LUTC PKT 05-19-1997
~
City of Federal Way
City Council
Land Use/Transportation Comoùttcc
May 19, 1997
5:30 pm
City Hall
Council Chambers
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
3. PUBLIC COMMENT (3 minute limit)
4. BUSINESS ITEMS
A.
Downtown Parking (a code amendment)
Action
Largen/20 min
B.
Award of 1997 Asphalt Overlay Contract
Action
Miller/ 10 min
c.
Approve 1997 Sidewalk Replacement List/
Authorize to Bid
Action
Miller/1O min
D.
South 356th Regional Surfacewater Facility
Action
Prattl1O min
E.
Renewal of HEX Professional Services Contract
Action
Wang/1O min
5.
OTHER ITEMS
6.
FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDAS
7.
ADJOURN
Committee Members:
Phil Watkins, Chair
Ron Gintz
Mary Gates
City Staff:
Greg Moore, Director, Community Development Services
Sandy Lyle, Administrative Assistant
661-4116
I: \LU- TRANS\MA Y19LUT .AGN
City of Federal Way
City Council
Land Use/Tr~lßSI)ort',ntiol1 Coll1miUcc
Committee of the Whole
May 5,,1997
5:30pm
City' Hall
Council Chambë~S
, "
SUMMARY
In attendance: Committee members Phil Watkins (Chair), Ron Gintz and Mary Gates; Mayor Skip Priest; Council members Hope Elder
and Michael Park; City Manager Ken Nyberg; Director of Community Development Services Greg Moore; Public Works Director
Cary Roe; City Attorney Londi Lindell; Assistant City Attorney Bob Sterbank; Street Systems Manager Ken Miller; Senior Planner
Lori Michaelson; Associate Planner Jim Harris; Administrative Assistant Sandy Lyle.
1.
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at S:30 pm by Chairman Phil Watkins.
2. AFPROV AL OF MINUTES
The minutes of the April 21,1997, meeting were approved as presented.
3.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Charles Connon, a resident of the Bellacarino Woods area, spoke about his concerns that the official meeting summary from the
AprilS, 1997, Land Use/Transportation Committee meeting did not accurately reflect the comments made at that meeting. He
feels that the taxpayers will ultimately pay for improvements to surface water problems in the Bellacarino area that the developer
caused and should pay to repair.
4. BUSINESS ITEMS
B. Cellular Towers - Following a brief staff presentation about cellular towers, a moratorium of 120 days was mIs/c (Priest
moved, Gintz seconded, unanimous vote) on wireless communications facilities. In 1990, when current codes were adopted,
cell phone technology as it is known today did not exist. The Counèil felt that having spent time and resources undergrounding
utility wires and developing a strong sign code, it did not make sense for cellular towers to proliferate. The intent of the
moratorium was not to prevent future cellular facilities but to allow developers, property owners and officials to communicate
and develop guidelines and regulations on siting, placement, screening, camouflaging, collocation and removal of cellular
towers. A public hearing will be held within sixty days to obtain input on the moratorium. Afterwards, the City Council will
adopt findings of fact to either justify continuing or canceling the moratorium. No new applications for cellular towers will be
accepted during the moratorium. There are exceptions to the moratorium which include: personal wireless facilities such as
residential television satellite systems; emergency wireless communication facilities; collocation on existing facilities; location
on Bonneville Power lines; smaller "whip" antennas. Staff will finalize language of the moratorium resolution. The vote on
the motion was as follows:
Gates
Elder
Dovey
Gintz
yes
yes
absent
yes
Park
Priest
Watkins
yes
yes
yes
A. Granville PreliminSlQ' Plat - Granville Place is a seven lot single family residential subdivision subject to Process III approval
under the 1990 Subdivision Code. The Committee raised concerns about potential surface water problems such as those
encountered recently in the Bellacarino Woods subdivision. It was noted that this project is a development under Federal Way
codes and not vested to any King County codes. The Committee mIs/c approval of recommendation to Council at their May
20, 1997, meeting of Granville Place pursuant to the Hearing Examiner's recommendations.
C. South 356th Street Re~onal Surfacewater Facility - Pulled from the agenda at the meeting due to incomplete contractor
documents.
D. 21st Avenue SW at SW 325th Sip1 Project - Staff is currently working on acquiring two parcels for the 21st Avenue SWat
SW 325th Place Traffic Signal and Intersection Improvement Project. The design phase has been completed. This project will
install a new traffic signal at SW 325th Place, a turn lane at SW 326th Street, a turn lane at SW 328th Street, street lighting,
utility relocation, and installation of a signal interconnect from SW 32Oth Street to SW 336th Street. Bidding of the project
will take place in June, 1997. Project costs exceed original estimates by $259,000. There is approximately $150,000 in
saving from completed bond projects that could be transferred to this project. Staff also recommends that $55,000 be
transferred from the unencumbered funds in the traffic interconnect account and $54,000 from the unencumbered street bond
issue funds. The Committee mIs/c recommendation of approval to Council the final design of the 21stl325th Intersection
Improvement Project, the transfer of funds and autho~on to bid the project at the May 6, 1997, meeting.
E. SW Dash Point Road and 21st Avenue SW Traffic SiVla1 - The Committee mIs/c the recommendation to Council to approve
the final design and authorization to bid the SW Dash Point Road at 21st Avenue SW Traffic Signal and Intersection
Improvement Project at its May 6, 1997, meeting. This project will install a traffic signal to allow left turns, provide a
signalized driveway into Lakota Park, improve the right hand turn lane onto Dash Point Road, install street lighting, and
improve sight distance. Right of Way acquisition will be presented to the Council in Executive Session when complete.
F. SW 336th from 21st Avenue SW I~vements - The design for the SW 336th Street Improvement Project is complete. This
project, the last of the 1997 bond issue projects, will widen the road from three to five lanes, install 12-foot wide sidewalks,
street trees, improved lighting, traffic signal revisions, access control, and resolve the street flooding problems during heavy
rains. Staff is currently completing the Storm Drainage Easements and Right of Entry to complete the project. The
Committee mIs/c recommendation of approval to Council of the final design and authorization to bid the SW 336th Street
Improvement Project at the May 6, 1997, meeting.
5. OTHER ITEMS
6. FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDAS
The next meeting will be May 19, 1997.
7. ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 pm .
I:\LU- TRANS\MA YSLUT.SUM
M~O
FROM:
city Council Land Use Committee
Kathy McClung, Deputy Director CDS~
TO:
DATE:
May 12, 1997
RE:
Downtown Parking
The Federal Way Comprehensive Plan sets several policies to
implement a denser downtown. One way is through different
parking strategies. The proposed changes encourage structured
parking, increase compact stall ratios, shared parking criteria,
and the ability to increase or decrease stalls based on certain
criteria. Attached are the following:
1. Planning Commission Recommendation and Findings
2. Staff report prepared by Don Largen of McConnell/Burke,
Inc.
3. Draft Ordinance with suggested code language
.'
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
Planning Commission
DATE:
APRIL 15, 1997
CITY COUNCIL
TO:
FROM:
ROBERT VAUGHAN, CHAIR
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION - DOVVNTOVVN PARKING
SUBJECT:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I.
BACKGROUND
One of the code amendments identified for the 1997 Planning Commission work program
is to review parking requirements in the downtown area and make recommendations to
implement the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan for a more dense downtown.
II.
PLANNING COMMISSION PROCESS
The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on downtown parking on March
. 19, and April 2, 1997. The only public testimony given was from representatives of
the SeaTac Mall.
City staff has made the modifications requested by the Planning Commission and has
indicated text to be removed from the FWCC by using Strilœ Outs and indicating
added text by using underlining. This allows the Council to easily distinguish the
changes being recommended by the Planning Commission. The revised FWCC
chapters are attached to this document in the form of a draft ordinance.
III.
SUMMARY OF CHANGES
The following list summarizes the major code amendments reviewed and approved by
the Commission during this code revision process.
A. Increase the compact stall ratio from 25% up to 40% and require the compact
stalls to be dispersed throughout the site.
B. Establish the parking stall requirement for office uses in the downtown from 1 stall
for every 300 square feet of gross floor area (GFA) to 1 for every 400 square feet of
1
GFA. Establish the stall requirement for retail uses from 1 stall for every 300 square
feet of gross floor area to 1 stall for every 350 GFA.
C. Establish the ability for property owners to reduce on-site parking on a one to one
basis if they contribute to the city to fund on-street parking and the streets adjacent
to the site are classified to allow on-street parking.
D. Establish the ability for property owners to reduce their on-site parking by 20% by
providing documentaion of a traffic demand management plan. This is directed at large
employers.
E. Structured parking in the downtown should be encouraged by allowing an increase
in height or up to a 20% reduction or 20% increase in parking if structured parking
is provided.
F. Shared parking in the downtown area should be permitted when there is not conflict
in the peak hours of parking demand, there are pedestrain facilities provided, no
building is more than 500 feet from the most remote parking, no more than 20% of
required parking may be reduced, and a written agreement is filed by all parties.
IV.
PLANNING COMMISSION FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
The Planning Commission bases its recommendation of adoption of the proposed
amendments to the FWCC to implement the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan on the
. following findings:
1.
Whereas, the Federal Way City Council adopted the Federal Way Comprehensive
Plan in order to comply with the state's Growth Management Act; and
2.
Whereas, the City of Federal Way's Comprehensive Plan contains policies that call
for the reduction of parking in the city center, encouragement of structured parking
and shared parking in order to intensify the downtown development and reduce
surface parking. (Policies CCG20, CCP41, CCP42, CCP43, and CCP47); and
3.
Further study of the downtown parking may be warranted when the transit service
is further improved and serves the region more effectively; and
4.
Whereas, the proposed code amendments would not adversely affect the public
health, safety or welfare.
~¿¿~
Robert Vaughan, Chair
Federal Way Planning Commission
2
..
oJ,
-,~
DATE
APPLICANT
PROPOSED ACTION
STAFF REPRESENTATIVE
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
I.
INTRODUCTION
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
Planning Commission
March 12, 1997
City of Federal Way
Text Amendments to Chapter 22, Article XV of
Federal Way City Code (City Center Parking)
Don Largen, AICP
Planning Consultant
McConnelVBurke, Inc.
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission
use the attached working draft of the City Center
Parking Standards as basis upon which the
Commission develops a recommendation of
proposed City Center parking amendments for City
Council consideration.
A number of code revisions have been identified and prioritized by the City Council for
completion during 1997. One of these items is an analysis of the City Center parking
situation and a recommendation for code revisions to be consistent with the goals and
polices of the City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan. This study began on February
25, 1997.
The City is proposing text amendments to Chapter 22 (zoning code) Article XV of the
FWCC. The proposed amendments are related to the City Center parking
requirements. The amendments are intended to address areas of implementation
contained in the Comprehensive Plan. Specific issues are discussed in Section III
below.
II.
PROCESS
The work program for the City Center Parking Study included the following goals:
analyze and modify, if necessary, the number of required parking spaces and the ratio
RECEIVED BY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
1
MAR 2 It 1997
.-
'.
of allowable compact to total parking stalls; encourage parking structures; and
encourage shared parking.
The first step in this study was to review existing background data and studies and
analyze the current City regulations to see which sections might be amended to meet
the goals of the work program. Included in this step was an inventory of the current
parking situation in the area. Public works provided acreage numbers for the amount of
"paved area" in the core and in the frame. Aerial photos and a field survey provided an
approximate number of parking spaces within the core and frame.
The second step was to research local and national trends in city center parking stall
requirements. An analysis was done using Washington State and national zoning
codes and numerous documents dealing specifically with parking published by the
American Planning Association. This research forms the basis for many of the options
presented in section III.
The third step was to research national and local car sizes and buying trends as they
relate to the 25 percent compact car parking allowance contained in Sec. 22-1442. In
addition, a number of codes form similarly sized cities were analyzed to see how other
municipalities allow for compact cars. The range for allowable compact spaces
appears to be from 25 percent to 50 percent.
The fourth step was to analyze the current and future barriers to building parking
structures. Studies were examined that dealt specifically with problems associated with
building structures without the aid of some type of bonus or incentive. The general
research and analysis regarding parking structures and the interviewing of key
individuals done specific to Federal Way provided the basis for the options for
encouraging parking structures presented in section" I.
The final step in this study was to examine the current regulations and draft
recommended amendments to implement the staff recommendations presented in the
following sections.
III.
ISSUE IDENTIFICATION I ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
The 1995 City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan contains a chapter dedicated to the
City Center. Goal CCG20 of this chapter aims to reduce demand for parking in the City
Center. Included with this goal are seven policies. Strategies to implement three of
these policies are presented in this section. The remaining three polices will require
further study and are presented in section IV. The issues included in this section are as
follows:
. Reduce Parking Requirements
. Encourage Parking Structures
2
. Encourage Shared Parking
',-
Clearly the intent of altering parking requirements and parking facilities is to free-up
land that is currently used for on-site surface parking in order to reduce the land
requirements for individual uses within the City Center. Over time this should contribute
to the City's goal of encouraging more intensive City Center development, creating a
more pedestrian oriented 'downtown' area.
A.
Reduce Parking Requirements
Policy CCP41 aims to reduce the number of parking stalls required for City
Center development in comparison to other areas of the City in order to
encourage more intensive development and reflect the improvements in local
aDd regional transit service. The number of required stalls is related to the
overall demand for parking, which in turn is a function of land use type and the
availability of other transportation options. Some of the literature reviewed
suggests that on average parking supply exceeds demand in the Puget Sound
Region by up to 30%.
Policy CCP46 aims to allow on-street parking to create a buffer between
pedestrian and traffic depending on street characteristics and its role within the
City Center. Providing on-street parking could be credited towards a project's
parking requirement. The effect of using on-street parking as part of the parking
requirement would be a net reduction in the amount of parking to be provided
on-site by a given project.
..
Part of the City's parking provisions is a requirement to provide compact parking
stalls at a ratio of 25 percent. Compact car parking requires less square footage
of actual parking space and less aisle width. Obviously, increasing the ratio for
compact stalls will reduce the amount of overall space devoted to parking. There
is a curious lack of specific information concerning consumer car purchases
relative to vehicle size. Country-wide statistics from the American Automobile
Manufacturers Association suggest that small and mid-sized cars command
approximately 75% of the current market. A small telephone survey of local auto
dealers supports this conclusion.
Currently, the 209 acre Core area contains approximately 10,150 parking spaces
that encompass 95.3 acres of paved area for an average of 409 square feet per
parking space. The 205 acre Frame area contains approximately 7,150 parking
spàces that cover 79.3 acres of paved area for an average of 482 square feet
per space.
3
r
)
':;
"
I.
1.
Options
. ~"
Below are several options for reducing the amount of parking required in the City
Center area.
a)
Increase the percentage of allowable compact car parking. Currently,
FWCC Sec. 22-1442 allows up to 25 percent of the number of required
spaces be sized for compact cars. Staff has analyzed trends related to
the size of automobiles sold in the United States and has examined the
ordinances of other similarly sized city centers. It appears that
percentages range from 25 to 50 percent, with a majority occurring
between 35 and 50 percent.
b)
.
The number of required parking stalls for certain uses in the City Center
Core (CC-C) and Frame (CC-F) zone could be reduced to better reflect
the long-term vision for the core, its unique features and building densities
and its proximity to local and regional transit service.
c)
On-street parking could be counted as part of the parking supply in the
City Center. This would be based on the classification of the street and
would be decided on a case by case basis. This is clearly a limited option
since there is a finite amount of linear footage available on existing
streets.
d)
For businesses a reduction of somewhere between 20 and 40 percent of
the required number of parking spaces could be allowed by the planning
director based on the provision of alternative programs aimed at the
reduction of employee off-street parking demand for the building or use.
These Transportation demand management options which could be
considered by the planning director include, but are not limited to the
following:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
(vi)
Private vanpool operation;
Transit/vanpool fare subsidy;
Preferential parking for carpools/vanpools
Flexible work-hour schedule;
Participation in a ride-matching program; or
Bicycle parking facilities.
e)
Set a maximum of allowable spaces that could be constructed. This
maximum can simply be a percentage above and beyond the minimum
amount of required parking spaces.
4
2.
Staff Recommendation
00
Staff recommends that a combination of the above options be implemented.
They are as follows:
A. Reduce the current FWCC CC-C and CC-F zone parking standards for the following
uses:
(i)
Office use: currently 1 space is required for every 300 square feet
of gross floor area. Reduce this requirement to 1 space for every
400 square feet of gro,s floor area.
Retail use: currently 1 space is required for every 300 square fe~t of
gross floor area for retail uses and is determined on a case by case
basis for retail establishments providing entertainment, recreation
or cultural activities. Reduce the base requirement to 1 space for
every 350 square feet of gross floor area.
(ii)
0,
B. Uses in the CC-C and CC-F zones may develop parking up to the following
maximums:
(i)
10% above the base minimum for projects requiring 100 parking
spaces or less.
5% above the base minimum for projects requiring greater than 100
parking spaces.
(ii)
C. Increase the percentage of required compact parking spaces from 25% to
40% for lots having greater than 20 stalls. A dispersion standard should
also be instituted to ensure compactlfull size stalls are not all located in the
same area.
D. Where a project is adjacent to a public street right-of-way, and the street is
classified to allow on-street parking, a project proponent may satisfy their
parking requirement on a 1 for 1 basis by making a one-time contribution to
a City fund established strictly for the development of on-street parking.
The amount of the contribution will be based on a per stall cost established
by the City.
E. Allow up to a 20% reduction in the number required parking spaces upon
documentation of a traffic demand management plan.
t'
3.
Analysis
Currently, the City Center (Frame and Core) is dominated by on-site surface
parking. The City Center contains approximately 17,300 surface parking spaces.
Studies suggest that this represents an over supply.
As improvements to the transit system and shifts in consumer trends occur, the
demand for parking should also change. No one regulatory approach by itself is
going to provide both the desired goal of parking reduction and design flexibility.
The recommended parking requirements for the City Center are intended to
5
,.
reflect future changes in parking utilization by offering a combination of
regulatory reductions in the required amount of parking.
B.
Encourage Parking Structures
Policy CCP42 aims to encourage public and private parking structures, below
and above ground, in the core area. The City may wish to consider a public
private partnership to develop structured parking in the downtown commercial
core area. However, there is the question as to whether the City wants to be
involved in the actual development of parking structures or to rely on substantial
incentives to induce the market to provide structured parking.
Barriers to the construction of structured parking are primarily regulatory and
market driven. The costs associated with developing parking structures can be
pfohibitive. Building aboveground parking is substantially less expensive than
underground parking. Above ground structured parking costs on average
approximately $9,900 per space, compared to $13,400 for underground parking.
Studies suggest that structured parking generally makes economic sense when
land costs are more than $20 per square foot. In Federal Way there do not
appear to be regulatory barriers as such since parking structures are an allowed
use in the City Center. However, there are also no real incentives in place to
encourage their development.
Policy CCP43 aims to encourage the provision of parking structures through the
use of bonuses and incentives. These can include such things as increased
floor areas, increased building heights, and reduced parking requirements, to
name a few. Bellevue has successfully used floor area bonuses to induce
underground and structured parking in their downtown area. Floor area and
height bonuses can oft-set some of the cost of providing structured parking since
the developer gains additionalleaseable floor space.
1.
Options
Below are several options for encouraging or requiring the development of
underground and/or structured parking in the City Center.
a)
Developers could pay a fee to the City in lieu of providing parking. The
pooled fees would be used by the City to construct parking structures.
Municipal bonds could. be issued to fund the development of parking
structures.
b)
c)
A special assessment tax on real property in the City Center could be
established as a method to obtain revenues from the beneficiaries of
publicly owned parking structures.
6
d)
The City could reduce the minimum parking requirements by a pre-
determined percentage if structured parking was used instead of surface
parking.
-.
e)
The maximum allowable building height in the City Center could be
increased under specific conditions; e.g. the maximum height could be
increased if structured or underground parking was integrated into the
building design.
f)
The maximum amount of lot coverage could be increased if structured
parking were included within the building design.
A floor area bonus could be used whereby some percentage of additional
leaseable floor space would be allowed for every square foot of
underground or structured parking provided.
g)
h)
The City could simply set a mandatory percent of required parking spaces
that would have to be built either underground or in a structure.
2.
Staff Recommendation
It is recommended that a combination of options 'd' through 'g' be used to.
encourage structured parking in the City Center. Specific provisions are as
follows:
':.
,~
,'i
:?
,)
,
A. Provide floor area bonuses for structured parking at the following
ratios:
(i) Underground parking: 4 - square feet of additional floor space for
every 'L~quare foot of below grade parking.
(ii) Stacked Parking: ~quare feet of additional floor space for every 1
square foot of stacked parking.
B. Allow height increases for structures containing parking up to ~175'
maximum for all uses in the CC-C zone, and up to a 100:: maximUm fn
the CC-F zone. '
C. Allow up to a 20~ reduction in the number of required parking stallš for
projects that 'Drovide structured parking.
D. Allow for a 50% increase in lot coverage for projects that contain
parking within the primary structure.
3. .
Analysis
These recommendations assume that the City would rather not get into the
business of developing structured parking and should rely on incentives. For
that reason options 'a' through Ie' are not recommended. Similarly, option 'hi is
also not recommended at thi~ time, but if the incentive ~pproach does not
7
..
"^
¡:t
.,
produce the type of development the City envisions for the City Center, then
mandatory structured parking provisions may be necessary.
c.
These recommendations also assume a review and revision of several other
provisions of the zoning code. These are discussed briefly in section IV of this
report.
Encourage Shared Parking
Policy CCP47 aims to encourage shared parking between uses to maximize the
use of available parking within the City Center. By fully utilizing the opportunity
for shared parking areas, the supply of land may increase in the City Center by
reducing the total number of parking spaces.
The success of a shared parking scheme will ultimately depend on the mix of
lånd uses in the City Center. In particular shared parking will work when there is
a substantially different peak hour demand between the uses sharing the facility.
,~
1.
Options
Currently, FWCC Sec. 22-1422 provides the opportunity for shared parking
facilities. Two or more businesses or uses may share parking areas, provided
that the number of spaces in shared parking areas contains at least 90 percent
of the parking spaces required for all businesses or uses that are open or
generating parking demands at the same time. To increase the use of this
provision, code amendments can be made to provide more opportunities for
multiple businesses to share parking.
a)
A revised procedure for shared parking could be implemented Shared
parking facilities within the boundaries of the City Center may be granted
up to a 20 percent parking reduction for uses with significantly different
peak hours of operation.
b)
Do not amend the current provisions for shared parking contained in
FWCC Sec. 22-1422.
2.
Recommendation
Staff recommends that option 'al be implemented.
Requests for shared parking must meet the following requirements:
~ A parking demand study will be prepared by a professional traffic engineer
and shall be submitted by the applicant demonstrating that there will not
exist substantial conflict in the peak hours of parking demand for the uses
for which joint use is proposed.
8
. :
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
The shared parking facilities and buildings which they serve are-connected
.with imDroveQ. pedestrian facilities and no buildin~ or use involved is more
than 500 feet from the most remote parking facility. The maximum
distance shall be measured from the closest portion of the parking facility
to the nearest building entrance that the parking area serves.
The number of parking stalls which may be credited against the
requirements of the structures or uses involved shall not exceed the
number of stalls reasonably anticipated to be available during differing
hours of operation.
A written agreement shall be drawn to the satisfaction of the City Attorney
and executed by all parties concerned assuring the continued availability of
the number of stalls designed for joint use.
The provision for a 20 percent maximum parking requirement reduction is
suggested as an administrative guideline. The planning director shall
ultimately determine the size of the parking reduction.
IV.
OTHER ISSUES
The following issues are related to the issues presented in section III, however, these
issues will require additional study to formulate specific code amendments for
implementation.
A.
Landscaping Buffer Requirements
Policy CCP44 aims to buffer parking areas to increase compatibility between
surrounding uses. These provisions should be revisited to ensure the
landscaping requirements, particularly buffer widths, are not in conflict with the
goal of establishing a dense urban center.
Open Space Bonuses
B.
Currently, in both the CC-C and CC-F zones an increase in building heights is
offered as a bonus for providing open space. This also may be in conflict with
the goal of creating a dense city center. Height bonuses might be more
appropriately applied to the provision of structured parking.
Design Standards for Parking Structures
..
c.
Parking structures can offer great relief for a constrained land supply in a city
center, however, careful attention must be given to the visual and locational
impacts of these new buildings. If parking structures are to be encouraged, an
analysis of the impact of these new buildings on the City Center must be
undertaken. Once such a review is done, design guidelines should be
implemented to make sure that the appearance, size, scale and bulk of the
parking structures are compatible with the City Center vision. The City could
9
!-
. I'
require such things as street-level retail space, staggered setbacks to soften the
impact parking structures at street level and architectural compatibility between
parking structures and the buildings they serve.
D.
Allowed Land Uses in the CC-C and CC-F zones
The current allowable land uses in the City Center Core and City Center Frame
should be reviewed to see how they could be revised to best reflect the long-
term vision of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan.
E.
Lot Coverage
At present, there are no set lot coverage requirements established for the City
Center area. Lot coverage is derived through other requirements such as
I~ndscaping and parking buffers. The City may wish to establish base lot
coverage requirements for the different uses and then allow increases over the
base coverage as an incentive to providing structured parking.
v.
CONCLUSIONS
The recommendations contained in Section III should be viewed as a package of
incentives and options that can be used together. This report is intended to provide a
starting point for the Planning Commission's review of these issues.
Our review concludes that the current parking codes for Federal Way have produced an
over supply of surface parking. Consumer tastes in vehicles have changed and the
typical small versus large car viewpoint may no longer be valid. Mini-vans, sport/utility
vehicles, and the advent of the 'mid-sized' car all suggest that different parking
requirements and dimensional standards may be appropriate.
Conversations with local developers suggests that the primary incentive to providing
structured or underground would be increases in floor areas, height, and lot coverage.
In order to fully utilize these types of incentives, other portions of the City's code
structure may need to be amended as discussed in section IV.
10
"
IIC; IC) LíD\ rs ~?
U LJU f-J U U
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, AMENDING CHAPTER 22
OF THE FEDERAL WAY ZONING CODE, PERTAINING TO
LAND USE AND ZONING, ADOPTING NEW
REGULATIONS FOR PARKING IN THE CITY CENTER
CORE AND FRAME AS CALLED FOR IN THE CITY'S
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
A.
The Federal Way Comprehensive Plan has goals and policies that address
parking in the downtown area including 1) CCG20- Reduce the demand for parking, 2)
CCP41- Reduce the number of parking stalls to encourage more intensive development
in the downtown, 3) CCP42- encourage public and private parking structures, 4) CCP43-
The city shall encourage structured parking through bonuses 5) CCP47- The City shall
. encourage shared parking; and
B.
Amendments to the Federal Way City Code (FWCC) text are authorized
pursuant to FWCC Sections 22-216 and 22-217 pursuant to Process IV review; and
C.
The Federal Way City Council has considered a proposed change to the
FWCC regarding the percentage increase of compact parking stall, establishing parking
stall requirements for retail and office uses in the downtown, establish a method for
I
property owners to reduce on-site parking through a contribution to on-street parking,
reduction of on-site parking through a traffic demand management plan, encourage
structured parking through height bonuses, further encourage shared parking; and
ORD#
, PAGE 1
D.
The Federal Way City Council, pursuant to FWCC 22-517, having
determined the Proposal to be worthy of legislative consideration, referred the Proposal
to the Federal Way Planning Commission for its review and recommendation; and
E.
The City of Federal Way SEPA responsible official has determined that the
proposed amendments are procedural in nature and categorically exempt from SEPA as
authorized by WAC 197-11-800(20); and
F.
The public was given opportunities to comment on the Proposal during the
Planning Commission review; and
G.
The Federal Way Planning Commission, having considered the Proposal
at public hearings during 1997 on March 19 and April 2 pursuant to FWCC Section 22-
523, and all public notices having been duly given pursuant to FWCC Section 22-521;
and
H.
Following the public hearings, the Planning Commission submitted to the
Land Use and Transportation Committee of the City Council its recommendation in favor
of proposed zoning text amendments affecting various sections of the FWCC as noted
previously; and
I.
The Federal Way Land Use and Transportation City Council Committee met
on April 21, 1997 to consider.the recommendation of the Planning Commission and has
moved to forward the Proposal, with amendments, to the full City Council; and
J.
There was sufficient opportunity for the public to comment on the Proposal;
NOW, THEREFORE,
ORD#
, PAGE 2
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. FindinQs. After full and careful consideration, the City Council of the
City of Federal Way makes the following findings with respect to the Proposal and the
proposed amendments to the Federal Way City Code ("FWCC"):
1.
The Federal Way City Council adopted the Federal Way Comprehensive
Plan in order to comply with the state's Growth Management Act; and
2.
The Federal Way Comprehensive Plan contains policies that call for the
reduction of parking in the city center, encouragement of structured parking and shared
parking in order to intensify the downtown development and reduce surface parking in
policies CCG20, CCP41, CCP42, CCP43 and CCP47; and
3.
The Federal Way SErA responsible official has determined that the
. proposed amendments are procedural in nature and categorically exempt from SErA as
authorized by WAC 197-11-800(20); and
4.
The proposed code amendments would not adversely affect the public
health, safety or welfare; and
5.
The Planning Commission, following notice thereof as required by RCW
35A.63.070, held work sessions and public hearings on the proposed regulatory
amendments and has considered the testimony, written comments, and material from the
public by and through said hearings; and
ORD#
, PAGE 3
Section 2. Conclusions. Pursuant to FWCC Section 22-217 and based upon
the Findings set forth in Section 1, the Federal Way City Council makes the following
Conclusions of Law with respect to the decisional criteria necessary for the adoption of
the Proposal:
1.
The Proposal is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals
and policies:
A.
CCG20-Reduce demand for parking in the City Center.
B.
CCP41- Reduce requirements for the number of parking stalls
required for City Center development in comparison to other areas of the
City to encourage more intensive development and reflect the
improvements in local and regional transit service. Increases above the
required number of stalls may be allowed, on a case by case basis, when
structured or underground parking is provided.
C.
CCP42 - Encourage public and private parking structures (below or
above ground) in the core area. Consider a public private partnership to
develop structured parking in the downtown commercial core area.
D.
CCP43 - The City will encourage the provision of structured parking
through the use of bonuses and incentives.
E.
CCP47 - Encourage shared parking between uses to maximize the
use of available parking within the City Center.
I PAGE 4
ORD#
2.
The Proposal bears a substantial relationship to the public health,
safety and welfare because it implements the policy of intensifying the
downtown area which city-wide reduces sprawl.
Section 3. Amendment. The Federal Way Zoning Code, Chapter 22, is amended
to provide as set forth in Attachment A which is attached and by this reference is
incorporated herein.
Section 4. The provisions of this ordinance are declared separate and severable.
The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of this
ordinance or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall
not affect the validity of the remainder of the ordinance, or the validity of its application
to other persons or circumstances.
Section 5. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the
effective date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed.
Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force five
{5} days from the time of its final passage, as provided by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this
day
of
,1995.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MAYOR, MAHLON S. PRIEST
ATTEST:
ORD#
, PAGE 5
CITY CLERK, N. CHRISTINE GREEN, CMC
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY, LONDI K. LINDELL
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.
ORD#
, PAGE 6
"
ATTACHMENT A
ARTICLE I.
IN GENERAL
Sec. 22-1. Definitions.
*
*
*
*
Structure shall mean anything which is built or constructed, an
edicfice or building of any kind or any piece of work
.artificially built up or composed of parts' joined together in
sòme definite manner.
structural alterations shall mean any change in the supporting
member of a building or structure.
Structured parkinç shall mean parkina Drovided on more than one
level and within " a structure. either above- or below-grade.
structured parking shall not include a surface parking lot.
*
*
*
*
ARTICLE XV. OFFSTREET PARKING*
----------
*Cross reference(s)--Traffic and vehicle regulations,
15;" requirements for conformance of nonconforming parking,
334; supplementary district regulations regarding vehicles
boats, § 22-1176 et seq.; yard requirements for driveways,
parking areas, fences, structure protruding beyond exterior walls
of a structure, retaining walls, walkways, and certain other
improvements or structures, § 22-1133; vehicular access easement
improvements required, § 22-1496 et seq.; landscape re~irements,
§ 22-1561 et seq.
ch.
§ 22-
and
----------
DIVISION 1. GENERALLY
Sec. 22-1376. Exception in the city center CC zone.
If ~ the provisions of this article (other than Section
22-1377) conflict with the provisions of section 22-791 et seq.
regarding properties in the city center (~CC") zone, the
provisions of section 22-791 et seq. will be followed. In the
event of a confljct. all ~ provisions of this article that do
not conflict with section 22-791 et seq. apply to properties in
the city cellter CC zone.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.10), 2-27-90)
Sec. 22-1377. Number of spaces--Mïnimum.
(a) Generally. Except as provided in subsection @ below, the
number of parking spaces required by Sections 22-596 - 22-871 for
any particular use is the minimum number of parking spaces
required for that use, and the applicant shall provide at least
that number of spaces.
(b) Guest parking for residential uses. For residential
uses, the city may require guest parking spaces in excess of the
required parking spaces, if there is inadequate guest parking on
the subject property.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.15), 2-27-90)
@ Exc~tions. The number of parking spaces reqpired by this
Code for a particular use may be reduced only when the use for
which the parking is reqpired:
1.
Provides shared parking in accordance with Section 22-1422:
2. Provides structured parking in accordance with Section 22-
1425:
3. Is located in the CC-C or CC-F zones and is accompanied by a
traffic demand management plan which, as a condition of project
approval. the applicant shall implement. In such an instance.
the Director may approve reduction of the reqpired number of
parking spaces by l1pto 20%. Transpo'rtation demand management
options which can be considered by the Director include. but are
not limited to, the following:
(I) Private vanpool oDeration:
(ii) Transit/vanpool fare subsidy:
(iii) Preferential parkina for ca~ools/vanpools:
(iv) Flexible work-hour schedule:
(v) Participation in a ride-matching program: or
(vi) Bicycle parking facilities:
4. Is located in the CC-C or CC-F zones. is adjacent to a public
street right of way classified to allow on-street parking and the
applicant makes a one-time contribution to a City fund
established strictly to fund development of on-street parking.
The amount of the contribution will be based on a per stall cost
established by the city. and the reqpired number of stalls may be
reduced on a 1 for 1 basis according to the amount of the
contribution paid.
Sec. 22-1378. Same--Not specified in use zones..
If this chapter does not specify a parking space requirement
for a particular use in a particular zone, the director of
community development shall determine a parking requirement on a
case by case basis. The director of community development shall
base this determination on the actual parking demand on existing
uses similar to the proposed use.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.20), 2-27-90)
Sec. 22-1379. Same--Fractions.
If the formula for determining the minimum and maximum
number of parking spaces results in a fraction, that fraction
will be rounded up to the next higher whole number.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.25), 2-27-90)
Sec. 22-1380. Bonds.
The city may require or permit a bond under section 22-146
et seq. to ensure compliance with any of the requirements of this
article.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.120), 2-27-90)
Bonds, § 22-146 et seq.
Sees. 22-1381--22-1395. Reserved.
DIVISION 2. MODIFICATIONS*
----------
*Cross reference(s)--Administration, ch. 2.
----------
Sec. 22-1396. Generally.
The provisions of this division establish the circumstances
and procedure under which the requirements of this article may be
modified, either at the request of the appellant or at the
initiation of the city.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.115(1», 2-27-90)
Sec. 22-1397. Authority to grant.
(a) If the proposed development or use of or on the subject
property requires approval through process I, II, or III, any
proposed modification will be considered as part of that process
using the criteria of this division.
(b) If subsection (a) of this section does not apply, the
director of community development may grant or require a
modification in writing under the provisions of this section. The
decision of the director to require,. grant or deny a modification
under this division may be appealed using the appeal procedures
of process I.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2 (105.115 (2) (a), (bU, 2-27-90)
Cross reference(s)--Process I review procedure, § 22-386 et
seq.i process II review procedure, § 22-431 et seq.i process III
review procedure, § 22-476 et seq.
Sec. 22-1398. Criteria.
The city may grant or require a modification to the
provisions of this article if the city determines, based on the
submitted plans and/or other information that the following
criteria have been met for modifications to the applicable
sections:
(1 )
The parking area design provisions of sections 22-
1441(b) and 22-1452 may be modified if:
a.
The modification will not create any vehicular or
pedestrian safety problems;
b.
The modifications will not affect the ability to
provide any property with police, fire, emergency
medical and other essential services; and
c.
One of the following requirements is met:
1.
The modification is necessary because of a
preexisting physical condition; or
2.
The modification will produce a site design
superior to that which would result from
adherence to the adopted standard.
(2)
A decrease in the required number of parking spaces
under section 22-1377 may be permitted if a thorough
parking study documents that a fewer parking spaces
will be adequate to fully serve the uses. An increase
in the number of parking spaces permitted under section
22-1377 may be permitted if a thorough parking study
documents that the consistent or frequently recurring
parking needs of the use exceed the permitted number of
spaces.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.115(3», 2-27-90)
Sec. 22-1399. Parking area requirements.
The parking area location requirements oof section 22-1421
may be modified if:
(1 )
(2)
(3)
The proposed parking area will have no adverse impacts
on adjacent properties;
It is reasonable to expect that the proposed parking
area will be used by the employees, patrons and others
coming to the subject property; and
A safe pedestrian and/or shuttle connection exists, or
will be created at the time of occupancy, between the
subject property and the proposed parking area.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2 (105.115 (2) (c», 2-27-90)
Sec. 22-1400. Landscape requirements.
The landscape requirements of section 22-1444 may be
modified if:
(1 )
(2)
The modification will produce a landscaping design in
the parking area comparable or superior to that which
would result from adherence to the adopted standard; or
The modification will result in increased retention of
significant natural vegetation.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.115(2) (d)), 2-27-90)
seq.
Cross reference(s)--Landscape requirements, § 22-1561 et
Sec. 22-1401. Curb and sidewalk requirements.
The curb and sidewalk requirements of section 22-1445 may be
modified if:
(1 )
The modification will result in superior landscaping
and/or increased retention of significant natural
vegetation;
(2)
(3)
The modification will not result in ~ncreased hazards
for pedestrians or vehicles; and
The modification will not result in increased erosion
of unpaved areas onto the parking area, driveway or
streets.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.115(2) (e», 2-27-90)
Sec. 22-1402. Buffer requirements.
if:
The buffer requirements of section 22-1446 may be modified
(1 )
(2)
(3)
The existing topography of or adjacent to the subject
property decreases or eliminates the need for visual
screening;
The modification will be of more benefit to the
adjoining property by causing less impairment of view
or sunlight; or
The modification will provide a visual screen that is
comparable or superior to the buffer required by
section 22-1446.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2 (105.115 (2) (f) ), 2-27-90)
Sec. 22-1403. Surface material.
The surface material requirements of section 22-1453, may be
modified if:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
The surfacing material will not enter into the drainage
system, or onto public or other private property;
The surfacing material will provide a parking surface
which is usable on a year-round basis;
Use of the surfacing material will not result in dust
or deterioration of air quality; and
Runoff from the parking area will not degrade water
quality. .
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.115(2) (g», 2-27-90)
Secs. 22-1404--22-1420. Reserved.
DIVISION 3. LOCATION OF PARKING AREAS*
----------
*Cross reference(s)--Traffic and vehicles, ch. 15.
----------
Sec. 22-1421. Generally.
(a) Unless otherwise specified in this èhapter, the
applicant shall provide the required number of parking spaces
either:
On the subject property; or
(U
(2)
On a lot adjoining the subject property, if that lot is
in a zone that permits the use conducted on the subject
property.
(b) If the parking is located on a lot other than the lot
containing the use which generates the parking space
requirements, the owner of the lot containing the parking must
sign a covenant or other instrument, in a form acceptable to the
city attorney, requiring that the lot be devoted in whole or in
part to required parking for the use on another lot. The
applicant must record this statement with the county to run with
all affected properties.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.30), 2-27-90)
Sec. 22-1422. Shared facilities.
a. Two or more businesses or uses may share parking areas.
The number of parking spaces that must be provided in such a
shared areas must be at least 90 percent of parking spaces
required by this chapter for all such businesses or uses that are
open or generating parking demands at the same time. Th~ owner of
each lot must sign an agreementL in a form acceptable to the city
attorney, stating that the owner's property is committed to .
providing parking for the other property. This statement must be
recorded ~ ~the King Ccounty Auditor, at the applicant's
expense, and shall run with the properties.
(Ord. No. 90-43, §2(105.35), 2-27-90)
b. A request for shared parkin~ on properties located in the
CC-C and CC-F zones must meet the following reqpirements:
(I) The applicant must submit a parking demand study.
9repared by a professional traffic engineer. demonstrating
that the peak hours of Darkinq demand for the businesses or
uses which propose to share parkina will not substantially
conflict:
(ii) The shared Darkin~ facilities and buildin~s which they.
serve shall be connected with improved pedestrian facilities
and no buildinq or use involved shall be more than 500 feet
from the most remote parkin~ facility. The distance between
the parkinq facility and the buildin~ or use which it is to
serve shall be measured from the closest portion of the
parking facility to the nearest building entrance that the
parkina area serves. -
(iii) Notwithstandin~ subsection (a) above. a business or
use located in a CC-C or CC-F zone and proposin~ to share
parkin~ may reduce the number of required parkina spaces. up
to a maximum of 20 percent of the number of spaces otherwise
required. provided that the reduction shall not exceed the
number of shared spaces reasonably anticipated to be
available to the applicant durin~ the applicant's peak hours
of parking demand.
roptionall The provision for a 20 percent maximum parking
requirement reduction is suggested as an administrative guideline
only. The Plannin~ Director shall ultimately determine the size
of the parking reduction. subject to the other requirements of
this paragraph.
(iv) A written agreement 'shall be drawn to the satisfaction.
to the city Attorney and executed by all parties concerned
assuring the continued availäbility of the number of stalls
designed for joint use.
Sec. 22-1423. Adjoining low density zones.
The applicant shall locate a parking area for a use, other
than a detached dwelling unit, as far as possible from any
adjoining low density zone or existing permitted low density use.
COrd. No. 90-43, § 2{10S.40), 2-27-90)
Sec. 22-1424. Required setback yards.
For regulations on parking areas in required setback yards,
see section 22-1135.
COrd. No. 90-43, § 2(105.45), 2-27-90)
Sec. 22-1425. Structured Parkinq in the Ci~ Center Core and
Frame.
A. Floor area bonuses are available at the following rates
to property owners in the City Center Core and Frame zones when
structured parkinq is provided:
(I) Underaround oarkina: 4 square feet of additional floor
space for every 1 sauare foot of below arade parkina.
(ii) stacked. above-9round parking: 3 square feet of
additional floor space for everY 1 square foot of stacked.
above-ground parking.
B. The height limit for structures containing stacked.
above-ground parking is a maximum of 135 feet for all uses in the
CC-C zone and a maximum of 100 feet in the CC-F zone.
C. Parking requirements mav be increased uo to 20% or
d~creased ~ to 20% for projects providing' structured parking.
Sees. 22-1426--22-1440. Reserved.
DIVISION 4. PARKING AREA DESIGN
Sec. 22-1441. Generally.
(a) The applicant shall design parking areas in accordance
with Article XIX, Community Design Guidelines.
(b) The director of community development is authorized to
adopt standards, specifications and requirements, consistent with
the provisions of this chapter, which shall be on file in the
city clerk's office, regarding the design and dimensional
requirements of parking areas, driveways and related
improvements. These standards, specifications and requirements
shall be followed and have the full force and effect as if they
were set forth in this article.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.50, 105.55), 2-27-90; Ord. No. 96-270, §
3 (D), 7-2-96)
Sec. 22-1442. Compact car spaces.
The applicant may develop and designate up to 25 percent of
the number of parking spaces for compact cars.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.60), 2-27-90)
In the CC-F and CC-C zones the applicant may designate up to
40 percent of the number of parkin~ spaces for compact stalls if
the parking lot has more than 20 spaces. The compact stalls must
be interspersed equally throughout the site.
Sec. 22-1443. Barrier free access.
1. The applicant shall design the parking area using standards
set forth in state regulations for barrier free access.
Card. No. 90-43, § 2{105.65), 2-27-90)
Sees. 22-1444--22-1450. Reserved.
Editor's note--Ord. No. 93-170, § 6, adopted April 20, 1993,
repealed former §§ 22-1444--22-1450, relative to landscape and
buffering requirements of parking area designs, which derived
from Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.70--105.90), adopted Feb. 27, 1990.
Sec. 22-1451. Traffic control devices.
If the parking area serves a use other than a detached
dwelling unit, the applicant shall clearly delineate parking
spaces, traffic directions and entrance and exit ways. The city
may require other traffic control, devices necessary to ensure the
safe and efficient flow of 'traffic.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.95), 2-27-90)
Cross reference(s)--Traffic and vehicles, ch. 15.
Sec. 22-1452. Backing onto street prohibited.
A parking area that serves any use, other than one serving
detached dwelling units, must be designed so that traffic need
not back onto any street.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.100), 2-27-90)
Sec. 22-1453. Surface materials.
(a) The applicant shall surface the parking areas, driveways
and other vehicular circulation areas with a material comparable
or superior to the surface material of the right-of-way providing
direct vehicle access to the parking area.
(b) Grass grid pavers may be used 'for emergency access areas
that are not used in required permanent circulation and parking
areas.
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.105), 2-27-90)
Sec. 22-1454. Streets used in circulation pattern prohibited.
A parking lot may not be designed so that a street is used
as part of its circulation pattern to get from one part of the
parking lot to another part of the parking lot~
(Ord. No. 90-43, § 2(105.110), 2-27-90)
k:\ordin\parking.rev
See. 22-802. Reserved.
See. 22-803. Office use.
The following uses shall be pennitted in the city center 1Ì"ame (CC-F) zone subject to the regulations and notes set forth in this section:
USE ZONE CHART
DIRECTIONS: FIRST, read down 10 find use. .. THEN, across for REGULATIONS
MINIMUMS
~ í)
Z
0 ~ §
~ '" REQUIRED YARDS '"
'" ~
~ gj~ ~I CC-F
~ ~~ ~ I
USE = ~ I~
O'~ '" ~ ~
0 ò g¡g¡ S ~ ~~ SPECIAL REGULATIONS AND NOTES
'"
Office use. Site plan review. None (1 (1 (1 3S' above avenøe 1 for each 3e9 1. The Citr may, using Process I. modify required y.d. beigbt, JandICIpe 8Dd buffer 8Dd otberaite design. 8Dd climemional requiIanatIs for 8 proposed development that meds the
Possi.o[e Process l building elcvatioo. ~ sq. ft. of f~ critaia:
See Note 1. -or- See Notes 1 & S. I!JOII 11oor L The proposed dcw:loplll<d will be consistent with the adopted OOwt-~w plan poW:ics for this 2XDe; 8Dd
-. b. The proposed dcw:loplll<d will be consistent with applicable design guidcliaes; 8Dd
1(1 (1 (1 c. The aIIec:t, utilitica, 8Dd othec Ï11ftastnIctuIe in the area an: adequate 10 IU(IpOIt the proposed cIc:wlopment.
2 No &om}'lld actbaclc requiæcI if the p:md 11oor facedc fioatinc on or Wible &om the rigbt.of -way is 60% traDsp8Iat &lass 8Dd is consistent with design ItaIIdarcIs cstab1isbed Ù
See Notes 1.2, S & 8. AIticIc ~ otherwise 1 (1 &om yard Idbadc required.
3. Aacmbly or JII8IIUfadure of pxIs on the subject prcpcrty is permitted oaIy if:
L The assembly or IDIIÚaI:tIn is clcady acccsIOI)' 10 an a11owecIuse COIIIb:œd on the IUbject property and is cIirectly rclatad 10 8Dd dcpcDdcnt on this aI1owed use;
b. The aucmb1ed or mamJfacånd pxIs an: available for purdIasc 8Dd rcmøva1 &om the aubject property and an: for sale oaIy 10 mail puIdIasas; and
c. 1'hon: an: DO outward appcanoœ or impacts &om the assembly or IDIIIIIfac:ture
4. The following regulations apply 10 veterinary office only:
L May oaIy tn:at small animals on the subject property;
b. May DOt include outside MIS or othec outside facilities for the animals;
c. The IÍleIDllt be dcsi¡p:d 10 that DOisc &om this use will DOt be audible off the subject prcpcrty based on8 catificatc 10 this effect signed by an acoustical engineer and filed with
the development permit applications.
S. IfanypœtionŒ"8sIructID:on1bc d>jcctpropc:rty is within 100 feet of 8 n:sidcntial2JOnC, then that portion of the IIructIn sba11 DOt C!CCCCd 30 feet above avenøe building elevation
8Dd the structure sba11 be set b8ck 8 miDimum of20 feet &om the prcpcrty liDc of the n:sidc:nlia1 ZOÐC.
6. No maximum lot covcngc is cstab[iJbcd. Instead. the buildable area will be determined by othec site dcw:lopment requirements. ie., required buffers, parking lot 1mdscaping.
suñacc water facilitica, etc.
7. For community design guidcliDcs that apply 10 the project, see Article XIX.
, 8. For ."""-Pi.. requircmœIs that apply 10 the ¡xoject, see Article xvn.
9. For sign requiremeDIs that apply 10 the ¡xoject, see Article xvm.
10. Refer 10 See. 22-946 ateq. 10 cIetamine what othecprovisioos of this chapter may apply 10 the subject property.
I I L For othednfcrmation about parking 8Dd parking areas, see § 22-1376 a teq.
Process I. n and m are described in
§§ 22-386-22-411.
22-431-22-460.
22-47&-22-498 rcspcctivcIy. For details of what may C!CCCCd this height 1imit, see § 22-1046 ct teq.
Site Plan Review is dcsa1òcd in §§ 22-361-22-369 For details rqarding required yards. see § 22-1131 a teq.
(Oed. No. 90-43, § 2(50.50),2-27-90; Ord No. 93-170, § 7(Exh. B), 4-20-93; Oed No. 96-270, § 5,7-02-%)
See. 22-792. Retail use.
The following uses shall be permitted in the city center core (CC-C) zone subject to the regulations and notes set forth in this section:
DIRECTIONS: FIRST, read down to find use . .. THEN, across for REGULATIONS
MINIMUMS
UJ
~
¡:: ~
~ ~
USE ~ ~~
'0 r> ~I:!
Rd8i1 esbhli"""- selling poceries. Site pIm nMew.
md rd.8Ied items; chugs 8Dd personal Poaible Proees.I L
procbIs; boob; liquor; hIrdwIre, prdca. See Ncte 1.
eIeœonics, sportúw goods; 8Dd re18Ied items; 01
wœb of lit (excluding bulk 1áaiJ.).
Rd8i1 variety, specia\i1y, 01" cIeper1mcm ItŒes.
REQUIRED YARDS
!:>
~
¡¡j
II
î
~
..
~
..
S
~
g¡
(1
~
Nœe.
(1
(1
(Ø
01"
lIS'
See Note 1 &; 2.
-or-
1(1
(
(1
See Notes 1 '" 4.
Retail _ohI;- provicIiDc bIaIåns -
re18Ied 1iDIacia1 smvices.
Rd8i1 ~ohI;- provicIiDc Iamdry, dr)
~ beauty 8Dd bIrb«. video RI1tal 01" sboc
I'ep8ir savices.
PriDIing 8Dd cIuplicating services.
0Ibc£ IáaiJ. DOt specificaIJy 1isted.
See Note 11.
Process I. IT and m are described in
§§ 22-386-22-411.
22-431-22-460.
22-476-22-498 respectively.
Site Plan Review is described in §§ 22-361-22-369
I
USE ZONE CHART
..
f:j
~
~;
~~
~
~
SPECIAL REGULATIONS AND NOTES
1 fOl" each - ~ sq. l. The City may, USÌIIg PIocc:ss I. modify required yard. beigbI, Imdscope 8Dd buffer 8Dd other IÌte design 8Dd dimensiooal requimneoIs fOl" a proposed cIevelopnaIt !bat:
fl of gross flooc -. meets !be following criteria:
L The proposed development will be consistent with !be adopted coo.¡.~ pIm policies fOl" this mne; 8Dd
b. The proposed development will be CODSÌsteIIt with IpplicIble design guidelines; 8Dd
c. The sIIeet, uIilities. 8Dd other infrutructure in !be area are adequate to supped !be proposed devdqmmt.
2. ~bei ¡ KmaybeD:r-Uiom!be permitted outriabtbeigbt 0(60 feet to a maxùmm of lIS feet in excbqc for public open sp8CC œ aite, 01" payDIaIt ofa fco-in-
lieu at providing !be open sp8CC œ lite. The procedIn 8Dd fŒlllUla fOl" calcuIatiDg 0IHÍte open Ip8CC 8Dd altematiYe fco-in-lieu Ih8ll be IpJWWJd by !be City Council,
adopted by !be Directcr of Cœmmnity DeYelopment SclYi.ces,1h8ll be œ file in !be City Cledå office, 8Dd Ih8ll be followed 8Dd haw !be fiIll forœ 8Dd effect as if let
ix1b. in fijl D Ibis Idide. NIIic open sp8CC under this aectiœ Iball be in additiœ to my other outdoOI" sp8CC 01" landscape area æquired by this code, 8Dd Ih8ll meet desian
requiremeøs establisbed in Article XIX. Sectiœ 22-1639.
3. R.eùil C8IabIisbmaIIs providing wbicIe « bolt II8les, IerYÌCe 01" I'ep8ir. wbicIe savice IIaIiœs, 8Dd IáaiJ. establ~ providing public mini-WRIIouse 01" sIon e
facilities are DOt permitted in this :rJOIIC.
14. Driw: 1Duugb. facilities may be permitted fer bIIIb 8Dd re18Ied fiDIDCÌal services. Aœess to 8Dd 1iœt drive-Imuugh facilities must be IppIOIIed by !be Public Wcdœ
Dq.tnm. 1m\: bcq¡h faciliIies IØIIt be cIesi pIed 10 tbá vebicIes will DOt block traffic in !be JIrec:t wbile waiting in line 8Dd will DOt ~ly interfere with 0IHÍte
traffic flow.
S. A l(1fimt yan:I setbacIc is requiIed lIDless all of!be following criteria are DId, then !be setbacIc is 0 feet:
L The ground floor facade ftœIing œ « visible fioom !be rigbt.of-way is a minimum of 60% tramparcnt glass; 8Dd
b. A major builcIiag enIrIIIce fiœts œ « is clearly visible 1iœt !be rigbt.of -way; 8Dd
c. Methods to modulIIe 8Dd IIticuIatc buildiDg facade(1)!bat are visible fioom!be right-of-way meet 01" exceed !be minimum standards establisbed in Article XIX.
Ccmmunity Design Guidelines; 8Dd
d. The deYelopDent is consistent with all other Ipplicable desian st8Dd8rds establisbed in Article XIX. Community Design Guidelines.
6. Assembly or manufa<:ture of goods œ !be subject property is permiUed œ1y if:
L The -œly 01" manufacture is cleady acc:esscry to an alloMd use conducted œ !be subject property 8Dd is dúectly re18Ied to 8Dd dependent on this allowed use; 8IId
b. The assembled 01" IDIIIIIIf-..ed goods are 8YIilable f« pun:base 8Dd IaDDV&l1iœt !be subject property 8Dd are for sale œ1y to IáaiJ. pun:basas; 8Dd
Co Tbcre is DO outWIId çpearance 01" impacts 1iœt !be assembly 01" III8IIIIÍadIIIe
7. No maximum lot cownøe is estahIiohM Imtead,!be buildable area will be ddamiDed by other IÌte devdopmt:Dt requinmenIs, ie., requiœd buffers, padåDg lot
IatIdsc:apq. surface water facilities, etc.
8. FOI" CUIIIDUIIÌI¥ design guidelines !bat Ipply to !be project, see Article XIX.
9. FOI" landscaping requÏranaIIs !bat Ipply to !be project, see Article xvll.
10. FOI"sigluequiranents tbatapplyto!be project, see Article xvm. I
11. Refer to See. 22-946 et seq. to cIetamine what other provisioos of this cbapter may apply to !be subject property. I
12. 01her 1dail uses DOt specifically listed in this ZIODC may be IppIUW:d by !be Directcr of CœImuDity DeYdopmt:Dt SclYi.ces if!be proposed use is cIetermiDed to be
00IISÏsteIIt wi1h adopted 00aiIt-~<'I: plan policies fOl" this :rJOIIC.
L FOI" other informatiœ about padciDg 8Dd padciDg IR8S, see § 22-1376 et seq.
(Oed No. 90-43, § 2(50.35), 2-27-90~ Oed No. 93-170, § 7(Exh. B), 4-20-93; Ord. No. 96-270, § 5,2-7-96)
For details of whit may exceed this beigbt limit, see § 22-1046 et seq.
FOI" details R:g8I'ding required yards. see § 22-1131 et see¡.
Sees. 22-763-22-790. Reserved.
DIVISION 8. CITY CENTER-CORE (CC-C) AND CITY CENTER-FRAME (CC-F)
See. 22-791. Office use.
The following uses shall be pennitted in the city center core (CC-C) zone subject to the regulations and notes set forth in this section:
DIRECTIONS: FIRST, reød down to find UIC . .. mEN, IICroII for REGUIATIONS
MINIMUMS
USE '0
rI)
z
0
... en
g ~
~ ~;
C> ~~
~
REQUIRED YARDS
~
~
i
II
î
~
en
~
en
¡....
0
..¡
None.
~
~
Office UIe.
Site plan rMew.
Possible Process I.
See Note I.
-or-
a
a
a
9S'
or
14S'
See Note 2.
10'
a
a
See Notes 1 a: 3.
Process l n and m are described in
§§ 22-386-22-411,
22-431-22-460,
22-476-22-498 respectively.
Site Plan Review is described in §§ 22-361-22.369
USE ZONE CHART
AO
IX1Z
1>::...
þ:.o:en
O'I>::~
1X1<:i
I>::",en
1 f«each.
400 sq. ft. of
glOSS floor
-.
~
~
SPECIAL REGULATIONS AND NOTES
I. The City may, usq Process l modiJÿ JeqUired y8RI, bciøbt.18ndsc:ape 8Dd buffer 8Dd other aite desian 8Dd dimensiœal requin:mans for a proposed c\evdopnaIt that meets !be
following criteria:
L The popoeed cIcveIopmrd will be coasisteat with !be adopted COIu\-"¡"';wo plan policies for this zme; and
b. The popoeed cIcveIopmrd will be coasisteat with applicable desian guideliDcs; and
c. The IIIect. utilities, 8Dd other infiasIructure in !be - an: adequate to suppcrt !be pI'OpO8Cd cIeYdopmcnt.
2. ~""DIII)' be ino:reaed ftom!be permitted ouIri¡Iabeiabt of9S feet to amaximumbeiþ oC14S feet in caa:bqe for providing public open IIpICC en aítc, orpayIDiCŒ at
afecHn.illloCpuvidirw!becpcnllplCCGluÏIie. Thepl'ClCClbe 8Dd formula for c:alc:uIaIing ono&ite openllplCC 8Dd a1tematiw: fco-in-licu Iball be IIp XIJWd by !be City Couno:il, adopted
by!beDRcøoCCaœuIiIf~Saviccs, IboIl be en file io!be City Clak's office. 8Dd Iball be followed 8Dd haw: !be 1ùll fœœ 8Dd efl'cct as if set forth in 1ùll in this article.
P\tiic cpcn 11-= UDder this IeCtiœ IbaIl be in additiœ to my other outdoor IIpICC or landscape IRa required by this code, and rball meet desian requinmcms established in Artic:le
XIX Sectiœ 22-1639.
3. A 1a iomyard IIdbadt is æquired unless all of!be fol1~ critaia arc met, then !be Idback is 0 feet:
L The around floor facade úœting en or visible ftom !be rigbt-Gf -way is a minimum of 60% tr8nsp8rc:nt glass; md
b. A major builcting aIIranœ fiœIs en or is clearly wible ftom !be right-of-way; 8Dd
c. Mdbods 80 mocU8e 8Dd ~ buikIq; facade( s) that an: visible ftom !be right-of-way meet or cxœed !be minimum standards cstablisbcd in Article XIX. Community Design.
GuideliDcs; 8Dd
d. The dewIopDmt is coasisteat with all other applic:able desian ItaDdards estabIisbed in Article XIX. Community Design Guidelines.
4. The followiDg regulatioos apply to veterinary office œly:
L May œJy treat smaUmimals on !be subject property;
b. May DOt include outside runs or other ootside facilities for !be mimals;
c. The silellUltbe dcsignedsolbat DOÏse ftom this UIC will DOt be audible off!be subject property bued on. c:ertificate to this efl'ect signed by m acoustical cngÏDecr 8Dd filed with,
, ,!be devdopncnt permit applications.
S. Assamly or mmufacture oC OOCIs en !be subject popcrty is permitted œJy if:
L The -œly or mmufacture is clearly accessory to 81 allowed UIC CCIIIb:ted on !be subject property 8Dd is directly related to 8Dd dependent on !be allowed use;
b. The assembled or manufactured øoods arc available for pun:base 8Dd rcmøval ftom !be subject property and are for sale œJy to mail pun:basers; md
c. 'Ih:rc arc DO outW8d appearaoce or impacts ftom !be assembly or mIIIIIÍactuIe.
6. No maxinam lot CXIII'COIF is cstablisbed. Instead, !be buildable IRa will be determined by other site development requircmcnts, ie.. requùed buffers, parlång lot landsc:apin&
surface water facilities, de.
7. F« cœIIDIIÜty desian guidelines that apply to !be project. see Article XIX.
8. F« landscaping requirc:menIs that apply to !be project. see Article xvn.
9. For sign requinmcms that apply to !be project. see Artic:le xvm.
10. Refer to See. 22-946 aseq. to determine what otberproYisiœs oftbis cbaptermay apply to !be subject property.
L For other information about parlång 8Dd ~ areas, see § 22-1376 a seq.
(Oed. No. 90-43, § 2(50.50), 2-27-90; Oed. No. 93-170, § 7(Exh. B), 4-20-93; Ord No. 96-270. § 5, 7-2-96)
For details oCwbatmaycxœed this height limit, see § 22-1046 a seq.
FordetailSlq.ardingrequiredyards, see § 22-1131 aseq.
See. 22-804. Retail use.
The following uses shall be permitted in the city center frame (CC-F) zone subject to the regulations and notes set forth in this section:
USE
'0
DIRECTIONS: FIRST, read down to find use. .. THEN, ac:ross foe REGULATIONS
fI:I
Z
0
...
~
S
c¡
=
Ò
'"
'"
~
Ii
gjgj
~
'"
8
None
Rdail est8b1isbment selling px:eries, produce I Site pIm review.
8nd related items; . drup 8nd penonal care Possible Process L
products; boob; liquor; Iwdw8re, prden, See Note 1.
home e10ctr0aics, spcrtÏDg goods; 8nd related
items; oe WOIb of art (adudiDg bulk rdail).
Rdail variety, speciality, oe cIepartma¡t stores.
Rdail-""'¡ohm..nt providing b8nkiDg 8nd
related fiDIDciaI savices.
Rdail estIbIisbmeat providing 1aunIky, dry
cleming. beauty 8nd bazber, video rœtal oe
rboe Iepair services.
Rdail est8bIisbments providing limited
mecIic81l1111WÍac1UriDg taYÏces such IS dental
18bs, prostbetics labs, optical taYÏces, 1m a
C8Ie by C8Ie bais. See Note 13.
Printing and duplicatiDg services.
Other rdail not specifically 1isted in this :mne.
See Note 13.
Process I. n 8nd m are desaibed in
§§ 22-386-22-411.
22-431-22-460.
22-47~22-498 respectively.
Site Plan Review is cIescribed in §§ 22-361-22-369
MINIMUMS
REQUIRED YARDS
~
c:
f1
1
....,
~
'"
~
~
~
~
II
USE ZONE CHART
'"
~
II
gjp.¡
~
~
f1
--
If1
f1
fI
35' Ibow awnøe
building elev8tion.
See Notes 1 '" 6.
SPECIAL REGULATIONS AND NOTES
0enenI n:taiI. 1. The City may, ... ~ I. modifÿ rcq.úred yard. beigbt, 1andscape and buffer 8nd other site design 8Dd dimensional n:quiIaDenIs foe a proposed cIeve1opnmt that meets
f!$bhli~' !be following c:ritaia:
1 foe each ~ ~ sq. L The proposed dewlo¡med will be cœsisteat with !be adopted ........,."'--iw plan policies foe this zme; 8nd
ft. of pOlS floor ... b. The proposed dewlo¡med will be COIISÎsteat with applicable design guidelines; 8Dd
c. The street WIities 8nd other iafbstruc:án in !be area lie adequate to support !be proposed cIeYclopnall ,
Rdail .-hI-.. 2 No i'OŒ yard 1db8cIc..- if the pmd ðocrfac8de fi'orâw 1m oe visible fum !be right-of-way is 60% InospIreIIt g\ass 8Dd is cœsisteat with design standaIds establisbrxt,
providing in Article XIX; oCbawise 1 fI ÛOIIt yard IdbecIc required. .
eIItataÌIIIIIeŒ 3. A8aDbiy oe ~ at eoods œ!be lUbject property is pezmiIted oaly if. I
IIeCIaÛaD oe c:uIIunl: L The IDeIIIbIy oe ~ is cIemy IIICÎUaIy to m allowed use COIIducIed 1m !be lUbject property 8Dd is directly œlDd to 8nd cIcpeudent 1m this allowed use; 'I
DetemIiDecI 1m a C8Ie b. The -œw oe ~ eoods - available foe purchase 8Dd I'<IDIMl fum !be subject property 8Dd lie foe sale oaly to rdail purduIsen; 8nd
by C8Ie bais. c. 'I'hae _110 outwmIlIppCII'8Dœ oe imp8CIs fi'om !be ISICIDbly oe mamûacture.
See § 22-1376 et lOCI. 4. Rdail-~ pmvidiacwbicleoebo8t sales.1aYÏce oelepair 8ndn:tail. estohli"""",- providingpublicDlÏlli-wlrdlous oestcnøe facilities -not permittodinl
this 2XDe. I
S. ÑX%8 to8ndi'om~iåIäes DUt be IIppIOWId by !be public WOIb depertmaL ~ facililies must be cIesigncd so thatwbicles will not block traffici
in !be sIIeet wbiIe W8ÎIÎIIS in liDe 8nd will not vmasœably interfere with cn-site traffic flow. I
6. If 811)' pxtioD at a ItIuctuR: œ !be IIIbject property is within 100 feet of a raidediallme, then that pcrIÌCIII. at!be IInI<:tun: sball not exceed 30 feet Ibow average buildingl
elewIilm 8nd the ItIuctuR: sball be let beck a minimum. of 20 feet fi'om Ibe property liDe of Ibe raidcmial2XDe.
7. Outdooc use, activity 8nd stcnøe is œguIated by See. 22-1113.
8. NolllllXÏDuDIotCXlWl1lFisallblilbed. In8e8d, Ibe buildøbIe II'C& will be cIetermiDed by other site dewlo¡med teqIIÍremI:IIIS ie~ required bulfen, pIIIåDg lot 1m:Isc8p~
surface wata' facilities. de. I
9. FoeCOlDlDllllÏty designglJÏdelWs that apply to !be project, see Article XIX. I
10. Foe landscIpiDg requiRmeIà that apply to !be project, see Article xvn. I
11. Foe sign requiraDeoIs that app1y to the project, see Article XVIII. I
12 Râer to See. 22-946 et lOCI.- to cIetamioe what other provisicos of this chIpter may app1y to !be lUbject property. I
13. Limited maœfacturiag IerYÎces 8nd ocbec n:taiI. uses not specifically 1isted in this 1JOIIC may be IIppI'OVed by !be DiIector of Commuaity DevdopneDt Savices iflbel
proposed use is cIetermiDed to be CCÐSÍstaIt with adopted ""'-~ plan policies for this 2XDe. :
L Foe other inf'cnDllicxlIboutpating8DdplllåDglR:IS, see § 22-1376 et lOCI.
(Oed. No. 90-43. § 2(50.35). 2-27-90; Oed. No. 93-170. § 7(Exh. B), 4-20-93; Oed. No. 96-270. § 5.7-2-96)
Foe details ofwblt may exceed this heigIá limit, see § 22-1046 et lOCI.
Foe details n:prding required ymIs, see § 22-1131 et lOCI.
See Notes I, 2, 6 '"
10.
fI
DATE:
May 13, 1997
TO:
Phil Watkins, Chair
Land Use/Transportation Committee
~t'^
FROM:
Ken Miller, Street Systems Manager
SUBJECT:
The 1997 Asphalt Overlay Project Bid Results
BACKGROUND
Four (4) bids were received and opened on May 13, 1997 at 10: 10 a.m. for the 1997 Asphalt
Overlay Project, (see attached bid results for further detail). The apparent low bidder is Lakeside
Industries, with a total bid of $1 ,597,987.89.
The budget for the 1997 Asphalt Overlay Project is $1,954,000, which is comprised of the
, following: 1) 1997 Budget, $934,000; 2) 1996 Carryforward, $220,000; and 3) Utility Tax,
$800,000. The estimated total project cost, including a 10% contingency, $51,000 for in-house
design, $85,000 for construction administration, and $7,500 for printing and advertising, is
$1,901,286.68, and is within the budget.
RECOMMENOA TION:
Forward the following recommendations to the May 20, 1997 Council meeting for approval.
1)
Award all schedules (Schedules A - I) of the 1997 Asphalt Overlay Project to Lakeside
Industries, the apparent low bidder, in the amount of $1,597,987.89, and approve a
$159,798.79 contingency.
2)
3)
Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract.
Authorize $85,000 for construction administration.
" .
1997 ASPHALT OVERLAY PROJECT
BID RESULTS
The following four (4) bids were received and opened on May 13, 1997 at 10:10 a.m. for the 1997
Asphalt Overlay Project:
Contractor
Lakeside Industries
M.A. Segale, Inc.
Tucci and Sons, Inc.
Woodworth and Co., Inc.
Engineer's Estimate
1997 Asphalt Overlay Budget
Total Bid Amount
$1,597,798.97
$1,693,619.90
$1,711,075.10
~2,01O, 746.06
$2,069,946.24
$1,954,000.00
The apparent low bidder is Lakeside Industries. Their bid for each schedule is as follows:
Schedule Bid Project
-
A $60,098.15 South 317th Street
B $185,416.95 28th Avenue South
C $172,537.41 9th Avenue South
D $142,564.39 5th Avenue South
E $299,645.30 Southwest 320th Street
F $270,355.33 EmbelWood
G $296,503.24 Mirror Lake Village
H $39,903.95 Nine Firs
I $130,963.17 Country Palisades
The following is breakdo\VI1 of the estimated total project construction costs.
Contract Amount
10% Contingency
Construction Administration
Printing and Advertising
In-house Design
$1,597,987.89
159,798.79
85,000.00
7,500.00
. 51.000.00
Total
$ 1. 901.286.68
I:\PMS\970VL Y\970LA \\1H"E1\ (I'SK>
5/8/97
DATE:
May 19, 1997
TO:
Phil Watkins, Chair
Land Use/Transportation Committee
'4-^
FROM:
Ken Miller, Street Systems Manager
SUBJECT:
Authorization to bid the 1997 Sidewalk Replacement Project
Back¡:round: Public Works Staff has developed a list of recommended streets for the 1997 Sidewalk
Replacement Project, they are as follows: 1) 21st Avenue Southwest, from Dash Point Road to
Southwest 356th Street; and 2) Southwest 340th Street, from 30th Avenue Southwest to 35th Avenue
Southwest. Attached is a vicinity map showing the locations of the project. The streets were selected
based upon the sidewalk inventory data, complaints and field reconnaissance. The 1997 structures
budget, of which the 1997 Sidewalk Replacement Project is a portion of, is $119,367, and consists
of the following: 1). $17,000 for in-house design; 2) $12,000 for matching funds for TIB grants; 3)
$10,000 for misc. sidewalk projects; 4) $80,367 for the 1997 Sidewalk Replacement Project. The
estimated cost of the project, including in-house design, inspection and construction administration
, is $78,000.
The above cost of $78,000 is a preliminary figure and is used for estimating purposes only. The
contract will be awarded within the sidewalk budget of $80,367.
Once the list of streets for the sidewalk project is approved by Council, staff will complete the design
of the project and solicit quotes from contractors on the Public Works Smalls Roster for this project.
The anticipated deadline for submittal of quotes from contractors for this project is June 10, 1997.
Recommendatiol1
Forward the following recommendations to the June 3, 1997 City Council meeting for approval.
1)
Approve the list of streets for the 1997 Sidewalk Replacement Project;
2)
Authorize staff to solicit bids for the project. Bids will be brought directly back to Council
for award, the contract will be awarded within the project budget;
3)
Place the above recommendations on the consent agenda of the June 3, 1997 Council Meeting.
1:IMAINT\97SWPROJ\975WBID.MEM (PSK)
-t
1997 Sidewalk R I
ep acement Project
II.T..
VICINITY MAP
~
..~
I-'Jot7
DATE:
May 13, 1997
TO:
Phil Watkins, Chair
Land U selTransportation Committee
Jeff Pratt, Suñace Water Manage~~
So 356th Regional Stonn Water Control Facility Bid Awanl
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Bacqround:
On April 24, 1997, the City received fourteen bids from various contractors for the above
referenced project. The low-bid contractor for this project is Porter Brothers Construction, Inc.,
with a total bid amount of $1,738,701.47. This bid amount is 7% lower than the average bid
of the next three lowest bidders combined and $4,172.00 less than the engineer's estimated
construction cost for this project (see attached bid tabulations).
Based on the reference checks completed by the City's Surface Water Management division and
KCM, Inc., the City's design contractor on this project, there is no known reason why this low
bidder should not be able to successfully complete this project.
The project budget status is as follows:
Council Authorized Budget
$3,291,923.00*
Estimated Project Costs
$3,576,753.00
$ 284,830.00
Estimated Project Shortfall
* This amount includes $717,000.00 contributed toward the project by WDOT as part of a joint
venture to provide'storm water quality and quantity control for their SR161 improvements.
Estimated project cost includes the following:
Design
$ 204,727.00
$1,189,455.00
Acquisition
Construction:
Underground Utility Conversion
Construction Management
Construction
$ 120,000.00
$ 150,000.00
$1,912,571.00*
* Includes 10% contingency
Total Costs
$3,576,753.00
The estimated project shortfall is a result of a settlement agreement reached between the City
and Everspring, Inc., during the property acquisition phase of the project. The estimated costs
of the Everspring parcel's acquisition was exceeded by the actual settlement price by
$335,487.00. Note that in order to proceed with construction of this project a Council approved
budget adjustment in the amount of $284,830.00 will be necessary.
Recommendations:
Staff recommends that the project budget be amended by a budget increase in the amount of
$284,830.00. Staff recommends the award of this project to the lowest responsive, responsible
bidder, Porter Brothers Construction, Inc., in the amount of $1,738,701.47, and that a 10%
construction contingency totaling $173,870.15 be established for the project. Staff recommends
that this matter be placed on the May 6, 1997 City Council meeting business agenda for their
, consideration.
Attachment: Bid TabuJationa
K:\LUTC\S3S6RSPB.WPD
Bid Tabulation "RFB 97-100" BID OPENING APRIL 24,1997
South 356th Street Regional Storage Facility and Stream Rehabilitation Project
8íd 1 Ijld;¿ Il:!ldJ IjIO 4
Vendor Name ---> PORTER BROTHER CONC NORTHWEST CONST., INC ~TAN PALMER CONST,INC. RW SCOTT CONST, INC
Location ----------> DesMoines Seattle Silverdale Renton
-
Item Amount Price Total Price Total Price Total
1 Temporary Water Pollution/Erosion 1 8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00
2 Silt Fence 645 5.28 3,403.02 5.00 3,225.00 2.00 1,290.00 6.00 3,870.00
3 Mobilization 1 49,585.00 49,585.00 150,000.00 150,000.00 144,000.00 144,000.00 140,000.00 140,000.00
4 Clearing and Grubbing 4.5 527.51 2,373.77 2,000.00 9,000.00 6,622.00 29,799.00 3,125.00 14,062.50
5 Removal of Structure and Obstructio 1 5,275.00 5,275.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 13,800.00 13,800.00 29,000.00 29,000.00
6 Unsuitable Foundation Excalnc. Haul 900 6.86 6,174.00 10.00 9,000.00 24.00 21,600.00 15.00 13,500.00
7 Gravel Borrow Incl. Haul 1665 10.02 16,679.97 10.00 16,650.00 8.15 13,569.75 11.00 18,315.00
8 Unclassified Excavation 1 353,214.00 353,214.00 350,000.00 350,000.00 297,789.00 297,789.00 434,124.00 434,124.00
9 Bottom Treatment Type A 10020 11.46 114,869.28 2.50 25,050.00 6.50 65,130.00 11.00 110,220.00
10 Slope Treatment Type A 2090 6.49 13,568.28 15.00 31,350.00 45.00 94,050.00 15.00 31,350.00
11 Shoring or Extra Excavation CI. B 55390 0:53 29,079.75 0.15 8,308.50 1.00 55,390.00 0.65 36,003.50
12 Dike Ditch 282 5.28 1,487.83 10.00 2,820.00 6.50 1,833.00 12.00 3,384.00
13 Shoulder Ditch 260 10.55 2,743.52 10.00 2,600.00 12.00 3,120.00 13.00 3,380.00
14 Site Remediation 1 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00
15 Temporary Pavement Patching 190 15.82 3,005.80 20.00 3,800.00 10.75 2,042.50 13.00 2,470.00
16 Asphalt Concrete Patching 190 23.74 4,510.22 20.00 3,800.00 15.00 2,850.00 33.00 6,270.00
17 Gabion Cribbing 1900 100.22 190,419.90 110.00 209,000.00 95.00 180,500.00 115.00 218,500.00
18 Trench Foundation Stabilization 220 12.66 2,785.42 20.00 4,400.00 19.00 4,180.00 15.00 3,300.00
19 CI. IV Reinf. Conc. Pipe 12 In. Diam. 72 24.88 1,791.36 46.50 3,348.00 28.00 2,016.00 31.00 2,232.00
20 CI. IV Reinf. Conc. Pipe 24 In. Diam. 137 44.76 6,132.12 67.00 9,179.00 33.00 4,521.00 33.00 4,521.00
21 Cl. N Reinf. Conc. Pipe 42 In. Diam. 1060 122.55 129,904.06 152.00 161,120.00 145.00 153,700.00 122.00 129,320.00
22 CI. V Reinf. Conc. Pipe 42 In. Diam. 408 169.89 69,315.12 196.00 79,968.00 220.00 89,760.00 145.00 59,160.00
23 CI. IV Reinf. Conc. Pipe 48 In. Diam. 604 137.03 82,763.70 160.00 96,640.00 139.00 83,956.00 126.00 76,104.00
24 CI. IV Reinf. Conc. Pipe 60 In. Diam. 13 208.61 2,711.93 218.00 2,834.00 450.00 5,850.00 255.00 3,315.00
25 Connect to Existing Manhole 2 3,376.00 6,752.01 750.00 1,500.00 3,200.00 6,400.00 500.00 1,000.00
26 Manhole Under 12 FI. 72 In. Diam 2 6,711.91 13,423.81 4,000.00 8,000.00 5,875.00 11,750.00 4,000.00 8,000.00
I 27 Manhole Under 12 Ft. 96 In. Diam 2 10,171.25 20,342.50 5,000.00 10,000.00 9,465.00 18,930.00 11,000.00 22,000.00
28 Manhole Under 12 to 20 FI. 72 In. Oi 3 8,756.50 26,269.50 2,500.00 7,500.00 10,500.00 31,500.00 5,668.00 17,004.00
29 Manhole Under 12 to 20 FI. 96 In. Di 4 13,841.60 55,366.41 7,100.00 28,400.00 12,200.00 48,800.00 9,400.00 37,600.00
I 30 Outlet Structure 1 36,503.00 36,503.00 30,000.00 30,000.00 15,000.00 15,000.00 12,750.00 12,750.00
31 T"psoil Type B 1970 4.75 9,359.47 4.00 7,880.00 6.25 12,312.50 12.00 23,640.00
3~ :fing and Establish. Type 1 0.8 1,086.64 869.31 1,030.00 824.00 1,475.00 1,180.00 1;092.00 873.60
33 4ding and Establish. Type 2 1.7 22,408.20 38,093.95 18,740.00 31,858.00 19;000.00 32,300.00 19,864.00 33,768.80
34 Straw Blanket Mulch 5000 1.11 5,525.00 1.05 5,250.00 1.10 5,500.00 1.15 5,750.00
35 Soil Amendment 708 4.95 3,507.43 4.70 3,327.60 5.00 3,540.00 5.17 3,660.36
36 Soil Guard 570 5.01 2,855.13 2.00 1,140.00 2.00 1,140.00 2.15 .1,225.50
37 Landscaping-Detention Pond Area 1 50,022.82 50,022.82 47,415.00 47,415.00 48,000.00 48,000.00 49,800.00 49,800.00
38 Landscaping-Stream Rehabilitation 1 18,705.15 18,705.15 17,730.00 17,730.00 17,000.00 17,000.00 18,700.00 18,700.00
39 Chain Link Fence Type 3 1184 7.65 9,059.97 8.75 10,360.00 8.00 9,472.00 9.50 11,248.00
40 Double 20 Ft Chain Link Gate 1 804.96 804.96 800.00 800.00 750.00 750.00 715.00 715.00
41 Streambank Protec.-Left Bank 60 68.57 4,114.38 26.00 1,560.00 92.00 5,520.00 60.00 3,600.00
42 Stream bank Prol.-Left & Right Bank 75 94.95 7,121.55 37.00 2,775.00 87.00 6,525.00 100.00 7,500.00
43 Channel Weirs 4 791.25 3,165.01 1,000.00 4,000.00 1,890.00 7,560.00 1,500.00 6,000.00
44 Emergency Overflow Spillway 1 21,311.00 21,311.00 7,500.00 7,500.00 12,500.00 12,500.00 15,000.00 15,000.00
45 Outlet Protection 62 56.97 3,532.20 120.00 7,440.00 60.00 3,720.00 113.00 7,006.00
46 Gravel Filter Window 2 3,165.00 6,330.00 ' 2,250.00 4,500.00 3,625.00 7,250.00 ' 4,200.00 8,400.00
47 Sedimentation Forebay 440 14.77 6,498.80 10.50 4,620.00 18.00 7,920.00 20.00. 8,800.00
48 Access Road 2660 21.79 57,950.76 21.00 55,860.00 22,00 58,520.00 26.00 69,160.00
49 Channel Protection 42 12.66 531.76 15.00 630.00 5.85 245.70 18.00 756.00
50 OillWater Separator & Div. Manhole 1 60,778.55 60,778.55 62,000.00 62,000.00 53,000.00 53,000.00 56,700.00 56,700.00
51 Asphalt Overlay 823 9.02 7,426.75 12.00 9,876.00 10.00 8,230.00 13.00 10,699.00
SUBTOTAL l,öUl,U14.;¿:> ,öl;¿,I$Jt:UU ,131$,311.4:> 1,816,757.26
Sales Tax @18.6% 137,687.23 138,704.08 149,494.78 156,241.12
TOTAL 1T,738,701.47 ,751,542.18 ,887,806.23 l,~r;¿,~~ð.;)!
IljlO ;:'Iqna ure sione<! slaneo slaneo slaned
IBid Bond ves ves ves ves
IAddendums ves ves ves yes
Bíd5 1:3Id 6 t!ld 1 'Ij d!:l I:Ild ~
LLOYD ENTERPRISES, INC PIVETTA BROTHER CONST FRANK COLUCCIO CONST.C M!D_MOUNTA!NS,INC GLACIER CONST. & EOUI
Federal Way Sumner Seattle Bellevue Seattle
Price Total Price Total Price Total Price Total Price Total
8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00 8,000.00
4.50 2,902.50 3.20 2,064.00 4.00 2,580.00 5.00 3,225.00 5.00 3,225.00
100,000.00 100,000.00 134,378.00 134,378.00 188,000.00 188,000.00 190,000.00 ,190,000.00 180,000.00 180,000.00 .
3,175.00 14,287,50 2,798.00 12,591.00 2,000.00 9,000.00 3,500.00 15,750.00 5,000.00 22,500.00
28.200.00 28,200.00 13,250.00 13,250.00 10,000.00 10,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00
9.05 8,145.00 14.70 13,230.00 21.00 18,900.00 7.00 6,300.00 15.00 13,500.00
8.50 14,152.50 7.77 12,937,05 11.00 18,315,00 8.00 13,320.00 18.00 29,970.00
511,000.00 511,000.00 366,236.00 366,236.00 520,000.00 520,000.00 400,000.00 400,000.00 375,000.00 375,000.00
4.05 40,581.00 13.40 134,268.00 8.00 80,160.00 9.00 90,180.00 10.00 100,200.00
4.10 8,569,00 7.90 16,511.00 8.00 16,720.00 8,00 16,720.00 2.00 4,180.00
0.55 30,464,50 0.22 12,185.80 0,20 11,078.00 0.05 2,769.50 0.25 13,847.50
12,30 3,468.60 16.72 4,715.04 9.00 2,538.00 10.00 2,820.00 15.00 4,230.00
20.25 5,265.00 15.50 4,030.00 15.00 3,900.00 18.00 4,680.00 12.00 3,120.00
25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00
15.00 2,850.00 11.00 2,090.00 7.00 1,330.00 8.00 1,520.00 20.00 3,800.00
22.30 4,237.00 44.85 8,521.50 35.00 6,650.00 22.00 4,180.00 25.00 4,750.00
105.00 199,500.00 115.38 219,222.00 85.00 161,500.00 134.00 254,600.00 110.00 209,000.00
8.20 1,804.00 25,25 5,555.00 13,00 2,860.00 12.00 2,640,00 35.00 7,700.00
32.75 2,358.00 42.55 3,063.60 54.00 3,888.00 40.00 2,880.00 35.00 2,520.00
50.50 6,918.50 45.00 6,165.00 73.00 10,001.00 50.00 6,850.00 55.00 7,535.00
147.50 156,350.00 105.80 112,148.00 141.00 149,460.00 180.00 190,800,00 200.00 212,000.00
233.50 95,268.00 113.70 46,389.60 211,00 86,088.00 250.00 102,000.00 320.00 130,560.00
160.00 96,640.00 128.60 77,674.40 150.00 90,600.00 180.00 108,720.00 160.00 96,640.00
164.00 2,132.00 349.00 4,537.00 253,00 3,289.00 300.00 . 3,900.00 300.00 3,900.00
1,130.00 2,260.00 3,418.00 6,836.00 2,700.00 5,400.00 350.00 700.00 1 ,000.00 2,000.00
6,200.00 12,400.00 3,966.00 7,932.00 5,300.00 10,600.00 5,000.00 10,000.00 4,500.00 9,000.00
8,450.00 16,900.00 6,732.00 13,464.00 7,400.00 14,800.00 8,000.00 16,000.00 6,000.00 12,000.00 .
7,105.00 21,315.00 4,555.00 13,665.00 6,300.00 18,900,00 5,500.00 16,500.00 6,000.00 18,000.00
10,150.00 40,600.00 8,561.00 34,244.00 9,000.00 36,000.00 9,000.00 36,000.00 7,500.00 30,000.00
33,850.00 33,850.00 26,440.00 26,440.00 29,500.00 29,500.00 23,000.00 23,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00
6.80 13,396,00 17.00 33,490.00 4.00 7,880.00 7.00 13,790.00 22.00 43,340.00
1,700.00 1,360.00 3,982.50 3,186,00 1,200.00 960.00 2,000.00 1,600.00 1,100.00 880.00
12,800.00 21,760.00 27,830.00 47,311.00 20,000.00 34,000.00 26,000.00 44,200.00 20,000,00 34,000.00
2.00 10,000.00 3.80 19,000.00 1.10 5,500.00 1.50 7,500.00 1.50 7,500.00
3.40 2,407.20 5.88 4,163.04 5,00 3,540.00 22.00 15,576.00 5.00 3,540.00
2.25 1,282.50 6.00 3,420.00 2.50 1,425.00 1.00 570.00 2.00 1,140,00
87,650.00 87,650.00 100,763,00 100,763.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 47,000.00 47,000.00 50,000,00 50,000.00
23,600.00 23,600.00 28,727.00 28,727.00 19,000.00 19,000.00 16,000.00 16,000.00 20,000,00 20,000,00
14.00 16,576.00 10.60 12,550.40 10.00 11,840,00 10.00 11,840.00 9.00 10,656,00
1,350.00 1,350.00 754.00 754.00 800.00 800.00 700.00 700.00 800,09 800.00
43.00 2,580.00 90.95 5,457.00 21,00 1,260.00 40.00 2,400,00 25.00 1,500.00
87.50 6,562.50 138.20 10,365.00 45.00 3,375.00 40.00 3,000.00 50.00 3,750.00
150.00 600.00 2,500.00 10,000.00 500.00 2,000.00 1,200.00 4,800.00 1,000.00 4,000.00
27,000,00 27,000.00 13,047,00 13,047.00 12,000.00 12,000.00 9,000.00 9,000.00 10,000.00 10,000,00
114.00 7,068.00 47.98 2,974.76 117.00 7,254.00 50.00 3,100.00 75.00 4,650.00
3,400.00 6,800.00 5,407.00 10,814.00 3,500.00 7,000.00 4,000,00 8,000.00 3,000.00 6,000.00
12.00 5,280.00 86.35 . 37,994.00 20.00 8,800.00 14.00 6,160.00 20.00 8,800.00
19.00 50,540.00 34.75 92,435.00 20.00 53,200.00 21.00 55,860.00 25.00 66,500.00
11.00 462.00 28.75 1,207.50 15.00 630.00 17.00 714.00 18.00 756,00
75,000.00 75,000.00 77,457.00 77,457.00 97,000.00 97,000.00 75,000.00 75,000.00 85,000.00 85,000,00
14.55 11,974.65 18.27 15,036.21 20.00 16,460,00 13.00 10,699,00 10.00 8,230.00
HfiH fififi.95 1 ,!:II 1.494.90 HHH l.IH1.00 1 l.Itlfi "'fi'~.bO Q". 'J1 Q.50
160705.36 161 464.56 162452.37 167 404.46 167976.88
'.J rJ'.Jl.I'{ .31 '.J/HH ¡'¡..,l.I.46 2,051.433,31 2,113,96/.96 2.121 196.38
" Ii I
sioned sioned sioned síaned - slonea
yes yes ~ yes "'è~ ves " 'o c yes
" "
yes yes yes ves " '; yes " "
"
-!'
~I( 10
TUCCI & SONS, INC
Tac"",a
~-
f-
8,000,00
6.00
147,00000
3 500,00
23000,00
23.50
66O
514,000.00
6,70
6.40
0,25
13.30
26.00
25,000.00
21.30
57.50
120,00
24,00
33.50
127.00
162,00
217.00
183,00
190.00
2,800.00
3,030,00
5,830.00
3,950.00
10.000.00
48,350,00
6.25
1,750,00
24.100.00
1,40
18.50
0.75
'JO
10
,1.00
750.00
25.50
36,25
950,00
11.400.00
65,00
4,300,00
30.00
41.25
25,00
82,400.00
6.70
4:>
1,
sIgned
yes
yes
.
Total
8,00000
3,870.00
147,00000
15.75000
23,000.00
21,150,00
10,98900
51400000
67,134.00
13,376,00
13,847,50
3.75060
6,760,00
25,000,00
4,047,00
10,925,00
228.00000
5,280.00
2,412,00
17,399,00
171,720,00
88,536.00
110.532.00
2,470.00
5,600,00
6.060.00
11,66000
11,850.00
40,000,00
48,350.00
12,312,50
1.400.00
40,970,00
7,000.00
13,098.00
427.50
43,620.00
14,630.00
13,024.00
750,00
1,530.00
2,718.75
3,800,00
11,400,00
4,030.00
8,600.00
13,200.00
109,725,00
1,050.00
82,40000
5,514,10
174551.44
tIle 11 ¡tIle lL tIle 1.j
GARY MERLINO CONST CO f/vestwater Construction Co OLSON BROTHER EXCA
Seattle ltIuDurn Puyallup
Price
8,000.00
3.00
50,00000
4,500,00
100,00000
8.00
7.00
582,500,00
3.00
3.00
0.10
7.50
14.00
25,000,00
25.00
30.00
90.00
25.00
55,00
85.00
200.00
325,00
210.00
350,00
500.00
5,500.00
10,000.00
7,000,00
12,500,00
25,000.00
12,00
1,800.00
25,000.00
1.50
19.00
1.00
45,000.00
15,000.00
9.00
700.00
40,00
60.00
1,000.00
15,000.00
80.00
4,000.00
15.00
30.00
15,00
85,000.00
15.00
slgnea
yes
yes
Total
8,00000
1.93500
50,00000
20,250.00
100,00000
7,200.00
11.6550::;
582,5000'
3O,O60C:
6,27J 00
5S)9.00
2,115.00
3,64000
25,00000
4.750.00
5,700,00
171.000.00
5,50000
3,960,00
11,64500
212,000.00
132,60000
126,840.00
4,550,00
1,000.00
11 , 000 . 00
20.000.00
21,000,00
50,000,00
25,000.00
23,640,00
1,440,00
42,500.00
7,500.00
13,452,00
570.00
45,000,00
15,000,00
10,656,00
700,00
2,400,()IJ
4,5OO,C'1
4,ooo,v:
15,00000
4,£60,00
8,000.00
6,600.00
79,800.00
630.00
85,000,00
12,345,00
175,818.57
L,LLV" :LV,:>,
Price
8,00000
7.00
178,000.00
7,00000
10,00000
10. 00
10.00
736,00000
8.00
12,00
0.25
10.00
14,00
25,000.00
5.00
20.00
7500
10.00
65.00
100,00
135,00
140.00
160,00
170,00
2,00000
5,000.00
7,000,00
6,800,00
8,000,00
35,000.00
18.00
1,600,00
1,400.00
1.50
4,00
2.00
68,000.00
25,000.00
10.00
700,00
45,00
65.00
1 , 000, 00
14,000,00
30,00
1 ,500 00
14.00
25,00
, 16.00
65,00000
10.00
I
I
I
slgneo
yes
yes
Total
8,000,00
4,51500
178,00000
31,500 00
10,000 00
9,00000
16,65000
736,000,00
80,160.00
25,08000
13,84750
2,820,00
3,640,00
25,00000
950.00
3,80000
142,500,00
2,20000
4,680,00
13,70000
143,100,00
57,120.00
96,64000
2,210,00
4,00000
10,00000
14,000.00
20,400,00
32.00000
35,000,00
35,460,00
1,280,00
2,380,00
7,50000
2,832,00
1,140.00
68,000,00
25,000,00
11,840,00
700,00
2,700.00
4,875,00
4,000.00
14,000,00
1,86000
3,000,00
6,160,00
66,50000
672.00
65,00000
8,23000
177,129,17
2,236, I IO,6?
Price
8,000.00
5.00
100,000.00
8,00000
50,000 00
20.00
18,00
55,000.00
18.00
25,00
0.50
100.00
75,00
25,000,00
100.00
120,00
100,00
20.00
30,00
48,00
92.00
106.00
110,00
156,00
2,000,00
6,00000
7,500.00
8.500,00
10,000.00
25,000.00
. 20.00
2,000.00
1,500.00
500
10,00
5,00
50,000.00
30,000.00
20,00
1,80000
500,00
500.00
1,000.00
28.000,00
200.00
12,000,00
60.00
150.00
30000
75,000,00
60.00
I
signed
yes
yes
Total
8,000,00
3,225,00
100,000,00
36,000,00
50,00000
18,000,00
29,970,00
55,000.00
180,36000
52,250,00
27,69500
28,200,00
19,500,00
25,000,00
19,000.00
22,800,00
190,000,00
4,400,00
2,160,00
6,576.00
97,520,00
43,248.00
66,440.00
2,028,00
4,000.00
12,000,00
15,000,00
25,500,00
40,000.00
25,000.00
39,400.00
1,600,00
2,550,00
25,000,00
7,080.00
2,850,00
50,000,00
30,000.00
23,680.00
1,800,00
30,00000
37,500,00
4,000.00
28,000.00
12,400,00
24,000,00
26,400.00
399,000,00
12,600.00
75,000,00
49,380,00
L,U!'I1,112.UU
179835.63
L,L/V,~4/,b.j
11014
YOICO, INC
Maple Valley
Price
8,000,00
7,00
200,000.00
10,000.00
100,000.00
30.00
15.00
539,OOô.00
4,00
5.00
0.50
20.00
20.00
25.000,00
5.00
15.00
105.00
50,00
60.00
70,00
140.00
150.00
160,00
1,000.00
3,000,00
20,00000
25,000,00
25,000.00
30,000,00
70,000.00
23.00
1 , 000. 00
16,000.00
2.00
5.00
5.00
80,000,00
25,000.00
23,00
1,000.00
35.00
70. 00
2,000.00
10,00000
50,00
2,000.00
10.00
15,00
20.00
65,000,00
9.00
I
I
I
signeD
Yes
yes
Total
8,00000
4,51500
200,00000
45,00000
100,00000
27,000.00
24,97500
539,00000
40,080.00
10,45000
27,69500
5,640.00
5,200,00
25,00000
950.00
2.850.00
199,50000
11 ,000 00
4,320,00
9,590.00
148,40000
61,200.00
96,640.00
13,00000
6,00000
40,000,00
50,000.00
75,000.00
120,000.00
70,000.00
45,310.00
800,00
27,200.00
10,000,00
3,540.00
2,850,00
80,000,00
25,000.00
27,232,00
1,000,00
2,100.00
5,25000
8,000.00
10,000.00
3,100.00
4,00000
4,40000
39,900,00
840.00
65,000,00
7,407,00
201 578.32
Pflce
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
8,00000
2,00
104,11900
3,00000
10,000,00
8.00
10,00
313,00000
9.00
38.00
0,15
10,00
17.00
25,00000
5,00
14.00
12500
8.00
30,00
51.00
100,00
110. 00
108.00
165.00
250,00
4,000,00
7,000.00
7,000,00
11 ,000, 00
20.000.00
9,00
1,200,00
1,700,00
1,00
4.50
4,00
43,900.00
15,500.00
12,00
1,000,00
37.00
78,00
2,20000
10,000,00
60,00
2,000.00
22,00
30,00
18.00
99,350.00
15.00
.
Total
8,000,00
1,290,00
104,119,00
13,500.00
10,000,00
7,200.00
16,650.00
313,000,00
90,180,00
79,420,00
8,308,50
2,820.00
4,420.00
25,000,00
950,00
2,660,00
237,500.00
1,760,00
2,160.00
6,987.00
106,000.00
44,880.00
65,232.00
2,145,00
500.00
8,000,00
14,000,00
21,000.00
44,000.00
20,000,00
17,730.00
960.00
2,890.00
5,000,00
3,186.00
2,280,00
43,900,00
15,500.00
14,208.00
1,000.00
2,220,00
5,850.00
8,800.00
10,000.00
3,720.00
4,000,00
9,680,00
79,800,00
756.00
99,350,00
12,345,00
138,017,66
,/42.tJ/4.1b
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MDEM (Q) ~ UM
TO:
City Council Land Use/Transportation Committee
Chris Green, City Clerk( ~..
May 12, 1997 -- U
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Professional Services Agreement for Hearing Examiner
The city's contract with McCarthy, Causseaux and Rourke expires May 15, 1997. The
professional services agreement has now been in effect for one year following last year's Request
for Proposal. City staff feels the existing hearing examiner has been fair and equitable to all
parties coming before him, and recommends extension of the contract for an additional one-year
term, with an option to extend for a third year. There will be no increase in the total
compensation for the examiner or related costs. The only changes extend the term of the current
ageement and add an additional deputy hearing examiner to the existing list of attorneys.
Attached is a copy of the proposed amendment, as well as a copy of last year's contract as
informational.
City staff respectfully requests the committee consider approving an extension of the hearing
examiner's contract for McCarthy, Causseaux and Rourke for an additional one-year term, with
an option to extend a third year. The committee's recommendation will then be forwarded to
full Council on May 20.
As I will be away from city hall the week of May 19, Director Iwen Wang will be present to
answer your questions. Thank you.
c:
Ken Nyberg
Philip Keightley
Londi Lindell
Iwen Wang
Greg Moore
Kathy McClung
Bob Baker
memocomm
~
5;1 z/'it
FIRST AXE!1D1IBI1'.r
'00 .
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEKBRT
FOR
HEARING EXAJaIlBR
This First Amendment ("Amendment") is dated effective this
16th day of May, 1997, and is entered into by and between the City
of Federal Way, a Washington municipal corporation ("City") and
McCarthy, Causseaux, Rourke~ Inc. P.S, a Washington professional
service corporation ("Hearing Examiner").
A. The City and. the Hearing Examiner entered into a
Professional Services Agreement dated effective May 16, 1996,
whereby the Hearing Examiner agreed to provide temporary
professional services in the capacity of a Hearing Examiner
("Agreement"). .
B. section 14.2 Modification of the Agreement provided that
the Agreement may only be amended by written agreement signed by
the parties.
C. The parties desire to amend the Agreement to extend the
term of the Agreement and to add Mark Burdelbrink as an additional
Deputy Hearing Examiner to the list outlined in the original
agreement.
. .NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree to the following terms and
conditions: .
1. ~. section 2. of the Agreement shall be amended to
extend the t.erm of the Agreement until May 15, 1998.
2. Full Force and Effect. All other terms and conditions of
the Agreement not modified by this Amendment shall remain in full
force and effect.
DATEP the effective date set forth above.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
By:
Kenneth E. Nyberg, City Manager
33530, 1st Way South
Federal Way, Washington 98003
ATTEST:
City Clerk, N. Christine Green
McCARTHY CAUSSEAUX ROURKE, INC., P . S .
By:
Stephen K. Causseaux, Jr.
President
,
902 South 10th Street
.Tacoma, WA 98405
(206) 272-2206
,
Extend term only does not need Landi' s OR Ken' s signature or
approval..
K:\Forms\AHENDTRH.PSA
Rev. 10-10-95
'.
,
46 q{¡- {Lf.g
(~~
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
FOR
HEARING EXAMINER
This Professional Services Agreement ("Agreement") is dated
effective this 16th day of May, 1996. The parties ("Parties") to
this Agreement are the city of Federal Way, a Washington municipal
corporation ("city"), and McCarthy, Causseaux, Rourke, Inc., P.S.,
a Washington professional service corporation ("Hearing Examiner") .
A. The City seeks the temþorary professional services of a
skilled independent contractor capable of working without direct
supervision, in the capacity of a hearing examiner who is
experienced in the areas of land use law, real property law, city
planning and development, and is familiar with the City of Federal
Way zoning and building codes and all other City codes, ordinances,
resolutions, regulations or policies; and
B. The Hearing Examiner has the requisite
experience necessary to provide such services.
skill
and
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows:
1.
Services.
The Hearing Examiner agrees to perform the following duties
("Services"):
~.1 Federal Way city Code. All duties described in, and
pursuant to the jurisdiction, power and authority established
in the Federal Way City Code Chapter 22, Division 3, section
22-81 through 85, as now existing or hereafter adopted or
amended, together with such other or further Hearing Examiner
services as may be required by the Federal Way City Code.
1.2 City Council. All duties, jurisdictions, powers, or
authority requested and approved by the City Council.
1.3 Compliance with Laws. All duties shall be performed
in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and City
laws, including but not limited to King County and the city of
Federal Way land use laws, State Environmental Policy Act
("SEPA"), Shoreline Management Act, Open Meetings Act, Rules
of Evidence and all city codes, ordinances, resolutions,
standards or policies, as now existing or hereafter adopted or
amended.
1.4 Clerical Services. The Hearing Examiner shall
furnish clerical services including, but not limited to, the
typing of decisions, mailing decisions to parties of~record,
and typing decisions on requests for reconsideration; and upon
CC(Q)~1f
'.
(
(
request of the City, to furnish qualified personnel to mark
exhibits, list names and addresses of parties of record, and
record public hearings.
1.5 City Direction. All duties shall be performed
pursuant to the direction of the city Manager or his or her
designee.
1.6 Desiqnated Hearinq Examiner. Unless otherwise
approved. to in writing by the city, the City hereby designates
stephen K. Causseaux, Jr., as the City's Land Use Hearing
Examiner; provided, however, that in the event MI. Causseaux
is unavailable for any cause deemed reasonable by the City,
the City hereby approves Terrence F. McCarthy, Keith McGoffin
or Stephen Shelton to act in that capacity. .
. 1.7 Performance Standard. All duties shall be performed
in a manner consistent with accepted practices for other
similar services, performed to the City's satisfaction,
including, but not limited to conducting orderly and impartial
hearings, creating a professional and courteous environment
for applicants, citizens and staff; and the preparation of
findings and conclusions which are understandable and based
upon sound reasoning and all applicable law. When deemed
appropriate, the Hearing Examiner will make site visits to
familiarize himself with the site of the proposed land use and
the surrounding area.
2.
Term.
The term of this Agreement shall be for a period of one (1)
year commencing on May 16, 1996 and terminating on May 15, 1997
("Term"). This Agreement may be extended for additional periods of
time upon the mutual written agreement of the city and the Hearing
Examiner.
3.
Termination.
Prior to the expiration of the Term, this Agreement may be
terminated with or without cause by either Party. The city may
cancel this Agreement qpon thirty (30) days oral or written notice
to the Hearing Examiner. The Hearing Examiner may cancel this
Agreement only upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to the
city.
4.
Compensation.
4.1 Total Compensation. In consideration of the Hearing
Examiner performing the services, the City agrees to pay the
Hearing Examiner an amount not to exceed Twenty-Seven Thousand
Three Hundred Forty and no/100 Dollars ($27,340.00),
calculated on the basis of the hourly labor charge rate
- 2 -
'.
(
(
schedule for Hearing Examiner's personnel and reimbursable
expense charges listed below:
(a) stephen K. Casseaux, Jr. and Terrence F. McCarthy-
$100.00 per hour
(b)
(c)
Keith McGoffin and Stephen Shelton - $80.00 per hour
Secretarial typing and mailing - $20.00 per hour
(d) Attendance at hearings by Hearing Examiner personnel
to mark exhibits and record proceedings - $10.00 per hour
(e)
Postage at cost, . photocopying at $0.10 per page.
4.2 Method of Payment. Payment by the city for the
Services will only be made after the Services have been
per~ormed, a voucher'" or invoice is submitted in the form
specified by the City, which invoice shall specifically
describe the Services performed, the name of Hearing
Examiner's personnel performing such Services, the hourly
labor charge rate for such personnel, and the same is approved
by the appropriate City representative. Payment shall be made
on a monthly basis, thirty (30) days after receipt of such
voucher or invoice.
4.3 Hearinq Examiner Responsible for Taxes. The Hearing
Examiner shall be solely responsible for the payment of any
taxes imposed by any lawful jurisdiction as a result of the
performance and payment of this Agreement.
5.
Representations.
The Hearing Examiner represents and warrants that it has the
requisite training, skill and experience necessary to provide the
Services and is appropriately accredited and licensed by all
applicable agencies and governmental entities, including but not
limited to being registered to do business in the City of Federal
Way by obtaining a City of Federal Way business registration.
6.
Independent contractor/Conflict of Interest.
It is the intention and understanding of the Parties that the
Hearing Examiner shall be an independent contractor and that the
city shall be neither liable nor obligated to pay Hearing Examiner
sick leave, vacation pay or any other benefit of employment, nor to
pay any social security or other tax which may arise as an incident
of employment. The Hearing Examiner shall pay all income and other
taxes as due. Industrial or any other insurance which is purchased
for the benefit of the City, regardless of whether such may provide
a secondary or incidental benefit to the Hearing Examiner, shall
not be deemed to convert this Agreement to an employment contract.
- 3 -
(
(
It is recognized that Hearing Examiner mayor will be performing
professional services during the Term for other parties; provided,
however, that such performance of other services shall not conflict
with or interfere with Hearing Examiner's ability to perform the
Services. Hearing Examiner agrees to resolve any such conflicts of
interest in favor of the city.
7.
Indemnification.
7.1 Hearina Examiner Indemnification. The Hearing
Examiner agrees to indemnify and hold the City, its elected
officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers
harmless from any and all claims, demands, losses, actions and
liabilities (including costs and all attorney fees) to or by
any and all persons or entities, including, without
limitation, their respective agents, licensees, or
representatives, ari~}ng from, resulting from, or connected
with this Agreement to the extent caused by the negligent
acts, errors or omissions of the Hearing Examiner, its
partners, shareholders, agents, employees, or by the Hearing
Examiner's breach of this Agreement. Hearing Examiner waives
any immunity that may be granted to it under the Washington
State Industrial Insurance Act, Title 51 RCW. Hearing
Examiner's indemnification shall not be limited in any way by
any limi tat ion on the amount of damages, compensation or
benefits payable to or by any third party under workers'
compensation acts, disability benefit acts or any other
benefits acts or programs.
7.2 city Indemnification. The City agrees to indemnify
and hold the Hearing Examiner, its officers, directors,
shareholders, partners, employees, and agents harmless from
any and all claims, demands, losses, actions and liabilities
(including costs and attorney fees) to or by any and all
persons or entities, including without limitation, their
respective agents, licensees, or representatives, arising
from, resulting from or connected with this Agreement to the
extent solely caused by "the negligent acts, errors, or
omissions of the City, its employees or agents.
7.3 Survival. The provisions of this section shall
survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement with
respect to any event occurring prior to such expiration or
termination.
8.
Equal Opportunity Employer.
In all Hearing Examiner services, programs or activities, and
all Hearing Examiner hiring and employment made possible by or
resulting from this Agreement, there shall be no discrimination by
Hearing Examiner or by Hearing Examiner's employees, agents,
subcontractors or representatives against any person because of
- 4 -
(
(
sex, age (except minimum age and retirement provisions), race,
color, creed, national origin, marital status or the presence of
any disability, including sensory, mental or physical handicaps,
unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification in
relationship to hiring and employment. This requirement shall
apply, but not be limited to the following: employment,
advertising, layoff or termination, rates of payor other forms of
compensation, and selection for training, including apprenticeship.
Hearing Examiner shall not violate any of the terms of Chapter
49.60 RCW, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans
with Disabilities Act, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973 or any other applicable federal, state or local law or
regulation regarding non-discrimination. Any material violation of
this provision shall be grounds for termination of this Agreement
by the City and, in the case of the Hearing Examiner's breach, may
result in ineligibility for further City agreements.
9.
Confidentialitv.
All information regarding the city obtained by Hearing
Examiner in performance of this Agreement shall be considered
confidential. Breach of confidentiality by Hearing Examiner will
be grounds for immediate termination.
10.
Insurance.
The Hearing Examiner agrees to carry as a minimum, the
following insurance, in such forms and with such carriers who have
a rating which is satisfactory to the city:
10.1 Workers' compensation and employer's liability
insurance in amounts sufficient pursuant to the laws of the
State of Washington;
10.2 Commercial general liability insurance with
combined single limits of liability not less than $1,000,000
for bodily injury, including personal injury or death,
products liability and property damage.
10.3 Automobile liability insurance with aggreg~te
limits of liability not less than $250,000.00 for bodily
injury, including personal injury or death and property
damage.
10.4 Professional liability insurance with combined
single limits of liability not less than $1,000,000 for
damages sustained by reason of or in the course of operation
under this Agreement, whether occurring by reason of acts,
errors or omissions of the Hearing Examiner.
The City shall be named as additional insured on all such
insurance policies, with the exception of professional liability
- 5 -
(
(
and workers' compensation coverages. Hearing Examiner shall
provide certificates of insurance, concurrent with the execution of
this Agreement, evidencing such coverage and, at City's request,
furnish the City with copies of all insurance policies and with
evidence of payment of premiums or fees of such policies. All
insurance policies shall contain a clause of endorsement providing
that they may not be terminated or materially amended during the
Term of this Agreement, except after thirty (30) days prior written
notice to the city. If Hearing Examiner's insurance policies are
"claims made" or "claims paid", Hearing Examiner shall be required
to maintain tail coverage for a minimum period of three (3) years
from the date this Agreement is actually terminated. Hearing
Examiner's failure to maintain such insurance policies shall be
grounds for the City's immediatè termination of this Agreement.
The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or
termination of this Agreem~nt with respect to any event occurring
prior to such expiration or termination.
11.
Work Product.
All originals and copies of work product, including plans,
sketches, layouts, designs, design specifications, records, files,
computer disks ,magnetic media or material which may be produced or
modified by Hearing Examiner while performing the Services shall
belong to the city. At the termination or cancellation of this
Agreement, all originals and copies of any such work product
remaining in the possession of Hearing Examiner shall be delivered
to the city.
12.
Books and Records.
The Hearing Examiner agrees to maintain books, records, and
documents which sufficiently and properly reflect all direct and
indirect costs related to the performance of the Services and
maintain such accounting procedures and practices as may be deemed
necessary by the City to assure proper accounting of all funds paid
pursuant to this Agreement. These records shall be subject, at all
reasonable times, to inspection, review or audit by the City, its
authorized representative, the State Auditor, or other governmental
officials authorized by law to monitor this Agreement.
13.
Non-Appropriation of Funds.
If sufficient funds are not appropriated or allocated for
payment under this Agreement for any future fiscal period, the city
will not be obligated to make payments for Services or amounts
incurred after the end of the current fiscal period, and this
Agreement will terminate upon the completion of all remaining
Services for which funds are allocated. No penalty or expense
shall accrue to the city in the event this provision applies.
- 6 -
('
(:-
General Provisions.
14.
14.1 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains all of
the agreements of the Parties with respect to any matter
covered or mentioned in this Agreement and no prior agreements
shall be effective for any purpose.
14.2 Modification. No provision of this Agreement may
be amended or modified except by written agreement signed by
the Parties.
14.3 Full Force and Effect. Any provision of this
Agreement which is declared.invalid or illegal shall in no way
affect or invalidate any other provision hereof and such other
provisions shall remain in full force and effect.
14.4 Assiqnment.~ Neither the Hearing Examiner nor the
City shall have the right to transfer or assign, in whole or
in part, any or all of its obligations and rights hereunder
without the prior written consent of the other Party.
14.5 Successors in Interest. Subject to the foregoing
Subsection, the rights and obligations of the Parties shall
inure to the benefit of and be binding upon their respective
successors in interest, heirs and assigns.
14.6 Attorney Fees. In the event either of the Parties
defaults on the performance of any terms of this Agreement or
either Party places the enforcement of this Agreement in the
hands of an attorney, or files a lawsuit, each Party shall pay
all its own attorneys' fees, costs and expenses. The venue
for any dispute related to this Agreement shall be King
County, Washington.
14. 7 No Waiver. Failure or delay of the City to declare
any breach or default immediately upon occurrence shall not
waive such breach or default. Failure of the city to declare
one breach or default does not act as a waiver of the city's
right to declare another breach or default.
14.8 Governinq Law. This Agreement shall be made in and
shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the
laws of the State of Washington.
14.9 Authority. Each individual executing this
Agreement on behalf of the City and Hearing Examiner
represents and warrants that such individuals are duly
authorized to execute and deliver this Agreement on behalf of
the Hearing Examiner or the City.
14.10 Notices. Any notices required to be given by the
Parties shall be delivered at the addresses set forth below.
- 7 -
'.
(
(
Any notices may be delivered personally to the addressee of
the notice or may be deposited in the united states mail,
postage prepaid, to the address set forth below. Any notice
so posted in the united states mail shall be deemed received
three (3) days after the date of mailing.
14.11 captions. The respective captions of the Sections
of this Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference
only and shall not be deemed to modify or otherwise affect any
of the provisions of this Agreement.
14.12 Performance. Time is of the essence of this
Agreement and each and all of its provisions in which
performance is a factor. .Adherence to completion dates set
forth in the description of the Services is essential to the
Hearing Examiner's performance of this Agreement.
14.13 Remedies "'Cumulative. Any remedies provided for
under the terms of this Agreement are not intended to be
exclusive, but shall be cumulative with all other remedies
available to the City at law, in equity or by statute.
14.14 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed 'in
any number of counterparts, which counterparts shall
collectively constitute the entire Agreement.
14.15
the City's
a result
Agreement,
the City's
Compliance with Ethics Code. If a violation of
Ethics Resolution No. 91-54, as amended, occurs as
of the formation andjorperformance of this
this Agreement may be rendered null and void, at
option.
14.16 Equal Opportunitv to Draft. The parties have
participated and 'had an equal opportunity to participate in
the drafting of this Agreement, and the Exhibits, if any,
attached. No ambiguity shall be construed against any party
upon a claim that that party drafted the ambiguous language.
DATED the day and year set forth above.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
~ f'¡i/I!
By: . . .' Y V&;.~ '
~nnet E. Nyberg, City
33530 1st Way South
Federal Way, WA 98003
Manager
- 8 -
(
(
ATTEST:
,"'-
CMC
APPROVED Æ TO FORM:
~~ll
McCARTHY CAUSSEAUX ROURKE, INC., P. S .
By: stdtr~¡¿~
Its: !to/tit'>'!!
(Title)
902 South 10th Street
Tacoma, WA 98405
(206) 272-2206 (phone)
(206) 272-6439 (facsimile)
K:\PSA\HEAREXAM.CSX
5-6-96
- 9 -