.721 4.721 4.721 4,721
Senior High CltJ'lieit) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
3,905 3.905 3.905 3.905 4.005 4,005 4.005
TOTAL Clipaeit) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ ~
19,828 19.802 19.776 19.750 19.824 20.308 20.308
'NOTE: These capacities are for buildings only and do not include portable classrooms. These capacities are based on the maximum use of the buildings.
Revised September 1998
VI-24
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Table VI 6 ~ VI-8
Federal Way School District Student Forecast
ENROLLMENT ACTUAL :1995 ~ ~ i998 ¥)99 ~
(FTE) i994 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Elementary ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
11.099 11.329 11.545 11.702 II. 778 11.847 12.046
Junior High 4;fiFf 4f1B 4;8H ~ 4;8e 4;8-13 ~
5.144 5.040 5.014 5.077 5.299 5.533 5.554
Senior High ~ ~ ~ 4;B5 4;HB ~ 4;393-
4.372 4.607 4.762 4.862 4.763 4.739 4.805
TOTAL ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
20.615 20.976 21.321 21.641 21.840 22.119 22.405
The District has compared their existing school
capacity with their growth forecasts ftftd ~oncIuded
that they ';lÍll b~ operating at a deficit at all sdiool
Ie.. cIs by th~ )'CM 200 1. Th~ District will need to öse
portftbles to ae~ommoðate the ftfttieipated "önhoösed"
sttH:ient popölation. The District may also be required
t6 böild n~.f seftððls as -.vcll. The deficit in pennanent
capacity will be mitigated by additional portable
purchases for the next six years. The District is plan-
ning to add one elementary school and increase the
capacity at Harry S. Truman High School with
modernization. In addition. the District is currently
executing a Study and Survey of all facilities. This
Study and Survey will provide direction for long range
planning of future facilities to achieve the objectives
of the District Learning Plan and anticipated increases
in student population.
Location and Capacity of New and
Improved School Facilities
No ne'N schools, ftftd only a few One new elementary
school and one senior high school expansions-, are
planned for the District over the next six years.4=hese
limited sehool f1ieilities imprð"..~m~ftts are li:rt~d
bdo'N, along -¡¡ith their addresses ftftd pl'6gram
eapadties. Of the sehðð13li3te.d belo'w, only Mer~dith
lIill Elementary is still under eonstm~tion ftftð is
s~hedöled to open in S~ptember of 1995. Beeaöse of
its opening date, Meredith Ilill is listed as existing
eapaeity in 1995. The bödget li:rt~d for the other
sehððls is to finish sehools that M~ already open and
op~rating. Scheduled improvements are:
.
.
.
.
.
.
Green Gables Elementary (Elementary #21)
326Ø7 47th Avenöe Soöth"nest
EftOCrprÎ3~ Elementary (Elem~ntary #22)
351 Ð 1 5th Avenue South\yest
Harry S. Truman High School
(Modernization and Expansion) 31455 28th
Avenue South
Meredith Ilill Elementttry (Elemeli"tftr)' #23)
5830 South 30Ðth Street
Elementary #24. site to be detennined
Saghalk Jr. Iligh (.h. IIigh #6)
33914 19th Avenöe South'.yest
Mark Twain J3kmcntM)
2450 Sentth StM Lake Road
Kilo Jr. IIigh
4400 South 308th Street
~~~ Existing schools are @! identified in Map VI-6
~ è:."{s'Ií~~,~~i~j:~4~Feþð$~:fte"8 sëh66~ .
Revised September 1998
VI-25
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Finance Plan
Table VI 7 ~ VI-9 describes the School District's
six year finance plan to support the school
construction. The table identifies $26,215,517
$12.714.303 avail-able from secure funding sources
and an additional $38,999,265 $22.095.133
anticipated from other funding sources between +995-
1998 and ~ 2003. These funds will more than
cover $26,215,517 $29.596.891 in planned project
costs to the year ~ 2003.
The School Plan states that State matching funds and
impact mitigation fees, if realized, will be used to
decrease the need for future bonds or used on addi-
tional capital fund projects. The School Plan currently
covers the years +995- 1998 - WOO 2003. The School
Plan and accompanying six year finance plan will be
updated annually by the School District. This will
bring the plan into full compliance with GMA
requirements.
6.7 WATER SYSTEMS
This section summarizes the Lakehaven Utility
District's 1991 Comprehensive Water System Plan
while providing up-to-date information where
warranted. Map VI- 7 shows the District's water
service area boundary. Other purveyors provide water
to portions of the District. The City of Tacoma, for
example, serves an area on the west side ofthe
District. Highline Water District serves a small
portion of the District on the north side. The ffiwft
City of Milton serves a small area on the south side of
the District that is within the ffiwft City of Milton
limits. Areas on the east side ofI-5 within the City
limits of Auburn and Pacific receive water from the
District by agreement with the cities. These areas are
at a higher elevation than the valley cities can cost
effectively serve. The District has begun a major
update of the plan that should be completed in 1998.
The 1981 Plan. and anv future amendments. are
incorporated into this Plan by reference.
Inventory of Existing Facilities
The District's wells, storage, and major components
of the distribution system are located on Map VI-8.
Other facilities are described in the following sections.
Interties
Interties connect Lakehaven's system with adjoining
'...ater dimiet3 systems of other utilities. Interties
allow the District to buy or sell water with adjoining
distriets utilities and are an essential back-up which
provide enhanced system reliability. Interties have
been installed at m seven different locations with
three of the adjacent water purveyors. The water
mains for the other pHrveyors on the ea3t and sottth
are loeated a signifieant distance ft"Nay from the
Distriet' s mains. In addition, theN; is a large differenee
in elevation vAiieh makes it possible to flot'( only in
the direction a'Yia)" Ífðm the District, and 'Nould
requiN; installation of eonffðl valves to eðntn~l the
pressure. Not all interties allow two-way flow. Details
of these interties are shown below:
. An intertie is installed on Sottth\vest SW 325th
Street near 35th Avenue Southwest SW between
the District and the City of Tacoma system and
serves as an emergency supply to Tacoma.
. An intertie has been installed on Sðtrth...;cst SW
349th Street near 30th Avenue Soutk.,'est SW
between the District and the City of Tacoma
system. This intertie was enhanced in 1991 by the
construction of a control valve station to allow
full-time supply by Tacoma to a ofte square mile
segment of the District's system, including Tank
No.3 in the southwest comer of the Distriet.
. A third intertie with the City of Tacoma is being
was added at 15th Avenue SW and SW 356th
Street to provide an additional full-time supply by
Tacoma to the District's system. a reduftdant
sottree to the one square milt; area served full time
by Tacoma. This intertic ...¡¡ll also allo'.y ror
possible expansion of the area no',( served by
Taeoma '¡¡Mer.
Revised September 1998
VI-27
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Table VI 71iJ1.!A VI-9
School Funding Plan
SECURED FUNDING SOURCES .¡J}% -1-996 +9W- ¥J93 -1-999 ~ TOTAL
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
1991 Befttl & Ifttere3t $6,512,179 $6,512,179
Impact Fees (I) ~ $700.000 $23.754 $~
$723,754
Ci~ Iftterleeal FHIIIIs $929,338 $929,338
Land Sale Funds (2) $2,599,99 $lS9,999 $788,028 $250.000 $68,191 $199,999
$2,225.000 $1.791.832 $5.123.051
State Match Funds (3) $9,775,999 $8,575,999 $811.898 $18,359,999
$4,950,600 $ U 05,000 $6,687.498
TOTAL $17,499,517 58,72S,999 51.623.680 5250.000 568.191 52~,21S,517
57.175.600 53.596,832 512,714,303
Table VI 7 ~ VI-9
School Funding Plan - Continued
UNSECURED FuNDING SOURCES 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 TOTAL
State Match Funds (6) $2,822,919 $2,822,919
$4,800.000 $4,800.000
Bond or Levy Funds (4) $31,999,999 $31,999,999
$15,000.000 $15.000.000
Land Fund Sales (7) $1,000,000 $1,000,000
Mitigatiell Impact Fees (5) $1,965,981 $1,965,981
$1.295.133 51.295.133
TOTAL $34,888,993 534,888,993
522.095.133 522.095.133
Revised September 1998
VI-28
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Table VI 7~ VI-9
School Funding Plan - Continued
NEW SCHOOLS i9% i996 ~ m& +999 ~ TOTAL
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
Creeft Ctthles (Eleflleftt~ 1/21) $299,689 ~
Efttel'l'rise (Eleflleftatry 1/22) $818,693 ~
Meretlith Hill (Eleflleft~ 1/23) $5,213,131 $5,213,131
811gltltlie (Jr. lIiglt 1/6) $929,338 ~
New Elementary Site (II) $600.000 $600.000
New Elementary School (#24) $6.300.000 $4.200.000 $10.500.000
MODERNIZA nONS
M8I'k Tn lIift EIefllefttll1') ~ $3.233.680 $2.155.787 ~
Truman Senior High (alternative) $5.389.467
Kile Jr. lIiglt ~ ~
TEMPORARY FACILITIES
Portables ill $178,415 $1.222.624 $623.680 $561.312 ~
$2.307.616
Federal Way Academv (10) $374.208 $374.208
OTHER
8)!erts Fieltls Lak6~fefllerilll $1,265,196 $1,265,196
Safety Improvements (9) $4.825.600 $4.825.600
Resel"\ e Flleilit} IfII)!1'6. ellleflt:i $8,5;5,999 $8,575,999 $17,159,999
Technology System Improvements
Library System $500.000 $650.000 $650.000 $1.800.000
Technology System Improvements
MIS Project $1.600.000 $600.000 $100.000 $2.300.000
Facilities Department $250,000 $159,999 $250.000 $250.000 $250.000 $250.000 $199,999
$250.000 $1.500.000
TOTAL $17,199,517 $8,725,999 $1.623.680 $250.000 $10.344.992 $6.605.787 $26,215,517
$7.I 75.600 $3.596.832 $29.596.891
Notes: I) These fees "II. e 8eell eðlleete<l ill eølell<lar ) ear 1995 Ie dele are currently being held in a King County and City of Federal Way impact fee account. and will be available
for use by the District for system improvements. 2) These funds come from various sales ofland and are set aside for estimated expenditures. 3) Guaranteed State match
reimbursements. 4) These funds, if secured, will be used for modernization of schools. 5) Cølelliatiell. ell ¡m lllet úe e.timMe. are e611tøille<l ill tke 1991.'1995 3e"661 <li.lfiet l11III
These are projected fees based u )On known residential development in the District over the next six years. 6) These funds are lelltl!li. III) ølI6tte<l projected state matching funds. 11
These funds are proiected land sale income. 8) These fees represent the cost of purchasing and siting new )Ortables. 9) These projects have been approved by the Board of
Directors and cover most schools. These projects do not increase capacity. 10) Federal Way Academy is a iunior high program that will increase capacity at one junior high site.
Il) This site is larger than 10 acres.
Revised September 1998
VI-31
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
.
One intertie, located on Pacific Highway South at
South 276th Street extended, has been installed
between Lakehaven and Highline Water District.
This intertie can provide emergency water to the
Highline District.
. An intertie between Highline Water District and
the Lakehaven system is insta11ed at Pacific
Highway South at about South 274th Street. This
intertie eotlld operate can flow in either direction
since the systems on both sides of the intertie
operate at a 490 foot system head.
. An intertie is insta11ed on Marine View Drive near
the boundary between Highline Water District and
the Lakehaven system at South 252nd Street. This
intertie can serve in both directions since both
systems opefftte at or nCfti' a 334 foot system head
provide emergency water to the Highline District.
. An intertie has also been constructed with the
Town of Milton's water system, but due to signifi-
cant differences in head between the two systems
(450 feet, LUD vs. 330 feet, Milton), water is only
provided to Milton on an emergency basis.
Forecast of Future Needs
The 1991 Water System Plan estimates future need by
analyzing existing water consumption patterns on a
daily, seasonal, and yearly basis. The District converts
gross water consumption numbers values into per
capita consumption in ga11ons per day. Average per
capita water consumption in the District is was
projected to be approximately 114 ga11ons per day in
1993 and 1994. This figure multiplied times .by
projected population growth, provides a rough
estimate of the future demand for water. Recently,
These numbers have been were reduced slightly to
account for the reduction in water consumption
associated with the District's water conservation
program. In addition, the gl'6vlth rate in the Distriet
has slowed significantly. In 1990, thc District The
Plan~assum~ a three percent annual growth
rate through 1995 and a two percent rate through
2000. In 1994, the District experienced a 1.64 pereent
increase in the number of-NateI' mcters insta11eð.
Despite their relttti. ely successful eonservation
program and lov.er than antieipated growth, the
Lakehlf'.'en Utility Distriet has a higher demttftd fur
water than it has in available supply. Eaeh year, the
District pumps more ",vater out of its aquifers than is
replenished by nttfl1ral aquifer recharge. As a eonse
quenee, the viater levels in some of the Distriet's
aquifers are going dovtn.
If the District is unable to seeure additional water
resourees in the nefti' mmre, it may be foreed to stop
issuing eertifieates of,,-"ater If'ltlÍlability. That action
would have significant impacts on the local eeonom)'
and economic de-,elopmeftt efforts,
Location of Expanded And
Improved Facilities
The District has programmed a number of system
improvements to eliminate maintain the existing
system defieiendes, conserve water, develop water
sources, drill we11s, add storage, and expand
distribution. These improvements are summarized
below.
Second Supply Pipeline
The District is currently involved in developing other
sources of water. The most significant effort is the
Second Supply Pipeline (formerly ca11ed Pipeline 5).
This prcjeet is tt6s01utel)' critical to the long term
"-/ater needs in Federal Way and to stabilize the -¡¡ateI'
lc-;eI in the aquifers. Based on the 1994 pipeline
construction schedule, the District would access the
pipeline at two locations. One connection facility is
proposed in the vicinity of Military Road and the
Bonneville Administration Power Line. This faeility
would add &oom 4.62 or 5.87 million ga11ons per day
(mgd) to the Distriet, depending on the final
eonttaeted a11oetttion. The second connection facility
would be located at the We11 No. 19 site. These
facilities together would add from 4.62 to 5.87 million
ga11ons per day (mgd} to the District's supply
depending on the final contracted a11ocation. It should
be noted however, water available from the Second
Supply Pipeline is conditioned upon adequate in-
Revised September 1998
VI-32
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
stream flows Imd may not b~ 8:ppt'6priat~ 8:3 8: primary
'.vater 30tlrCe which the expansion of storage behind
Howard Hansen Dam wiil provide.
The City should carefully monitor progress on all of
these projects, Itftd partieuIMI)' on the; se;eond supply
pipeline project, to ensure that th~ City has water will
be available to meet future needs as identified in this
Plan.
Wells
The District currently has sufficient well capacity to
accommodate peak water demands for future growth
through the near-term. For ~xampk, the; Dhtriet has
W~ll No. 26 at th~ Tank No. 3 sit~ whi~h has not yet
been deo/doped, bttt is ft'iailable for fttmre de-. clop
ment. This ...'ell has the potential ~apaeit). of about
600 CPl\{. Th~ aql:1if~r has not be~n positively identi
fied. This \vell wol:1ld not aetuall) add any more S\:1p
ply to th~ '.vater system due to limited aquifer ~ap8:
e:Ït}', but cotlld be used for replaeement of another ~tell
in the event that one of the exi3ting wclls should fail.
The answer to future water demand is not merely
through drilling more wells. Additional wells are
needed to meet summer peak demands. It is well
documented, however, that the existing wells have the
pumping capacity to produce more water than is
available from local aquifers. Therefore, the District is
planning several projects to increase supplies from
outside the District, thereby allowing local aquifers to
recharge and increase recovery during the peak
summer season. The problem is declining levds in the
aquifer and the ~urrent inability for the aquifer tð keep
pa~~ -.lÍth th~ demttftd for '.vater.
Source Treatment
The 1991 Water System Plan identifies a potential
need for a water treatment plant in the near future. The
decision to build the provide treatment plant will
depend to some extent on legal interpretation of
Federal and State drinking water laws.
A more important concern relates to adding chlorine
to the drinking water. The addition of chlorine to the
existing well water will precipitate iron/manganese
from the water and cause staining of fixtures and
clothes if the iron/manganese concentration is not
reduced before chlorination. A treatment strategy
would probably provide for removal of iron and
manganese compounds together with disinfection by
chlorine. The District will be providing corrosion
control. disinfection. and sequestering of iron and
manganese at all of its water sources. In the event
wells containing iron/manganese above Federal limits
are needed for future supply needs. treatment will be
provided at those sources.
Storage Improvements
According to the Distriet 1991 Water Svstem Plan.
storage is adequate at this time. Calculations show that
the 538 pressure zone will likely require additional
storage in the next few years to meet future demand
needs. The District's updated water system plan will
determine when and where this new storage should be
located.
Water Conservation Measures
The District is committed to implementing aggressive
water conservation measures to reduce per capita
water consumption. These include programs such as
public information campaigns, rate adjustments to
reduce summer and peak day consumption, and every
third- day lawn watering calendars. At present, the
conservation program is voluntary, but it mft) become
certain mandatory curtailment measure may be imple-
mented in the future if extreme conditions warrant
such measures.
The District will also work with the City to introduce
water conservation measures by amending the zoning
and building codes. These measures could include a
requirement for low flow showerheads and toilets,
landscaping with reduced irrigation needs, and use of
reclaimed water for irrigation.
Finance Plan
The District has identified several significant capital
improvement projects in its water systems plan. The
Revised September 1 998
VI.33
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
general description and scheduling of these projects is
included in the Lakehaven Utility District's Capital
Improvement Program for the years 1995 ~O()4 1998-
2007 (Table VI 8la VI-IO). The District has
approximately $37 milfu;'ñin reserve to be utilized for
capital projects. In addition to this money. the District
has depreciation. interest income. assessment income.
and connection charge monies that it can utilize for
funding their Capital Improvement Plan (CIP).
Additionally. the district can borrow money or
increase rates when necessary to best meet the needs
of its customers. The District has utilized a very
conservative approach in budgeting for the CIP by
utilizing the growth figures provided by the
jurisdictions within the districts. even though growth
over the past six years has been substantially less than
planned for in the CIP (actual growth has been one
percent per year). If growth continues as it has over
the past six Years. construction of all projects listed in
the CIP may be unnecessary. The District will provide
facilities as necessary to support growth within its
service area. The schedule and project costs will be
updated annually through the District's budget and
capital improvement program process.
6.8 SEWER SYSTEMS
The existing Sewer Wastewater Comprehensive Plan
was originally adopted in 1983. Since being adopted,
the Plan has been updated amended on numerous
occasions. The last amendment was approved by King
County early in +988 1990. The Lakehaven Utility
District has iftðieaœð tfl.ftt the eðmpreheftsive; phm .vill
gð threögh begun a major update ift fall 1995, and
iMe 1996. ofthe Plan that should be completed by the
end of 1998. +hat The 1983 Plan, and any future
amendments, are incorporated into this Plan by
reference.
The Lakehaven Utility District serves an area that
includes the unincorporated areas east and north of the
existing City limits of Federal Way. Map VI-9
ðese;ribes shows the District's sewer service area as
v.'ell as the lðeal sef\'ie;e; areas vÚthift the District.
Inventory of Existing Facilities
The sanitary sewer system is comprised of three major
components; the trunk collection system, the pump
station system, and the treatment plants. The trunk
system collects sewage from the lðeal service MetiS
drainage basins and conveys it to the treatment plant
using primarily by gravity flow. In areas where using
gravity flow is not possible, pump stations and force
mains are used to pump the sewage to a location
where gravity flow can be used. Map VI-IO describes
the location of these components of the sanitary sewer
system.
The District currently has the capacity in all the major
components of the system to accommodate the
existing demand for service.
Forecast of Future Needs
The District estimates that during the non-irrigation
months (typically November through March),
domestic sewage flows are normally equal to about 90
percent of the domestic water demand. On a house-
hold basis, the unit rate has been estimated at 225
gallons per day. It is estimated that commercial land
use generates approximately 700 gallons per day per
acre of land. When these sewer system use rates are
applied to estimates of future commercial land and
household counts, the District can calculate the size
and location of additions and expansions to the sewer
system.
Wastewater generation or flow is directly related to
ultimate land use. The District does not anticipate any
enlargement of the existing treatment plants until well
after the year 2001. This assumption is based on the
built-out nature of the area served by the Redondo
plant and the fact that the Lakota plant is currently
operating at less than 40 percent of its designed
capacity.
Revised September 1998
VI-34
(/
0)
~
'õ
<a
LL
ëõ
....
"5.
<a
U
I
c
<a
õ:
0)
>
ëii
c
0)
.r:
0)
5-
E
0
u
>
<a
:s:
i
..;
"0
0)
u..
j:
fJ ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ¡ ~ ~ re ~ ffi * ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
i~ !. ~
Þ' i~ !. ~ ffi
ëb
~~
~ft
~ß i~ ¥. ~
~
s
i~ !. ~ ffi
~
~
i~ ! ~
¡
~~ ! ~ ffi
t
~~ ' $ ~
. ~
~
i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ffi
~ ~ ~ ~ * ~ i ~ rn * ~ * re *
~t ~~
,
. ~I ~ * * ~ ~ ~ ~ re ~ ~ $
re ~ "" ~ * ~
¡
.
~
( :
~ ¡~
~ ~ ~~
~
I ( " ~~ '
~ 5 ' ~
~ , ¡.
~' . 'I> . ~'
I ( )
, ' L ¡ S ( I ,. i.. I
t I ~ I ~; , I I , , , i . , ,
, :¡¡ i ,g ( :
, ; !
.1= :¡¡ , ~ ,~( : ¡ ,
:~ ~ ( ~ ,
¡é- :" ; ¡
¡ ; (þ c ¡ , ¡ I :
~
..c
E
0)
....
C-
O)
en
"0
0)
(/
'>
0)
a:
It')
"?
:>
ro
m
m
...
II)
Q)
;g
'(3
co
I!-
¡¡;
....
ïi
co
u
I
c
co
1i:
Q)
>
'¡¡¡
c
Q)
J::.
Q)
Ci
E
0
u
>-
CO
~
¡¡;
:¡¡
'tI
Q)
u..
IJ g; ~ * m $ ; * I rn m ~ * ~ ~ I I ~ ~ I
i~ ~ * * ,
i~ ~ ! ~ !
i~ ~ ~ ~ ! ,
i~ ~ * ~ æ ,
I~ ~ * ~ !
!~ !. ~ ~ !. * ¡
I~ $ ! ffl ffl $ * ! ffl
~~ * m ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~
~~ g; ~ * * rn ! $ * ~ ! ffl
~J g; $
~ ~ b
Ií ~
' é
~ ~
f : ' ;:>.. .
: ¡.. .
~ . ' ~ ¡ . ,
¡ I c ~ i~ c ~ :¡.. ~ 5 ~
¡ .
~ ~ I I> ! '1= cD
: ! c J : ' è 1
' ~. : ¡
:R : J . ~ I
: ; è (I' : \ t ¡ C ; ~ t' c
co
r;>
:>
00
en
en
~
:¡¡
.c
E
Q)
....
c
CD
(f
'tI
Q)
II)
":;
Q)
cr:
Federc.. oay Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Tahle~ VI-1O
Lakehaven Utility District
1998-2007 Caoital Imorovements Projects Summarv - Water Deoartnum.11in $000'8)
Pre 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 - 2007 TOTAL
PROJECT TITLE 1998 Hudeet Est. Est. Est. Est Est. PROJECI' COSTS
SOURCE OF SUPPLY
ASR Testing ]63,5 ]63.5 327,0
OASIS 1.100,0 1.090,0 1710,0 2.900,0
Source Water Treatment - Well ]9A 32.5 1.0 892,0 5]4,0 300,0 1.739,5
Source Water Treatment - Well 9 ]7,0 66,0 604,0 ]3,0 700,0
Well ]5/]5A E]ectrica] UDgrades 3.4 150,0 153.4
Well ]6 UDgrade 25,0 25.0
Well 18 E]ectrical UDgrade 90,0 90,0
Well 25 Chlorination Station 90,0 90,0
WeJI 29 Site Deve]oDment Ph III 11 0.1 967,0 459,0 1.536,1
TOTAL SOURCE OF SUPPLY 163.0 1.312.5 2.358.5 1.627.0 1.390.0 710.0 0.0 7,561.0
MA1N S
Auburn Intertie 41.9 1465.3 582,1 2.089,3
23rd Ave S Water Main Relocation 3.3 ]6,5 ]94,8 30.4 245,0
Military Rd S Water Main Re]ocation 10,0 1.5 ] 1.5
S 3 ]2th St Water Main Relocation 33,6 374,7 30,2 438.5
S 356th Water Main Relocation Ph II 5,0 5,0 490,0 500,0
SW 356th St Water Main Relocation 183.4 30,0 213.4
Revised September 1998
VI-37
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Pre 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 - 2007 TOTAL
PROJECT TITLE 1998 Budeet Est. Est. Est. Est Est. PROJECT COSTS
S 304th St/Militarv Rd W,M. Relocation 1.0 86.5 87,5
SR161 W,M, Relocation: 360th-384th 90,0 935,0 1.025,0
295th & 12th Ave SW W.M, Replacement 95,0 95,0
35th Ave & S 344th St Replacement 90,0 90,0
Redondo WWTP Water Main Replacement 50,0 50,0
S 344th/345th St Water Main Replacement 350,0 350,0
18th PI S Water Main Replacement 90,0 90.0
WD 56 DUD #3 Replacement 61.9 8,7 704,9 80,0 855.5
S 334th & 18th Ave Water Main Tie 40,0 40.0
Seatac Mall Tie 100,0 100,0
S 344th. lith Ave to Pac Hwv S W,M, Ext 160,0 160,0
12th PI & SW 304th Transmission Main Ext. 20,7 0,5 514,8 64,0 600,0
16th SW and SW 304th Transmission Ext. 220,0 220,0
Seattle Intertie 130,0 970,0 1.100,0
Pipeline 5 Construction Contribution 1.800,0 1.800,0 9.000,0 12.600,0
Oversizing Payments 55,0 50,0 50,0 50,0 50,0 50,0 250,0 555,0
Distribution Improvements 300,0 900,0 1.000.0 1.100,0 7.000.0 10.300,0
Future Relocations/Roads 200,0 600,0 650.0 700,0 4.250,0 6.400,0
TOTAL MAINS 410.8 2.873.7 3.294.7 2.694.4 4.210.0 3.650.0 21.082.1 38.215.7
Reviseð ~ ":Jtember 1998
VI-38
Fedel. lay Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Pre 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 - 2007 TOTAL
PROJECT TITLE 1998 Budeet Est. Est. Est. Est Est. PROJECf COSTS
PUMPING
33Th Booster Electrical Upgrade 90,0 90,0
Telemetrv System Upgrade 235,0 45.7 30,7 30,7 30,7 30,7 403,5
Pump Station & Well Upgrades 100,0 200,0 125,0 150,0 1,750,0 2.325,0
TOTAL PUMPING 235.0 135.7 130.7 230.7 155.7 180.7 1.750.0 2,818.5
INTANGIBLES
Pipeline 5 Connection 11.6 1.0 108,0 689,8 131.0 941.4
Spoils Disposal Site 13,0 122,0 135,0
Corrosion Control Feasibility Study 126,9 31.4 158,3
Enhanced Natural Aquifer Recharge 2,8 50,0 300,0 200,0 50,0 200,0 550,0 "1.352,8
Future Water Complan Updates 280,8 280,8
Lakehaven Utility District Water Complan 182,0 230,0 80,0 492,0
Administration Building Remodel 50,0 175,0 225.0
MIS Projects 27.0 115,O 142.0
TOTAL OTHER INTANGIBLES 413.3 724.4 488.0 889.8 181.0 200.0 830.8 3.727.3
REp AIRIREHABILIT A TION
Repair/Rehab Reserve 500,0 500,0 1,000,0 1.l00,O 1,200,0 7.500,0 11,800,0
TOTAL REPAIRIREHAB 0.0 500.0 500.0 1.000.0 1.100.0 1.200.0 7,500.0 11.800.0
TOTAL WATERCIP 1.222.1 5,546.3 6,771.9 6,441.9 7,036.7 5,940.7 31,162.9 64,122.5
Revised September 1998
VI-39
federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital facilities
Location and Capacities of Future
Facilities
The District develops a capital improvement projects
(CIP) summary as a part of the annual district budget
process. This CIP lists individual capital projects for
the succeeding 10 year time frame. The CIP prioritizes
the projects according to the system needs. Also
included in this list of projects are the ones that are
continued from previous years, A list of these capital
projects can be found in the District's Capital
Improvement Program 1995 2004 1998 - 2007 (Table
VI 9 ~ VI-II).
Finance Plan
The District updates its capital improvement program
annually as part of the District's budget process. For
specific information on the Finance Plan, please refer
to the District's most recent capital improvements
program for revenue and cost information related to
the District's proposed capital projects. The District
has approximately $37 million in reserve to be utilized
for capital proiects. In addition to this money. the
District has depreciation. interest income. assessment
income. and connection charge monies that it can
utilize for funding their Capital Improvement Plan
(CIP). Additionally. the district can borrow money or
increase rates when necessary to best meet the needs
of its customers. The District has utilized a very
conservative approach in budgeting for the CIP by
utilizing the growth figures provided by the
iurisdictions within the districts. even though growth
over the past six years has been substantially less than
planned for in the CIP (actual growth has been one
percent per year). If growth continues as it has over
the past six years. construction of all proiects listed in
the CIP may be unnecessary. The District will provide
facilities as necessary to support growth within its
service area.
6.9
FIRE FACILITIES
This section summarizes the King Cðtinty Fire; Pro
tediðn Distrie;t No. 39 Federal Way Fire Department,
Long Range Plan (The Fire Plan), The Fire Di3t:riet
Department provides service to the entire City and
surrounding unincorporated area. Services include fire
suppression, fire prevention (building inspection and
public information), emergency medical, and
communications center for 911 emergency calls. The
Fire Plan identifies and programs improvements that
are necessary to maintain existing service standards
and to meet the needs of future residents and
businesses. The Distrkt's Department's Fire Plan, and
future updates, are adopted by reference in this Plan.
The Fire Distriet Department provides fire suppres-
sion service to the entire City. In order to do this, the
Distriet Department has adopted the following LOS
standards:
. An average emergency response time of five less
than six minutes 80 percent of the time.
. Each emergency response should include a
minimum of one fire fighting vehicle and three
fully-equipped and fully-trained crew members.
. The Fire Distriet Department provides a full
building inspection service for fire code
compliance.
The Distrkt Department is currently providing service
which is generally consistent with its adopted LOS
standards.
The Fire Di3triet Department also depends on having
adequate water pressure available in fire hydrants to
extinguish fires. The Distriet Department works with
the Lakehaven Utility District to ensure that adequate
fire flow is always available. The Water System Plan
analyzes "fire flow" and programs improvements to
the water system to ensure that sufficient water is
available for fire suppression.
Inventory and Capacity of
Existing Facilities
The Distriet Department has two major types of
capital facilities. One is fire stations and the other is
capital investment in equipment and, in particular, fire
engines. The Di3t:riet's Department's fire stations are
shown on Map VI-II.
Revised September 1998
VI-42
III
CD
~
'(3
m
u.
iij
....
'is.
m
U
I
c:
m
¡¡:
CD
>
'0;
c:
CD
.c::
CD
a.
E
0
u
>
m
~
iij
:¡¡
"0
CD
U.
fÆ ~ ! I æ i , Cþ ~ * ~ æ æ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ !
* ~ æ !
i~
i~ * , æ ~ ~
,
ë * , æ
~ i~ ~
'[
i~ * , æ ~ ~ *
* ' æ ~ *
~ I~
;
C~
* ! æ ~ ~ ~
!~
(
e * , æ æ !. ~
.~ ~~
~
* ~ ~ ~ æ æ I ~ ~
~~
;
J !~ * ! * * ~ æ ~ ~ * ~
.
.
ç ~j * ! ~ ~ i , ~, ~ * ~ ~ æ "" ~ ~
.
ã
f
~ (
,; cp lb
i . l i
':> i ¡ ~
) ¡¡ E
~ ; : : ¡;' : i
I ~ . IË ;p ;
~ : I
ß ' . . e-. ! '
¡ . Ii ¡ \.
'!I ~ !~ ¡~ ! Ip '~
¡ c ! : ~ ~ i ¡ ¡~ ¡ ( c
e-. ; ! ¡~ l:-
i ~ I . : ~b ( I ~ ; ¡þ . ~
:¡¡
J:I
E
CD
....
Co
CD
en
"0
CD
III
'>
CD
a:
M
"t
;;
i:
ex¡
m
m
~
'"
Q)
~
'õ
'"
u.
õi
....
'5.
'"
u
I
C
'"
ë:
Q)
>
ïii
c
Q)
..c
Q)
5-
E
0
u
>-
.,
.J
Q;
"C
Q)
U.
f $ * ~ !. I I , I % ~
J
I~ ~. I
i~ re ~ ~ !.
m~ ~ !
i;j ~
æ ~ !
I~
~;j ~ I
~~ ! ~
~;j ~ ~ ~ ! ~
~~ * ~ ffi ~
~j
ß
~ l
I ¡, t
. , C ¡ I ~ ¡ :
~
( ¡
! . (
¿ ~. ~
; :
~
~ ¿ rl . ~
~ .¡ ~ d
'<t
-<r
:>
0)
m
m
.....
Q;
.c
E
Q)
....
0-
Q)
en
"C
Q)
'"
'>
Q)
a:
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Table fBIJlfJl VI-ll
Lakehaven Utility District
1998-2007 Capital Improvements Projects Summa" - Wastewater Department (in $OOO's)
Pre 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003-2007 TOTALPROJECf
PROJECf TITLE 1998 Budl!et Est. Est. Est. Est. Est COSTS
MAIN S
Weyerhaeuser Sewer Extension 71.0 554,5 108,5 734,0
Oversizing Payments 19,0 50,0 50,0 50,0 50,0 50,0 250,0 519,0
Meredith 2 Siohon Uograde 66.5 53.1 119,6
Auburn-Redondo Siohon 22,0 238,9 260,5 521.4
Lower Woodmont Side - (S) 193,2 188,0 361.2
Pumo Station 33 Force Main 15,0 15,0 15,0 15,0 60,0
TOTAL MAINs 371. 7 1099.5 434.0 65.0 65.0 50.0 250.0 2.335.2
PUMPING
Pumo Station 6 Rehabilitation 60,1 470.1 530.2
Purno Station 22 Detention Vault 28,0 452,0 480,0
Purno Station Fuel Tank Reolacement 203,7 30,5 434.2
TOTAL PUMPING 291.8 952.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.244.4
TREATMENT
. Redondo WWTP Disinfection Uograde 8,0 402,1 734,5 1.144,6
Lakota WWTP Disinfection Uograde 8,0 423.5 792,5 1.224,0
Lakota Pri. Scum Tank Modification 46,2 42,7 88.9
Stonnwater Decant Facility 67,6 14,7 82.3
Revised c::"otember 1998
VI-45
Fede. -, Nay Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Pre 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003-2007 TOTAL PROJECT
PROJECT TITLE 1998 Bud2et Est. Est. Est. Est. Est COSTS
Water Reuse and Reclamation 4,0 100.3 353,2 452,9 205.3 1,115.7
Composting Facility 17.3 32.4 933,2 913,0 913,0 2.808.9
Redondo Noise Abatement 1.0 9,2 9.3 19.5
Redondo Debris Retaining Wall 32,3 101.9 134.2
Lakota Grit Unit Modifications 60.0 90/0 150.0
TOTAL TREATMENT 70.6 1.243.2 2,970.1 1,365.9 1,118.3 0.0 0.0 6.768.1
OTHER INTANGIBLES
Sewer Comp Plan Update 94,7 262,0 37,0 264.0 657.7
Main Office Modifications 50.0 175,0 225,0
MIS Projects 27.0 115.0 142,0
PS 35 APU Building & Electrical 41.0 85,2 126.2
Pump Station 9 Access Relocation 75,8 6,5 82,3
TOTAL OTHER INTANGIBLES 288.5 643.7 37.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 264.0 1,233.2
REp AlRIREHABILIT A TION
Repair/Rehab Reserve (Sewer Const) 400,0 200,0 200,0 200,0 200,0 200,0 1.000,0 2.400,0
TOTAL REPAIR/REHAB 400.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 1.000.0 2.400.0
TOTAL SEWER CIP 1.422.6 4.139.0 3.641.1 1.630.9 1.383.3 250.0 1.514.0 13.980.9
Revised September 1998
VI-46
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Forecast of Future Needs
From 1986 through +99+ 1992, emergency responses
increased at an average annual rate of over nine eight
percent. In 1990, public education efforts included
911 use/abuse training. The increases in call volume
during 1993 and 1994 leveled off with 1994 volume
increasing only 1.5 percent from the 1992 level. It is
unknown. however. althðugh it is unknð".Vft how
much, if any, effect the 911 public education effort
had on actual call volumes. Fire related ineidents
deereased during the 1999's, ..-hile eal13 fðr emer
geney medieal services haole inerelt1ed. In 1995 and
1996. calls for service again increased at an average
rate of 8.1 percent. Emergency medical incidents have
increased more rapidly than non-medical incidents.
During the 1990's. structure fires have declined. The
challenge for the Fire Distriet Department will be to
manage fixed-cost investments, such as new stations,
and to be flexible in its ability to meet fluctuating call
volumes.
Location and Capacity of Expanded
or New Facilities
During 1994 and 1995, Fire Distriet #39 pM'tieipated
in a sft1dy tð eonsider the reasibilit) ðf consolidating
-.-lith the fuur fire districts tð the north, to'liM'd SeaTae
and Burien. Based on thc results of that sIDdy, Distriet
#39 and the t'wð distriets in the vieinity ðfBurien and
SeaTae dedded tð begin ..ðrking on a eðnsðlidation
pre gram. that wðuld have them merge administrati-iely
in the HeM' term and ðperatiðnally ð ,'er the next few
years-.
This eonsðlidation effurt is sigflifteant for a -iM'iety ðf
reaSðns, nðt the least ðf vthieh is the loeatiðn of the
District' s fire statiðns. Based ðft hð.v the eðnsolida
tion proeeeds, the Distriet may deeide to maintain the
exi8ting nðrth end stations. Altemath'ely, they may
deeide its best 1ð deeðmmissiðn ðne ðr both ðf them in
f8:"iðr of a more centralloeatiðn in the District.
During 1996 and 1997. annexations by the cities of
Des Moines and Kent have impacted the Federal Way
Fire Department. The Kent annexation (north of
272nd and east of Pacific Highway South) will cost
the Department an estimated $275.000 annually. The
Des Moines annexation (WoodmontlRedondo) could
cost the Department an estimated $500.000 annually.
although a contract for services between the Depart-
ment and Fire District #26 provides continued funding
to the Department in exchange for continued fire
protection from the Department for those areas.
It is unclear how long this relationship will remain in
existence. If either party should give the reQuired 12
month notice to eliminate the contract. District #26
would take ownership of Station #6 (27010 15th
Avenue South). The Department has purchased pro-
perty at South 288th and Interstate 5 as a contingency
against that possibility. This would accommodate the
building of a new station that is more centrally located
in the north end of the City. This realignment of
stations. response areas and revenues would reQuire
closure of Station #5 (4966 South 298th).
Second, the Distriet Department may have need for an
additional station in the south end of the City in the
vicinity of 356th and Pacific Highway. If this area
continues to experience significant commercial
growth, the District Department anticipates that the
calls for service will also continue to grow. In this
eventuality, an additional station may be needed to
maintain acceptable response times. The District is
acquiring prðpcrty in this area 1ð assure fttttu'c avail
ability of a statiðn site The Department has acQuired
property in this area through a swap of properties with
Lakehaven Utility District to assure future availability
of a station site.
Any new station should be able to accommodate an
on-duty crew of three fire fighters, with appropriate
living and sleeping quarters. In addition, the structure
should be able to house two engines and an aid car,
with room for growth dictated by LOS demands. :¡:fle
Cðst of these faeilities is appreximately $1,900,900,
plus lftfld CðStS. It may also be appropriate to provide a
public meeting room and an office for community
policing in new facilities. The cost of these facilities is
approximately $1.500.000. Equipment would be in the
range of $500,000 for a new station in the south end.
Eauipment for a new station in the north end would be
provided from the closures of Stations 5 & 6.
Revised September 1998
VI-47
.+.
(-
) /
¡
>-'
r:(
w
...I
...I
PugetSound
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FEDERAL WAY
FIRE DEPARTMENT #39
CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT
" ,
, ~
Federal Way City Limits
/,,' Potential Annexation Area
IV Fire Department Boundary
Þ' Existing Fire Station Locations
0 Proposed Fire Station Locations
-SCALE-
1 Inch equals 4,500 Feet
MAP VI-11
GIS DIVISION
NOTE: This map is intended for use as a graphical representation only,
The City of Federal Way makes no warranty as to its accuracy
Map printed December 1997
$N/cpmapslfiredist,aml
.
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Funding Plan
The Fire Di3trkt Department has established a capital
reserve fund for the systematic replacement of all
capital equipment. These reserves are funded from the
annual revenues of the District Department. The
Distriet Department also has established a goal of a
minimum of three paid fire fighters on each fire
apparatus. Additional staff that are hired in support of
that goal will be funded from new construction levies.
The Distriet Department has not established any funds
for purchase of new stations or associated equipment.
These purchases would require voter approved bonds.
In the Distriet' s Department's annually adopted
budget, capital projects are identified. This capital
projects list is updated based on completed projects
and changing priorities. This plan adopts by reference
the Distrkt'3 Department's Fire Master Plan as well
as the annual capital improvements program update.
6.10
GOALS AND POLICIES
The goals and policies in this section implement the
State's Growth Management Act requirements and the
King Cemnty Cðönty".vide Planning Pðlieics CWPP's.
The City of Federal Way takes responsibility for
implementing only those goals and policies for
services provided by the City.
Special service districts, such as the school, utility ,
and fire districts, must implement goals and policies
which are consistent with their respective plans. The
City does intend, however, to closely coordinate the
City's plan with these service districts so that the
citizens of Federal Way receive the highest level of
service possible.
Goal
CFGl
Annually update the Capital Facilities Plan to
implement the Federal Way Comprehensive
Plan by coordinating urban services, land use
decisions, level of service standards, and
financial resources with a fully funded
schedule of capital improvements,
Policies
CFPl Provide needed pubiic facilities and services
to implement the City's Comprehensive Plan.
CFP2
Support and encourage joint development and
use of community facilities with other
governmental or community organizations in
areas of mutual concern and benefit.
CFP3
Emphasize capital improvement projects
which promote the conservation, preser-
vation, redevelopment, or revitalization of
commercial, industrial, and residential areas
in Federal Way.
CFP4
Adopt by reference all facilities plans and
future amendments prepared by other special
districts which provide services within the
City. These plans must be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
CFP5
Adopt by reference the annual update of the
Federal Way Capital Improvement Program
for parks/recreation, surface water manage-
ment, and the Transportation Improvement
Program.
CFP6 Protect investments in existing facilities
through an appropriate level of maintenance
and operation funding,
CFP7 Maximize the use of existing public facilities
and promote orderly compact urban growth.
Goal
CFG2
To meet current needs for capital facilities in
Federal Way, correct deficiencies in existing
systems, and replace or improve obsolete
facilities,
Balancing existing capital facilities needs with the
need to provide additional facilities to serve growth is
a major challenge for Federal Way. It is important to
maintain our prior investments as well as serve new
growth. Clearly, tough priority decisions are facing
Federal Way policy-makers.
Revised September 1998
VI-49
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Policies
CFP8 Give priority consideration to projects
mandated by law, and those by State and
Federal agencies.
CFP9 Give priority consideration to subsequent
phases of phased projects when phase one is
fully funded and under construction.
CFPIO Give priority consideration to projects that
renovate existing facilities and preserve the
community's prior investment or reduce
maintenance and operating costs.
CFPll
Give priority consideration to projects that
correct existing capital facilities deficiencies,
encourage full utilization of existing
facilities, or replace worn out or obsolete
facilities.
CFP12 Give priority to projects where leveraged
monies such as grants and low interest loans
can be used.
Goal
CFP13 Provide capital facilities to serve and direct
future growth within Federal Way and its
Potential Annexation Area as they urbanize.
It is crucial to identify, in advance of development,
sites for schools, parks, fire and police stations, major
storm water facilities, greenbelts, open space, and
road connections. Acquisition of sites for these
facilities must occur in a timely manner and as early
as possible in the overall development of the area.
Otherwise, acquisition opportunities will be missed,
with long term functional or financial implications.
Policies
CFP13 Provide the capital facilities needed to serve
the future growth anticipated by the Compre-
hensive Plan.
CFP14 Give priority consideration to projects needed
to meet concurrence requirements for growth
management.
CFP15 Plan and coordinate the location of public
facilities and utilities in advance of need.
CFP16
Implement a concurrence management
system for transportation which permits
project approval only after a finding is made
that there is capacity available in the trans-
portation system sufficient to maintain the
adopted level of service standard.
CFP17 The provision of urban services shall be
coordinated to ensure thát areas identified for
urban expansion are accompanied with the
maximum possible use of existing facilities
and cost effective service provisions and
extensions while ensuring the protection and
preservation of resources.
CFP18 Coordinate future economic activity with
planning for public facilities and services.
CFP19 Purchase property in the Potential Annexation
Area and keep it in reserve for future City
parks and surface water facilities.
Goal
CFPG4 Provide adequate funding for capital
facilities in Federal Way to ensure the
Comprehensive Plan vision and goals are
implemented.
The GMA requires that the Land Use chapter be
reassessed if funding for capital facilities falls short of
needs. The intent is to ensure that necessary capital
facilities are available prior to, or concurrently with
new growth and development. Capital facilities plans
must show a balance between costs and revenues.
There are essentially five options available for bal-
ancing the capital facilities budget: increase revenues,
decrease level of service standards, decrease the cost
of the facilities, decrease the demand for the public
service, and reduce the rate of growth and new
development.
Revised September 1998
VI-50
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
Policies
CFP20
CFP21
Manage the City òfFederal Way's fiscal
resources to support providing needed capital
improvements. Ensure a balanced approach
to allocating financial resources between: (l)
major maintenance of existing facilities; (2)
eliminating existing capital facility deficien-
cies; and (3) providing new or expanding
existing facilities to serve new growth.
Use the Capital Facilities Plan to integrate all
of the community's capital project resources
including grants, bonds, general funds,
donations, impact fees, and any other
available funding.
CFP22 Ensure that long term capital financing
strategies and policies are consistent with all
the other Comprehensive Plan elements,
CFP23
CFP24
Pursue funding strategies that require new
growth and development to pay its fair share
of the cost of facilities that are required to
maintain adopted level of service standards.
One such strategy that should be imple-
mented in the near term is an impact fee
program for parks, and transportation,.-and
schools.
Promote a more efficient use of all public
facilities by enacting interlocal agreements
which facilitate joint maintenance and
operations of those facilities.
CFP25 Use the following available contingency
strategies should the City be faced with
capital facility funding shortfalls:
. Increase revenues by selling general
obligation bonds, enacting utility taxes,
imposing impact fees, and raising
property tax levy rates,
. Decrease level of service standards to a
level that is more affordable.
. Decrease the cost of the facility by
changing or modifying the scope of the
project.
. Decrease the demand for the service or
facilities by establishing a moratorium on
development, focus development into
areas where facility capacity is available,
or changing project timing and/or phasing.
CFP26 Aggressively pursue grants or private funds
when available to finance capital facility
projects.
CFP27 Maximize the usefulness of bond funds by
using these monies to the greatest extent
possible as matching funds for grants.
Goal
CFPG5 Ensure that the Federal Way Capital
Facilities Plan is current and responsive to
the community vision and goals.
The role of monitoring and evaluation is vital to the
effectiveness of any planning program and partic-
ularly for the Capital Facilities chapter. The City's
revenues and expenditures are subject to economic
fluctuations and are used to predict fiscal trends in
order to maintain the City's adopted level of service
for public facilities. This Capital Facilities Plan will
be annually reviewed and amended to verify that
fiscal resources are available to provide public
facilities needed to support adopted LOS standards.
Policies
CFP28
Monitor the progress of the Capital Facilities
Plan on an ongoing basis, including the
completion of major maintenance projects,
the expansion of existing facilities, and the
addition of new facilities. Evaluate this
progress with respect to trends in the rate and
distribution of growth, impacts upon service
quality, and Comprehensive Plan direction.
Revised September 1998
VI-51
Federal Way Comprehensive Plan - Capital Facilities
CFP29
Review, update, and amend the Capital
Facilities Plan annually. Respond to changes
in the rates of growth, new development
trends, and changing City priorities, budget,
and financial considerations.
Make provisions to reassess the Comprehen-
sive Plan periodically in light of the evolving
CFP30
Capital Facilities Plan. Take appropriate
action to ensure internal consistency of the
chapters in the plan.
Continue to coordinate with other capital
facility and service providers to ensure that
all necessary services and facilities are
provided prior to or concurrent with new
growth and development. 'è
Revised September 1998
VI-52
interoffice
MEMORANDUM
Federal Way Dept. of Public Works
Traffic Services Division
To:
Phil Watkins, Chair
Land Use / Transportation Committee
Rick Perez, City Traffic Engineer ~
From:
Subject:
Sound Transit Site Evaluation Criteria
Date:
September 17, 1998
Background
As part of the 1998 amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, staff proposed language that would
update the Plan's discussion of the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority's (Sound
Transit's) projects in Federal Way. The Committee requested additional information in order to
comment on the evaluation criteria for siting Sound Transit projects being considered for adoption
by Sound Transit. Sound Transit will be constructing five projects in the Federal Way area:
~
a new Federal Way Transit Center
expansion of park and ride capacity in City Center
direct access HOV ramps from 1-5 to these transit facilities
expansion of park and ride capacity at Star Lake Park and Ride
direct access HOV ramps from 1-5 to Star Lake Park and Ride
~
~
~
~
Attached are the criteria definitions, questions that should be considered in evaluating sites for
each criterion, and a list of fatal flaws that would cause a site to be considered for removal from
further analysis. These criteria are to be used for screening for a first and second round of
evaluations, with successive rounds of analysis being more detailed, leading to the selection of
preferred alternatives for each project in Federal Way.
The process developed by Sound Transit for adoption of these draft criteria include approval by
the Project Management Team and an Executive Advisory Committee. The Project Management
Team consists of staff from the City (Cary Roe, Greg Moore, and Rick Perez), King
County/Metro, WSDOT, City of Kent, Sound Transit, and the consultant team. The Executive
Advisory Committee includes representatives from the City (Mayor Ron Gintz, Councilmember
Jeanne Burbidge, Econcomic Development Executive Debra Coates), City of Kent, several
community representatives, Federal Transit Administration, Federal Highway Administration,
King County/Metro, Pierce Transit, WSDOT, and Sound Transit.
Recommendation
This information is provided in response to the Committee's request for additional information in
order to provide comment on the discussion of Sound Transit projects in the City Center for the
Comprehensive Plan amendment. However, staff will forward any comments provided by the
Committee to the Project Management Team for its consideration in adopting these evaluation
criteria.
K:\LUTC\1998\RT ASITE,MMO
Sound Transit Regional Express I Federal Way and Star Lake Project
Draft Evaluation Criteria Definitions
Task 3.3
Environment Description
1) Noise Potential increase in noise levels to sensitive receptors (residential uses; schools;
religious facili~ies-,. etc.) with or without miti~io~_____._--------
2) Visual Quality I Aesthetics Compatibility with existing and potential surrounding community (scale, views,
architectural treatments, character, etc.); light and glare; the amount of visual change
compared _with exis~ and potential ~isual quality~___._._-----------
3) Energy Consumption Increase or decrease in regional energy consumption (for operation only) for the
forecast year in British Thermal Units (BTUs). This criterion measures the net impact
on energy savings as a result of changes in automobile travel and is part of the Ff A
New Starts re~ir~ments,
4) Air Quality Change in pollutants and emissions for the forecast year; compliance and conformity
with local and regional requirements,
5) Water Quality I Quantitv Increase in impervious surface and surface water run-off. -.
6) Sensitive Areas Potential impacts to streams, wetlands, steep slopes, vegetation; presence of threatened
.. and/or endang~..!:.t:~_~pecies; compliance with local ordinances and ~'?~~s. ------
7) Parks and Recreation Potential for direct or indirect impacts to parks and recreation sites (Section 4(t) of the
Transportation Act, 1966). . .----
8) Historic and Cultural Potential for direct or indirect impacts to historic and cultural resources that are on, or
Resources eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act, 1966).
9) Hazardous Materials Potential for the presence of contaminants.
10) Construction Impacts Potential for construction impacts on HOV and transit users,
Lande~~ff.;nonijc Description
De ment
1) Joint Development Potential for partnership with another public agency or a private business/enterprise at
. Opportunities or near the transit facility.
2) Mixed Use Development Potential for mixed (residential, retail, or office) development at or near the transit
Opportunities facility,
3) Transit-Supportive Land Use Local land use policies supporting transit site development; compatibility with local
plans and polici~s.
4) Displacement and Relocation Costs associated with physical impacts to business access, parking, or other frontage
Costs and the potential to relocate existing businesses or residents.
5) Public AcceptabilitylPublic The degree to which the alternative avoids significant impacts to neighborhoods,
Opinion businesses, or natural resources; likelihood that alternative will be accepted by local,
~. Environmental Justice state, and federal agencies,
Potential for disproportionate impacts to minority or low-income populations (FfA
New Starts Criteria)
7) Low Income Households The absolute number of low-income households (below poverty level) located within
Served one-half. mile of.!>_<?arding points of proposed alternative (Ff A New Starts Criteria),
8) Consistency with Cities' Consistency with the needs of the City of Kent and City of Federal Way - is the
Needs alternative consistent with the needs of the respective cities,
- .
9) Site Feasibility Site is adaptable_.!o accommodate ~he requirements of the facility, including access,
!O) Land Use Com£~~ibility Compatibility- w~th existing_and J2.°tential uses. ..
11) DevelopmentJRedevelopment Maximizes development I redevelopment opportunities,
Opportunities
Costs
1) Operating Cost per Passenger
Mile
2) Incremental Cost per
Incremental Passenger in
Forecast Year
3) Total Costs
4) Ongoing Operation and
Maintenance Costs
1) Pedestrian and Bicycle
Access
2) Safety
3) Transit System Connectivity
4) Transit Ridership
5) Travel Time Savings
6) Park-and-Ride Capacit
7) Operations
8) Mode Shift Inducement
9) Flexibilityl Adaptability
lO)HOV Access Improvements
Po"" W8S\en...\9SEV ALC.DOCdoc
Description
Change in operating cost per passenger mile in operating year comparing the
alternative to the no-build and TSM alternatives (PIA New Starts Criteria); note - this
data may not be available for the analysis (screening).
Annualized total capital investment and annual operating costs divided by the forecast
change in annual transit system ridership, comparing the alternative to the no-build and
TSM alternatives; note - this data may not be available for this analysis.
Whether the costs are within the realm of Sound Transit's budget; includes
engineering, right of way, construction, mitigation costs.
Will there be local agency & operation cost impacts.
Potential for impacts on non-motorized modes; potential to connect with existing
pedestrian and bicycle paths.
Potential for impacts will be assessed based upon a review of similar applications
elsewhere in the country as well as professional judgement given the configuration of
the alternative and the operating conditions. «vehicles, buses, pedestrian accidents).
How the alternative improves connections with regional transit and projected bus
service; how well the alternative enhances mobility in the region; the potential for
transit connections to serve both existing and future developments
The potential benefits (such as connection with HOV facilities and travel routes) and
travel time savings associated with an alternative.
As defined by the PI A New Starts Criteria, is the projected dollar value of aggregate
travel time savings in the forecast year anticipated from the alternative compared to the
no-build and TSM alternatives. This includes the aggregate travel time savings of
people using competitive modes (automobile and commercial) as well as new and
existing transit users; note - this data may not be available for this analysis.
Potential for net gain of parking stalls, Potential for future parking expansion.
Potential impact on traffic operations (freeway, arterials, intersections, and ramp
operations).
Potential for shift from SOY to transit or carpool.
How well the alternative will accommodate future potential changes in freeway
capacity or bus routes and potential for future light rail service in south King County,
Potential for improving HOV access to other facilities (transit centers, park-and-ride
lots, freeways) and maximizing the number of HOV s that are able to use the new
facilitv,
.
Sound Transit Regional Express! Federal Way and Star Lake Project
Questions To Be Used in Screening the Alternatives
Task 3,3
Note: For the first screening, questions should be answered based upon qualitative
information and professional judgement.
Environmental
1. Noise
Is the alternative in close proximity to sensitive receptors (residential uses, schools,
parks, religious institutions)? Does the alternative avoid serious noise impacts?
Based upon professional judgement, would the alternative increase or decrease noise
levels to su"ounding sensitive receptors with or without mitigation?
2. Visual Quality! Aesthetics
Does the alternative obstruct any view corridors? Is the alternative compatible with
the scale of existing and potential (as defined in land use plan) su"ounding uses?
3. Energy Consumption
Does the alternative encourage more transit use? Is there a potential for mode shift
(from auto use to transit use) which has the potential to decrease regional energy
consumption (tied to mode shift success)? Postponed - data not available for first
screening.
4. Air Quality
Does the alternative provide the potential for reduction in vehicle volumes necessary
to avoid serious air quality impacts? Does the alternative provide the potential to
decrease pollutants and emissions? Does the alternative meet local and regional
conformity requirements? Postponed - data not available for first screening.
5. Water Quality/Quantity
Does the alternative require new detention/treatment facilities?
6. Sensitive Areas
Is the alternative located within a sensitive area or its designated setback? Does the
alternative negatively impact sensitive areas?
7. Parks and Recreation
Does the alternative impact Section 4(f) resources?
0 13985\engr\mp - quest3,3doc
-1-
09/16/98
8. Historic and Cultural Resources
Is the alternative located adjacent, or in close proximity, to a historic or cultural
resource? Is the site/resources at least 50 years old? Will the alternative
compromise the integrity of the resource? Is there an impact to Section 4{f) and/or
Section 106 resources?
9. Hazardous Materials
Are there any known hazardous materials sites adjacent, or in close proximity, to the
alternative? Postponed - data not available for first screening.
10. Construction Impacts
Does the alternative minimize construction impacts?
existing car-pool parking during construction?
Does it avoid displacing
Land Use/Economic DeveloDment
1. Joint Development Opportunities
Does the alternative provide opportunities for joint development? Are there any
known entities that may be interested in partnering with Sound Transit?
2. Mixed Use Development Opportunities
Does the alternative present opportunities for providing a mix of housing and retail
uses at or near the site? Will residents be able to walk or bike to the facility? If
required, now or in the future, will the structure obstruct the ability of the traveler to
see a retail use or have an impact on the frontage (exposure) of the retail use?
3, Transit-Supportive Land Use
Does the alternative encourage transit supportive land use consistent with local plans
and policies?
4. Displacement and Relocation Costs
Will the alternative require relocation of existing businesses and or residential uses?
5. Public Acceptability/Public Opinion
Would the alternative be supported by surrounding neighborhood and surrounding
businesses? Would the alternative be supported by local, state, andfederal agencies?
Would the alternative generate public controversy? Postponed - data not available
for first screening.
0 1398S\engr\mp - quest3,3doc
-2-
09/16/98
6. Environmental Justice
Would the alternative have a disproportionate impact on minority or low-income
communities? Postponed - data not available for first screening.
7. Low Income Households Served
Would the alternative improve access to transit for low-income households within
one-half mile of boarding points? Hold until September 24h PMTmeetingnumber 4.
8. Consistency with needs of the City of Kent and City of Federal Way-
Is the alternative consistent with the needs and adopted goals of the cities of Kent and
Federal Way?
9. Location Feasibility
Can the alternative be constructed within the designated site? Will other adjacent
sites need to be acquired to provide sufficient space for all functions?
10. Land Use Compatibility
Will the alternative be compatible with existing and potential uses?
11. Development and Redevelopment Opportunities
Does the alternative maximize the opportunity for development and redevelopment?
Loss of economic opportunity costs?
Costs
1. Operating Cost per passenger mile
Can not be answered qualitatively. Data won't be available for first screening.
2. Incremental Cost per incremental passenger
Can not be answered qualitatively. Data won't be available for first screening.
3. Total Costs [includes engineering, construction, mitigation and right-of-way]
Can the alternative be built with funds availablelwithin Sound Transit's budget? Is
there an opportunity/incentive for a local match? Postponed - data not available for
first screening.
4. On-going Operation and Maintenance Costs
Will there be local agency operations and maintenance costs?
0 1398S\engr\mp - quest3,3doc
-3-
09/16/98
.-_--m.m.
Transportation
1. Pedestrian and Bicycle Access
Is the alternative adjacent, or in close proximity, to existing pedestrian and bicycle
trails/routes?
2. Safety
Does the alternative adequately address safety issues (vehicles, buses, bikes,
,pedestrians) for the surrounding community, pedestrians, and facility users?
Postponed - data not available for first screening.
3. Transit System Connectivity
Does the alternative provide connections with regional, commuter and local transit
service at one location? Does the alternative improve mobility for both regional and
local transit users? Does the alternative provide the opportunity to co-locate the
transit center and park-and-ride facilities?
4. Transit Ridership
Does the alternative have the potential to increase transit ridership? Postponed -
data not available for first screening.
5. Travel Time Savings
Can not be answered qualitatively. Data won't be available for first screening.
6. Park-and-Ride Capacity
Is there a potential for future parking increase?
7. Operations
Does the alternative have a potential impact on traffic operations (freeway, arterials,
intersections, and ramp operations)?
8. Mode Shift Inducement -
Will the alternative encourage auto users to ride transit? Will the alternative make a
mode shift easy? Postponed - data not available for first screening.
9. Flexibility! Adaptability
Is the alternative compatible with current and proposed transit system and future
light rail? Postponed - data not available for first screening.
10. HOV Access Improvements
Will the alternative improve service for HOVs? Does the alternative improve access
to other transportation facilities (transit center, park-and-ride lot)?
0 1398S\cngr\mp - quest3,3doc
-4-
09/16/98
Sound Transit Regional Express I Federal Way and Star Lake Project
Draft Evaluation Criteria Definitions
Task 3.3
Fatal Flaws (draft list)
1. Any alternative that could not be permitted
2. Any alternative that would require a Design Standard Deviation that would not be
approved by WSDOT/FHW A
3. Any alternative inconsistent with local plans and policies (i.e. Comprehensive Plan)
4. Insufficient funding (within reason, substantial, other funding sources)
5. Adverse impacts to historic, cultural, or recreational uses (Sections 4(f), 6 (f), or 106)
6. Inability to relocate businesses or residents or inability to provide access to
commercial or residential uses during construction
7. No decrease in CO emissions Action: (Dean Torkko will clarify)
8. Impacts to wetlands that can't be mitigated
9. The combination of elements does not meet Purpose and Need requirements
10. Must provide a total of 2,100 parking stalls at Federal Way and 1,150 at Star Lake
P:'lJ139RS\cn",195EV ALe.DOC.doc