LUTC PKT 06-05-2017City of Federal Way
City Council
Land Use/Transportation Committee
June 5, 2017
5:00 p.m.
MEETING AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PUBLIC COMMENT (3 minutes)
3. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
Topic Title/ Description Presenter Page
A. Approval of Minutes: April 24, 2017 and Upton 3
May 1, 2017
B. Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail Project Mullen 13
-Bid Award
C. ORDINANCE: Amendment to FWRC for Van De 17
Historic Preservation Weghe
D. RESOLUTION: 2018-2023 Transportation Perez 51
Improvement Plan
E. 2017 Surface Water Management capital Thurlow 59
Improvement Program (CIP) Update
F. Presentation of Data Analysis Report for Thurlow 67
Upper Joe's Creek Watershed Nutrient
Reduction Study
G. Submittal of Transportation Grant Winkler 71
Application
H. Sound Transit -City Services Agreement Walsh 75
4. OTHER
5. FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDA ITEMS:
Action
or Info
Action
Action
Action
Action
Action
Info
Action
Action
City Hall
Council Chambers
Council Date
N/A
June 20, 2017
Consent
June 20, 2017
Ordinance
First Reading
June 20, 2017
Public Hearing
June 20, 2017
Consent
June 20, 2017
Info
June 20, 2017
Consent
June 20, 2017
Consent
Time
5 min
5 min
10 min
10 min
5 min
15 min
5 min
lOmin
The next LUTC meeting will be Monday, July 10, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers.
6. ADJOURN
Committee Members
Bob Ce/ski, Chair
Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member
Mark Koppang, Member
City Staff
Marwan Salloum P.E, Public Works Director
Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II
253-835-2703
This page left blank intentionally.
2
City of Federal Way
City Council
Land Use/Transportation Committee
April 24, 2017
6:30 o.m.
City Hall
Council Chambers
MEETING SUMMARY
Committee Members in Attendance: Committee Chair Bob Celski and Committee members Lydia Assefa-Dawson
(via conference call) and Mark Koppang. Council members in attendance: Deputy Mayor Burbidge and Councilmembers
Honda and Moore.
Staff in Attendance: City Attorney J. Ryan Call, Deputy City Attorney Mark Orthmann, Public Works Director Marwan
Salloum, Deputy Public Works Director/PAEC Project Director EJ Walsh, Community Development Director Brian Davis,
Economic Development Director Tim Johnson, SWR Coordinator Rob Van Orsow, Planning Manager Robert Hansen,
Principal Planner Margaret Clark, and Administrative Assistant II Shawna Upton.
Planning Commissioners in Attendance: Chair Lawson Bronson, Vice Chair Tom Medhurst, Tim O'Neil, Diana
Noble-Gulliford, and Dawn Meader McCausland.
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Celski called the meeting to order at 6:33 PM
2. PUBLIC COMMENT (3 minutes)
Dana Hollaway expressed her desire for Council to extend the moratorium on multi-family housing. She feels the
proposed amendments failed to address the impact high-density, multi-family housing has on the City, public
facilities, public services and residents. She further noted the City is struggling financially to provide services to the
current population including police, schools, fire, and roads. She would like to see the City follow its own
comprehensive plan regarding development and growth.
3. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
Forward to Council
Topic Title/ Description
A. ORDINANCE: Adopt Code Amendments Related to Multi-Family Dwelling Units,
Senior Housing, and Special Needs Housing
Mr. Davis indicated the staff memo presented tonight outlines the recommended
code changes as well as address questions received from Councilmembers. He
began with the first question which asked how much developable or redevelopable
land the city has and what zone they fall into. He discussed a table that summarizes
where the vacant land is and how much of that is redevelopable as of 2012. The
four most recent developments since the 2012 inventory are Park 16, Kitts Corner,
Uptown Square and Celebration Center. An updated zoning map was requested,
and was provided, that shows the city center core and city center frame zones.
There was a comment that the requirement for a 100-foot setback for multi-family
developments that are adjacent to residential zones appeared to be a bit onerous
so staff was asked to consider this requirement if they were next to single-family
zones. Based on the number of effected parcels, staff recommends having this
May 2, 2017
Committee Members
Bob Ce/ski, Chair 3
City Staff
Marwan Salloum, P.E, Public Works Director
Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II
253-835-2703
Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member
Mark Koppang, Member
provision apply only when the BC-Zoned developments are adjacent to single-family
zoned areas. A table was provided that outlines the maximum height of multi-family
housing in the different zones. A discussion was held regarding the city center core
zone with building heights varying between 70 and 200-feet and what determines
the actual allowed height, required setbacks, and building modulation. Under the
current proposal, any building over 100 units they would be required to have 25%
of the parking underground or on the first floor. In the city center areas, they could
construct the parking outside of the footprint if they use a structured parking facility.
Chair Celski proposed that for multi-family zones outside of the city center areas, the
25% parking requirement is too high and that inside the city center areas, 25% is
too low. Staff researched parking requirements of comparable jurisdictions and was
unable to find specific code that addresses a requirement for underground parking.
Further discussion was held regarding parking requirements in the different zones
to determine what the proper ratio would be and how cities like Seattle, Tacoma and
Bellevue are dealing with multi-family parking issues. There was concern with
requiring multi-family developments to provide ground floor retail because there
may be some difficulty in achieving the intent of this requirement. Staff
recommends moving that from a requirement to an option for developers to choose
from. The intent behind common recreational areas is to provide for the recreational
needs of the tenants. It is important for the multi-family developments further away
from the city center core because there are fewer activities as you move away from
downtown. Regarding private open space requirements, staff recommends
eliminating the 48 square feet for each unit requirement for special needs housing
and there could be some flexibility for senior housing and developments in the city
center areas. That sparked further discussion about whether to require a certain
amount of private open space, such as balconies, or to leave the decision and
flexibility up to the developer. Some were concerned that if we didn't require any,
the developer would choose not to provide open space and if we require too much,
it will pose a hardship on the developer and they may build elsewhere. The
Committee asked staff to come back with a recommendation as to what the
appropriate requirement would be. A suggestion was made to eliminate
surveillance camera requirements in senior and special needs housing. Staff
indicated this is not a requirement, but is an option so the decision to use
surveillance equipment would be left up to the developer. A brief conversation was
held regarding a possible Council resolution as a way to express flexibility for future
modifications to the code changes and Transportation Oriented Development. Mr.
Orthmann explained a resolution would accomplish that but it is somewhat formal
for the situation. He indicated the objective could be reached by directing staff to
report back to Committee and Council with further information. A question arose
asking how recycling and composting materials would be enforced. Staff stated that
they review the proposals to make sure that it has recycling and composting
requirements if it applies to the development and they follow through with an
inspection. If there are problems after the fact, staff attempts to reconcile the issue
with the property owner or site manager to remedy the problem. If the property
owner or manager does not cooperate with the City, then staff would follow the
nuisance abatement process. Staff also clarified standards related to compatibility
with the existing neighborhood, mailboxes in multi-family developments, and a brief
discussion ensued regarding rental discrimination. Mr. Davis summarized the
comments he heard from Committee to make sure staff makes the appropriate
changes to the code and provides the additional information they are seeking. Mr.
Davis noted that at the next Council meeting, staff will provide a map that illustrates
how many units we have available in our land capacity, a presentation explaining
the recent multi-family developments and how we measure up with city goals and
other cities as well as Sound Transit being available to give a presentation on Transit
Oriented Development. Also, staff will come back with a recommendation on the
Committee Members
Bob Ce/ski, Chair
Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member
Mark Koppang, Member
4
City Staff
Marwan Salloum, P.£, Public Works Director
Shawna Upton, Administra tive Assistant II
253-835-2703
proper amount of underground or structured parking required and the appropriate
amount of open space that should be required. Councilmember Honda asked for
a definition of low-income housing to be discussed at the next Council meeting as
well as what the numbers are so the public has a better understanding of what that
means exactly. Chair Celski would also like to discuss Councils desire to shape our
city center as it relates to density, walkability and how developments happen within
the city center core zone. He would like to know what the impact of restricting
multi-family stand-alone structures would be in the city center core or allowing
multi-family as a mixed-use structure where you might have retail on the ground
floor and then multi-family in the same structure. Deputy Mayor Burbidge asked
staff to provide the numbers of existing multi-family within the city center core and
city center frame. Councilmember Honda asked for senior housing to be included
as well. Staff indicated they have the numbers available and will provide that
information. Chair Celski asked if any Planning Commission members would like to
speak on this topic. Lawson Bronson, Chair, spoke and expressed concern about the
amount of land that will be taken up by Sound Transit. He indicated the map
provided to the Committee does not show the land that will be used by Sound
Transit and feels that is an important piece of information that should be
considered. He believes the staff has been severely overloaded by this project. He
addressed three areas of the proposed changes related to the safety plan,
maintenance plan and security cameras portion. He does not feel the city budget
has the available funds to administer those programs. Tim O'Neal, Planning
Commission member, indicated the examining of the multi-family code is being
driven by the moratorium. He indicated that the Planning Commission forwarded
the item to Committee without a recommendation because the proposed changes
do not answer all the questions that were brought forward due to the moratorium.
He feels this is more of a political question than a planning issue based on the
timeline devised by the moratorium. Tom Medhurst, Vice Chair, shared concerns
regarding the timeline of the moratorium regarding multi-housing which presents
a very different set of issues than senior housing issues. He feels that since senior
housing does not create some of the issues that multi-family does, such as parking,
strain on infrastructure and schools, senior housing could be moved forward in a
more timely fashion and then extend the moratorium to address the remaining
multi-family issues. Diana Noble-Gulliford, Planning Commission member, shared
two concerns that will shape the city for years to come. The first is the Sound
Transit project further noting there is an affordable housing element within the ST3
plan, and the impacts of that element are just being realized. The second is the
owner of the Commons Mall who wishes to include multi-family within the property.
She feels the moratorium should be extended so more thought can be put into these
issues. Councilmember Koppang thanked the Planning Commission for their
comments. He shared his support of the safe city camera program but feels the safe
city cameras in the apartments that are not for senior or special needs housing is
a good way to help residents feel safe. There has been some discussion on the
segregation of the senior housing from the multi-family housing and although he
understands the reasoning behind that though, they fall under the same umbrella
and cannot be divided. Sound Transit and the affordable housing will continue to
be discussed with Council as the city moves through this process. The challenge
of how to use the Commons and Belmore Park properties so they don't become a
plight for the city is an issue that will continue to be looked at. Dawn Meader
McCausland stated most of her technical questions were addressed in the changes
that staff brought forward. She shared the Committees concerns regarding parking,
commercial space, and balconies and was happy to see the Committee find some
middle ground. She feels it's important to look at the regional market pressures and
trends when making these decisions and to understand what income levels are
served by affordable housing because it will likely be closer to the median income
Committee Members
Bob Ce/ski, Chair
Lydia Assefa-Oawson, Member
Mark Koppang, Member
5
City Staff
Marwan Salloum, P.£, Public Works Director
Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II
253-835-2703
level that what is thought. Discussion was held regarding the request by the
Commons Mall owner to extend the moratorium and what their desires may be.
Allen Wallace, Land Use Counsel for Merlene Geier, indicated Merlene Geier just
purchased the property a month ago so the moratorium was brought to their
attention. He stated that the bulk of these regulations do not work for the city
center zone and the purchase of the Commons Mall property would not have
happened without the ST3 and light rail station project. He shared structured
parking scenarios in other cities such as Renton and Bellevue and noted the
approximate costs per stall. The numbers of parking stalls in the proposed
amendments do not work for the city center multi-family redevelopment. The trend
is for people to use Uber or car sharing services. He feels these types of regulations
are focused on suburban multi-family development which is quite different from
urban dense multi-family development. He further discussed concerns with ground
floor retail and rent levels as well as the type of rental groups which would be
interested in this type of urban dense multi-family housing. He would like to see
an exception made to the parking stall count and open space requirement in the city
center area.
Motion to continue the conversation on the multi-family housing
moratorium to the May 1, 2017 LUTC meeting.
Moved: Koppang Seconded: Assefa-Dawson Passed: 3-0
4. OTHER
5. FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDA ITEMS:
The next LUTC meeting will be Monday, May 1, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers.
6. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 8 :22 PM.
Attest:
Shawna Upton
Administrative Assistant II
Approved by Committee:
Committee Members
Bob Ce/ski, Chair
Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member
Mark Koppang, Member
6
City Staff
Marwan Salloum, P.E, Public Works Director
Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II
253-835-2703
City of Federal Way
City Cou nci I
Land Use/Transportation Committee
May 1, 2017 City Hall
5:00 o.m. Council Chambers
MEETING SUMMARY
Committee Members in Attendance: · Committee Chair Bob Celski and Committee members Lydia
Assefa-Dawson and Mark Koppang. Council members in attendance: Deputy Mayor Burbidge and Councilmember
Honda.
Staff in Attendance: Public Works Director Marwan Salloum, Deputy Public Works Director/Street Systems
Manager Desiree Winkler, Assistant City Attorney Mark Orthmann, City Traffic Engineer Rick Perez, Community
Development Director Brian Davis, Building Official Scott Sproul, Solid Waste & Recycling Coordinator Rob Van
Orsow, Street Systems Project Engineer Christine Mullen, Principal Planner Margaret Clark and Administrative
Assistant II Shawna Upton.
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair Celski called the meeting to order at 5:03 PM.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT (3 minutes)
Cheryl Hurst is the Vice President for the Citizens for Federal Way Schools and stated that the schools cannot
handle any more kids in the district. As of now, the district is 1100 children over capacity at this time. South
King Fire and Rescue services are stretched as well as Police services, so bringing additional multi-family units,
other than senior housing, into the city is not a good idea and will overburden schools and public services.
Dana Hollaway expressed her desire for Council to extend the moratorium on multi-family housing. She feels
the proposed amendments failed to address the impact high-density, multi-family housing has on the City,
public facilities, public services and residents. She further noted the City is struggling financially to provide
services to the current population including police, schools, fire, and roads. She would like to see the City
follow its own comprehensive plan regarding development and growth.
3. COMMITTEE BUSINESS
Topic Title/ Description
A. Approval of Minutes: April 17, 2017
Forward to
Council
N/A
Committee approved the April 17, 2017 LUTC minutes as presented.
Moved: Koppang Seconded: Assefa-Dawson Passed: 3-0
Committee Members
Bob Ce/ski, Chair
Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member
Mark Koppang, Member
7
City Staff
Marwan Salloum, P.E, Public Works Director
Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II
253-835-2703
B.
C.
D.
E.
ORDINANCE: Amendment and Adoption of NFPA 130 Standard for Fixed
Guideway Transit and Passenger Rail Systems Current Addition
Mr. Sproul noted this is an amendment to the code for Sound Transit to use
when determining occupant loads at transit stations and guideways. A brief
discussion continued to discuss the difference between the current code and
the proposed changes. The new code is being proposed to address occupancy
loads based on the number of transit riders instead of square footage.
Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented.
Moved: Assefa-Dawson Seconded: Koppang Passed: 3-0
21st Ave S (S 320th St to S 316th St) Pedestrian Improvements -Bid Award
Ms. Mullen stated five bids were received and opened on April 19, 2017 and the
lowest responsive, responsible bidder is Active Construction Inc. (ACI) with a
total bid of $685,685.00. She outlined the estimated expenditures and
available funding for the project noting there is a budget shortfall. Staff
requests the transfer of Local Infrastructure Financing Tool Funds (LIFT funds)
to cover the shortfall .
Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented.
Moved: Koppang Seconded: Assefa-Dawson Passed: 3-0
RESOLUTION: Setting Public Hearing Date for 2018-23 Transportation
Improvement Plan
Mr. Perez said there will be no Power Point presentation on this issue. This is
simply a resolution to set a public hearing date for June 20, 2017 to hear the
transportation improvement plan for the next six years.
Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented.
Moved: Assefa-Dawson Seconded: Koppang Passed: 3-0
Submittal of Transportation Grant Application
Ms. Winkler introduced a new grant funding opportunity for the City. She
indicated WSDOT issued a call for projects for the new federally-funded
National Highway System (NHS) Asset Management Program. A few years ago,
the NHS expanded the program to include all principal arterials. Staff evaluated
eligible roads and their pavement ratings to select the best grant candidates.
Each city is limited to two applications and staff selected SW Campus Drive from
19th Ave SW to 1st Ave S and 15th Ave S from SR 18/5 348th to SR99/Pacific Hwy
as the two projects to submit for grant funding. A brief discussion ensued
regarding how the state is scoring the projects and what criteria the City
typically receives high point scores from. Mr. Salloum reminded Council that
WSDOT has $40M available for the grants and competition is state-wide.
Committee forwarded Option #1 as presented.
Moved: Koppang Seconded: Assefa-Dawson Passed: 3-0
May 16, 2017
Ordinance
First Reading
May 16, 2017
Consent
May 16, 2017
Consent
May 16, 2017
Consent
Committee Members
Bob Ce/ski, Chair
Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member
Mark Koppang, Member
8
City Staff
Marwan Salloum, P.E, Public Works Director
Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II
253-835-2703
F. ORDINANCE: Adopt Code Amendments Related to Multi-Family Dwelling Units,
Senior Housing, and Special Needs Housing
Mr. Davis addressed suggestions made from the previous week's meeting.
Concerns centered on parking, open space ground floor requirements and other
uses. A concern was shared about requiring underground parking on the first
floor of multi-family developments in the multi-family zones outside the
commercial and core zones. Staff addressed that concern. Another concern
deals with commercial uses in multi-family developments and where they are
required versus Where they are an option. Staff will retain this as an option but
not a requirement. At the last meeting, a discussion was held regarding the
100-foot setback if it's adjacent to single-family rather than all residential zones.
Staff and Councilmembers discussed and decided that the requirement will be
applied when it's next to .single-family. There was a question about roof lines
and why there was a requirement for it being in the guidelines. Staff has
deleted that reference from that section. Mr. Davis addressed concerns related
to open space that required 48 square feet of private open space for each unit
that could consist of patios or some other open space with the intent of
providing tenants an opportunity for activities within their own private open
space. It was felt that in the core areas, there would be less of a need for that
because open space activates can take place at adjacent uses. However, there
was still some desire of the Committee to retain that requirement even in the
outlying multi-family zones. What staff proposed is that the collective open
space will remain a requirement but the private open space, if the developer
opts to do that, can be credit towards the collective open space requirement.
Councilmember Koppang asked to revisit the roof line conversation noting his
understanding is that Committee wanted some variation in the roof lines
instead of straight gable, slab-sided developments that were aesthetically
boring and that the Committee wished to create an aesthetic appeal to the
developments and one way to do that is with a varied roof line adding peaks and
valleys. Staff indicated the varied roof lines are currently provided as a
guideline but not a requirement for the developer. Councilmember Koppang
also commented on the open space topic asking for clarification if it was more
cost effective for the developer to build one common area as opposed to
multiple small areas. Staff indicated that could be the case if it were a per unit
requirement but developers currently build housing with per unit features so it
just depends on how the developer wants to tailor their specific development
for their tenants. Further discussion was held regarding open space
requirements and credits and how they are applied to the development. Deputy
Mayor Burbidge asked that a summary ratio of the minimum open space
required for a particular complex size be provided to Council before their next
meeting, using Uptown Square as an example. She also commented on
modulation and sloped roofs giving her impression that flatter roofs are perhaps
an attempt to maximize potential space under the height requirements. She
strongly prefers the visual appeal of sloped roofs and wanted to know what the
actual requirements are in that regard. Staff indicated that currently the sloped
roofs are a guideline and not a requirement. Deputy Mayor Burbidge feels it's
important to have some requirement be in place for sloped roofs because a
guideline may not be enough to encourage developers to build sloped roofs.
She would also like more information on modulation. Staff indicated modulation
is a guideline as well but if the Committee would like to propose changes, it
May 2, 2017
Ordinance
First Reading
Committee Members
Bob Ce/ski, Chair 9
City Staff
Marwan Salloum, P.E., Public Works Director
Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II
253-835-2703
Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member
Mark Koppang, Member
would help staff to receive specific direction from the Committee. Discussion
continued regarding the difference in angles of sloped roofs and how the
neighborhoods have visually changed over the years and how the height
requirements differ between the core areas and residential areas. At the last
meeting, staff discussed a proposal that for any development over 100 units in
the core and frame areas, a minimum of 25% of their parking needed to be
structured, underground or on the first floor of the building. Also at that
meeting, a lengthy discussion took place and there were some different
viewpoints on this. Some were concerned that downtown needed to preserve
space for parking and at the same time, there were concerns about being too
burdensome to developers within downtown because structured parking is
considerably more expensive than surface parking. Staff looked at a tiered
approach to address this issue recommending that as you get closer to
downtown, the parking requirement is greater and as you move further away,
the parking requirement would be less. Mr. Davis indicated staff looked into
parking requirements from a planning profession standpoint as well as best
practices for cities of our size. What staff proposed is that the parking
requirement is at a certain level for surface parking but if the developer chooses
to go underground or structured parking, the overall requirement for parking
would be reduced. That gives the developer incentive to use the land more
efficiently with structured parking. Conversation continued regarding how our
parking requirements compare to other cities. Councilmember Honda asked if
market-rate housing was built next to the light rail, and were· concerned with
building parking they don't feel they need, would the City consider adjustments.
Staff indicated they would consider changes and noted that by the time Sound
Transit is completed, a Transit Oriented Development plan should be in place
and that would likely address those issues. Chair Celski asked if parking would
be provided to the tenants for free or if the owner could charge for parking.
Staff indicated they would require some assurance that the minimum parking
required would be available to the tenants to limit the need for tenants to park
on the street or at nearby business. Staff then addressed the Committee's
comments that were received over the last few days. The first comment
addressed was about mixed use development in the downtown area. Ms. Clark
indicated the existing language in the code requires a certain percentage of
each building fac;ade to be commercial use. Staff revised the code to read each
building no longer needs to include its own commercial use but instead it would
be a percentage of the total fac;ade. Chair Celski wondered if requiring
commercial space in every building, rather than a percentage, would be more
beneficial. He also indicated he'd like to see a requirement that parking cannot
be viewed from the street in the city center core and as recommendation in the
city center frame area. Staff presented a map illustrating the buildable areas
are for multi-family properties, most of which are in the city center core and city
center frame areas and it indicates which areas are considered redevelopable
and which are vacant and has potential for being built. Councilmember
Koppang has heard that the amount of housing inventory in Federal Way needs
to meet a certain standard by 2035 and wondered if the inventory as currently
zoned capable of supporting those goals. Mr. Davis indicated that is one of the
next steps in long term planning for the department. Ms. Clark provided
additional information on the 2012 housing targets and capacity goals and a
question and answer session continued. Chair Celski mentioned there is no
requirement in the code that requires Senior Housing to have first floor retail
or other uses and staff confirmed but noted the current code allows it as a
Committee Members
Bob Ce/ski, Chair
Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member
Mark Koppang, Member
10
City Staff
Marwan Salloum, P.E., Public Works Director
Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II
2S3·835-2703
stand-alone use. Staff proposes to allow the option for the developer to have
commercial use on the first floor. Councilmember Honda is concerned about
our infrastructure with potential building in the future noting it seems road
capacity is full, and fire, police, water and sewer services seem to be stretched.
Ms. Clark said she talked with the General Manager at Lakehaven Water and
Sewer District and was told there is adequate capacity for water and sewer in
the city center and is in the process of constructing a new sewer main
downtown. Mr. Perez stated there are a few critical road connection locations
in the comp plan currently but staff doesn't recommend adding any new roads.
He provided additional information on the Growth Management Act, level of
service standards, and concurrency codes. He further explained that if there is
a development that triggers a level of service failure under the concurrency
code, staff would give the developer the option to either reduce the size of the
development or mitigate the impact of the development. That is apart from any
other required mitigation under the traffic impact fee and SEPA. He also stated
staff makes every attempt to provide projects on the Six Year Transportation
Improvement Plan that would head off the need for a concurrency failure. Staff
will enforce concurrency on all developments that provide for new trips and
there are no exempt uses, however credit is given for trips that were generated
at the previous use before redevelopment. The only use that is exempt is per
state law and that is for Sound Transit. Councilmember Koppang said that in
partnership with the School District, we've created a barrier to entry for market
rate development explaining that the per unit impact fee has slowed down
development within the city limits and mentioned there is a development in King
County at the corner of S 320th St and Military Road that will have an adverse
effect on the School District from an attendance standpoint. He asked if there
is an incentivized or reduced impact fee for any development currently. Mr.
Davis indicated there aren't any by zone but the only flexibility staff has is for
the payment of impact fees to be deferred prior to occupancy but that is
reserved for residential. Commercial developments need to pay that fee up
front before the permit will be issued. Councilmember Honda asked if school
impact fees are the same in the city center core. Staff replied that the fees are
calculated based on use and that there may be a reduced impact fee in the core.
Committee and staff continued to discuss concurrency, school impact fees and
impacts on the school district. Staff will provide additional details regarding
concurrency and impact fees to the Council at the next meeting. Chair Celski
wanted to make sure that if the City allows developers to construct buildings
upwards of 200-feet high, South King Fire and Rescue would have the ability to
service a fire in a structure that tall. Councilmember Honda asked if the
moratorium was lifted, what are the next steps for the City and has the
Department seen any pending developments that will come forward if that
happens. Mr. Davis reminded the Committee that this is merely a first step on
this issue and changes can be made later if needed. He further explained that
once the moratorium is done, these code amendments would be in place, there
are no developers currently waiting to build, and noted there's one developer
that has been in contact with the City, who was vested prior to the moratorium
being put in place, that has discussed how the land would be developed. The
new owner of the mall property has had some questions recently as they are
interested in some aspect of multi-family development for the property but they
have indicated they are some time away from doing so. The only other one is
the Sound Transit properties which will be required to surplus their properties
system-wide, and will be required to use 80 percent of their property for
Committee Members
Bob Ce/ski, Chair
Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member
Mark Koppang, Member
11
City Staff
Marwan Salloum, P.£, Public Works Director
Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II
253-835-2703
affordable housing. One the moratorium is lifted, staff anticipates moving to
the next step of analysis to refine the code updates, especially as it relates to
Transit Oriented Development as it relates to the future Sound Transit station.
Discussion continued regarding the next steps that will be taken, Transit
Oriented Development and the possibility of increased natural open space
requirements. Committee members and staff briefly discussed multi-family
housing in neighboring cities, the impacts to Federal Way and how it's currently
dealt with. Staff sought clarity from the Committee by outlining the changes
requested by the Committee. Chair Celski indicated this moratorium has been
in place for approximately 11 months and feels satisfied that the services with
the contingencies discussed will cover that. He also shared that several school
bonds failed while he was in High School and he remembers the need for
additional schools due to overpopulation. Some years later, several new
schools were built due to the pressure from the community to satisfy those
needs. Deputy Mayor Burbidge added that she also lived in Federal Way when
the levies were failing and the quick increase in population was very challenging
for the school district and noted part of the challenges for the schools is
inequitable school funding in our state. She also brought up the topic of
recycling stating she received an inquiry about the size of the facility for dealing
with recycling, the recycling and solid waste containers and wondered if city
requirements are comparable to other jurisdictions. Mr. Van Orsow explained
that the existing code only requires recycling services. With the code changes,
staff is proposing a solid waste and recycling requirement noting that the
majority of cities require solid waste and recycling. A brief discussion continued
regarding enclosures for containers and the methods for accessing those. Staff
again outlined the changes as requested by Committee for clarification and a
brief discussion ensued to further define parking requirements and pitched
roofs.
Motion to direct Staff to incorporate the changes as discussed and
forward the ordinance to the May 2nd Council Meeting for first
reading.
Moved: Koppang Seconded: Assefa-Dawson Passed: 3-0
4. OTHER
5. FUTURE MEETINGS/AGENDA ITEMS:
The next LUTC meeting will be Monday, June 5, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. in City Hall Council Chambers.
6. ADJOURN
The meeting adjourned at 6:06 PM.
Attest:
Shawna Upton
Administrative Assistant II
Approved by Committee :
Committee Members
Bob Ce/ski, Chair
Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member
Mark Koppang, Member
12
City Staff
Marwan Salloum, P.E, Public Works Director
Shawna Upton, Administrative Assistant II
253-835-2703
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2017 ITEM#:
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: STEEL LAKE PARK TO DOWNTOWN TRAIL PROJECT -BID AW ARD
POLICY QUESTION: Should City Council award the Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail Project to the lowest
responsive, responsible bidder?
COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
IZJ Consent
D City Council Business
D Ordinance
D Resolution
MEETING DATE: June 5, 2017
D
D
Public Hearing
Other
STAFF REPORT BY: Christine M111len, P.E. Street s x _st_e_ms_·_P_r~oJ._·e_c_t E_n,,,,gi_·n_e __ D_E_P_T_:_P_u_b_l_ic_W __ o_r_k_s _____ _
Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee Memorandum dated June 5, 2017 .
Options Considered:
1. Award the Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail Project to Ceccanti Construction Inc., the lowest responsive,
responsible bidder, in the amount of $812 ,598.56, and approve a 10% contingency of $81,260 .00, for a total
amount of $893,858.56, and authorize the transfer of $230,859 from the Citywide Pedestrian Crossing
Improvements project (project #178) to the Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail Project (Project #193) and
authorize the Mayor to execute the contract.
2. Reject all bids for the Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail Project and direct staff to rebid the project and
return to Committee for further action.
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding option 1 to the June 20, 201
consent agenda for approval.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward Option I to the June 20, 2017 City Council consent agenda for
approval.
Bob Celski , Chair Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to authorize staff to award the Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail
Project to Ceccanti Construction Inc., the lowest responsive, responsible bidder, in the amount of $812,598.56, and
approve a 10% contingency of $81 ,260.00,for a total amount of $893,858.56, and authorize the transfer of $230,859
from the Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Improvements project (project #178) to the Steel Lake Park to Downtown
Trail Project (Project #193) and authorize the Mayor to execute the contract."
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
0 APPROVED
0 DENIED
0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION
0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED -l/2015
13
COUNCIL BILL#
18T reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE#
RESOLUTION #
CITY OF FEDERA'-WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 5, 2017
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
Land Use and Transportation Committee ~
Jim Ferrell, Mayor
Marwan Salloum, P.E., Public Works Director
SUBJECT:
Christine Mullen, P.E., Street Systems Project Enginee rq'f'
Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail Project -Bid Award
BACKGROUND
Six bids were received and opened on May 17, 2017 for the Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail
Project from the entrance to Steel Lake Park to 24th Ave S. Please see attached Bid Tabulation
Summary. The lowest responsive, responsible bidder is Ceccanti Construction Inc. with a total
bid of $812,598.56.
PROJECT ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES
Design
Right of Way
2017 Construction Cost
10% Construction Contingency
New Pump Station pu_rchase for the Park
Construction Management (In house)
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS
PROJECT AVAILABLE FUNDING
Budgeted City Funds
Connecting Washington Grant
TOTAL AVAILABLE BUDGET
Project shortfall
$100,000
$0.00
$812,599
$81,260
$20,000
$30,000
$1,043,859
$513,000
$300,000
$813,000
$230.859
The project budget has a funding shortfall of $230,859. Staff is requesting the Council to
authorize the transfer of $230,859 from the Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Improvements project
(project #178) to the Steel Lake Park to Downtown Trail Project (Project #193) and authorize
the Mayor to execute the contract.
14
!--'
u,
STEEL LAKE PARI< 'TO DOWrlTO\'YN TRAIL PROJECT
Rf8 hl0..17.002
WO OP t.NU,.,G DATE 17-MAY·:2'0 17
viwmr Hane -J --ITEM ITEM "°'
1 -s...~ 2 Can:1..~tww1'!lu-
' ...,,..,_..,.R_Dr_ ..
• SPCCP,.,.
5 --6 Traffic Con(ro[ SupeMsor
7 Flaggers and Spotters
e Other Traffic:. Control Lab o r
9 Ofnaf l•fT9CIWY TrdcCon11d
10 ~.-:IIISCl.iw,A
11 Clio~and-
12 Roadside Clelr,gp
13 R~orsirucn.i,.in:t"~ ,. R«l'IC' ... ~COCChBan
\$ R....,..e-,o,;.,.n1S.-...~
16 &iHIWilrig
17 Gmtd Borrow for Trench 81cl4il ',rid . Had .. R~~lnd.H~
18 IJtl~f"N\dlt:iCn Excavatio n Incl Haul
20 Sh0<mg or Extra Excavation Class B
21 Crushed Surfacing Top Course
22 Crushe d S urlac1n9 Bas e Course
23 H14A Cl. 1/2" PGM-22
2, l'emDon11yP.wt"lllcll'll
2S S:rucu'III E.anhW,.
26 Gravel Borrow for Structura! Earth Wall Ind Haul
TT Reconnec:t Exisbng Mtse. Drainage
2e Drain Pipe 6 Inch Diam
29 Clam IV Rcnl Ccn,:. S10rm &aww f'iot, 12.h. Ot:ii·rn.
>o ClilW fY R:oinl. Cone. s~ St-war Pipe '24 1n. ~
31 Catch Basin Type 1
12 (.a!dl.BanT;,:,,tlL ., ~-,,.. 2. 5-< lr,:i, Di,,n,
34 AdJust Exr..ting Storm Drain a ge Structure
'" C'°""*w,i,i.o 'i&lll'll:lic..ta;o~,
le SCQnnwJu, Modt ~ (fl..odula' W~ Unlll
YT Elm;anC:<1mtd~W.1U1r?<c6itionPr....etlton
38 lnle l f'rolection
39 s,JL Feace
,o lccacM. li;ia.A ., ih,2; CIC' Wood Chip a.lwlal
41 StidcdlilMiilrll.Uhton
'3 Sod-.. PS1f'E_._-..,,,.,,...eor.1_M .... H"Col, 12'-14'
<S PS.iPEAbt,f ~trVP~wkU.-TCit...1D'·12"t1t
411 Pl:,pl!lft'f Rat«aeot\
47 Raei:8.amtr ,a -"U\Dtl\Mieln\);l:ior, S 'SklnCCiC1'11lkt,c,
•9 Ex:IN:ScOCl,Ali\ T-,c,,te
so ~,eono._ Oab 4 Gumtf
51 C:ltncnl Cone. PednDwl CIR
52 lnt~lfCurti
53 Cdran1Conc ~e::inncc .. Rai:ad~tnel"ltM~ Tw,o2
>S CIIKt \'n',(C.0.aud'C:t'IMI Unlc F~ l\H l
56 -EdQ<s.dowad<
51 C<moot Cone. -.. ...
se Ccmlnt Cone. 0-to NWl'L ...
59 ~ W--.u $.ulUa: .. ~~ ModileabON. Comokt:D
61 RRFB=-lliM~Con-.plnli
"' ~l!ignl\O
ISO """"'""" 114 -"'--es J>""""' Bc,do LM< S\mi>ol
95 ft~~ .... ~ e, ,.....,_, .. R~~~UtlmiCon!lictt
TOTAL SCHEDULE A
ftld~nclJdo'*°tD,x)
UNIT APX.
QTY
CALC 1
LS 1
,s 1
LS 1
LS-1
lS I
HR 640
HR 200
LS 1
$1' ....
LS 1
EST 1
L S I .... 2
LF 170
LF 900
TN 300
CY 560
CY 100
SF 2.JOO
TN 11!0
TN 440
TN 370
TN 20
SF 1,300
tH 990
LS 1
LF 30
LF 430
LF " EA 1
EA 2
EA 1
EA ' EA I
EA 2
I,&-1
E A 11
lF 1,0
C"( ,.
CY ,s
SY 50
SY 290
£-. IQ
EA • ES1 I
LI' 224
Ui I
LI' 110
LI' &30
LF ,oo
SF 10
SY 200
HO 2
LF 2JO
LF 2lO
SY 900
EA I
~ "' LS ,
LS 1
LS ,
Lf 1.800
SF 100
EA ' LS 1
FA 1
FA 1
1111W ..
CECCA#ll l'NERA--
COOIS1RUC11DN
Taco-.wa -·-UNIT PRIC E TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL
ilOl.'WlOO s,0.000.00 SIGOOOJIU s.10:ooa.m
Sl2-58'5.57 S12..865..57 s,~000.00 .S1lODQOCI
'54.218 s:z $4,288.51 S117S,c,o Sl,115:.0CI
SSS0-07 $53607 ....... H5GOCI
$30,00000 $80.000 00 $8SOCO.D0 S65,000.0C
525,417 2 1 S25,4 17 21 515 ,000.00 .s,s~aoooo
$49 70 $31 .80600 sa,.oo Sl'9Q.C0.00
SS9 .18 S11 .tl2..00 57850 S15~700 OQ
$2..680 33 S2880.3] $21.8.:5000 521.!SO.OCI
mn '1120.t'*O $20.60 "5.1~
i:32,689.,6 .$32,68928 $46.000.00 $48,000.00
-S3:000JJO , nnn "0 S3 000 OD s3_onn Nl
S242M'1 $l.C.fl;.C,.C1 s21 2soooT $27.250 00
MaA..cS $9669 ... $00 :sMO.co
S1600 $27»50 $20 50 .$3485 00
$2.14 S.1 ,!U:9.00 SIU S1.57S.OC
>l0:12 $9 096 00 $:0:6 00 $7.800 00
m.2, $14 ,134 40 ssa,!4 w ,-,.~,
$34.01 Sl.401.CO i>0,00 U .00000
105' 11 24200 .so lO S690 .DD
S,ll ,13 S5603.40 $35.00 1 $fl.JOO .Oil
S3U2 S.1:S.h2.&Cl 532.001 lU.Mll.00
$15500 157 35000 $135..151 -150 _;n7.50
S1122t!I !l6A.S2G $225,ooI $4.SOQDQ
$2885 $37 ,505.00 $34..00! $44,200.0C
$28-20 ~7977.40 $26.00! $25,74000
$1,30.04 $1.,343.04 $1 000,00 $1000.00
nn.25 $4_11 7 50 S71.00 sa,ooo
... .v $34 51 6 10 s1·::;,.oo :U:2.2!0.QO
.S.t56.6l $2..4.9534 u,:s.oo Sl,610,00
$14.71 ,SS S:2.90.815 S2 13000 $4.260.0D
.S.t .1>'2.C.Od n .248,12 $2.l(I0,00 $4.400.00
S.1930.lS S7.e&70 S.4 20000 S8_4000C
>68&~ s, 0,06,( ssas .oo .s1 .lss.oo
l.'?-JJJ711 S2 037 9 1 S53o co.I. $530.00
"2S!9SM .SSS.39\.10 m .6<!0.oo l H7.2DO.DD
.$21JJ,i7 .0:9 5'21tJ.i70S ll-00 $3:50000
Si50-S $!25.M $50.001 ~SOOD
s, .. 12 $3 ,566.80 s.a so • $629006
$37"' ·S22k.40 UJOO u.,20.00
SSH1 $87915 $7 4 75 s, t21 ?~
52069 S1 .0U !O szuo 11 ,122.50
$13 39 53.88310 $1 4 50 $4.205.mJ
$$Cit es "·o•MO $550 00 S5 ,5DOOO
s,7g_n S'l ,90611,11 $5,15,00 S2o&)OO -.5300000 $3 000 00 s ·J.ooo.m
$8 95 $2..004 80 S1il.1~ :$2..1&40(1
$14 ,'27&.s :Sl4.'271115 $15.500 DD $15,50000
$21 4l 52..'U7-l0 $21.76 == $2216 -l11U76.80 $23 00 $19090 00
516 77 SI ffi"CIC $15.,00 11 Min 00
$25-99 $181~'30 5 18401 $1,288 00
ss, !S $10 37000 $1'1.60 SS.520.00
£37066 $74132 S(OOQO S000.00
S34-02 $7 962 60 $">2,)2 S7 •33.HJ
u,,,o .$4 ,02.2-70 $17 6 01 $4 ,048 DO
... M $239340 $29'.~ s11 ssoon
S1MO.al5 $16.cD.be St.111.50 $U11,SO
$3160 $948 00 53"-00 $10,000
S70)00.00 l70,20C).00 $55.25000 $55.250.00
$17 59667 s17 596 s? S'9.1DO.OO s,t.,oo .oo
$14 389 63 'St.c:Yl06'3 $9,600.00 $9,600 01)
'4.02 !'7'238'00 $4 45 1 $8010.00
$847 $847 00-l9-25 $i2500
$132...38 D971'1 $1.C~OO .......
52,488 74 $24B8 74 s.2.10000 $2..700.00
...Jil0000.00 ~ $lOJXXI.OG r $U)G00:m:I S,dOIKIIII
$10°00000 ·.siO:OCO.OIJ SIO.Ol!Odo St0.000.0I
$812,S98,56 $817,583.85
IIU!l Illa .. ...
REED 1RUC11116& ---AC'IM!cc.e-NC. -CMCMll!.IIIC. ~-ti EICAV,.TIIIG cca11111C'11D11 -WA --·-.......... , __
UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTAL UNIT PRIC E TOTAL UNIT PRICE TOTA L UNIT PRIC E TOTAL
i10:ooo .oo $100001111 .sioot)Ooo S"i4000'.IIG 510.00000 it0..000-00 StQ.OOOIIG -'••JlOO'do $"10,000.00 510,000.0{
S'i'0,000..00 s,0.00000 .!13.000,00 s,,.ooa .oo S11 OCIOQQ ,,,,000 .00 $15::SDOCIC SJS.50000 $12-000.00 St2.Jl00.0C
S2.00000 S!.000 00 ...,.,_ .. lOOCl .00 SI 1DO.OD 51 IQQ .00 $!i 000,DO SSOOO,CO S>.000.00 ... 000.00
ssoooo ssoooo $1 _00000 S\000.DO .s,so.oo $1,000 S25(),00 $'250,CO $1=~ SI 500,.DCJ
S75000D0 57.sODOOC Si!l6DG0DG .$36000.CIO !7260000 sneoooo $102 350 00 $102.350 00 sas.000.00 SM,000..00
$3..500.00 53,500.00 $2SOOOD0 SM:OOOCM 52,650.00 $2.650 00 $41.500.00 $41.500.00 S25.COO.OO S25000Jl0
.... oo -S3S20000 $56.00 :S3S.8,401'lt 1.6.8.501 $US40.00 S7000 $44 .800,00 !60.00 "6.,400.00
ss,oo $1).CllO ,OC'.I $5000 $11.&flQ,OO $68.50 $13-7000(.i S7.500 S.15.000,00 IGOOO i,12.,000.QO
:!i8.000 00 S6.000 00 .SSUOO..OQ $! 000.00 S2.40CIOIJ 52 . .c OO.OCI $14425 00 $14.425.00 $15.000 00 .ns .00 1nn
S2000 $5600 00 $32.00 $8960 00 $25.50 $7140 00 uuo $1 .1,0.00 $30 00 $8_400 00
no.00000 S20000,0C) $40,000.00 $40,000.00 $45,500.00 545,500.00 S64.825.00 $64.825.00 (15.00000 S.15Mll.OO
SO.COO.OD ~:000.00 $3.000 00 s.3000 od $3.000.00 13.oontvi $3.DQ O_Qa UilQOJlO S3,00UO l,3m,ooo
$17.20000 $17..200.00 $17J)OO 00 $1700000 $36 ,50000 S35 50000 $36.550 00 $36.550.00: $20,000,00 .=00000
S>00.00 sooooo $400001 $800 0 SGOC .00 11.20000 S1SO.OCI S1 Ual'loOQ l600.00 $1.200 OD
$1000' $1,700.00 $17001 "1.•ao.oo $2200 $3.740 00 $14.00 S238D.OO $15.00 $2 550 OCJ.
5300 $2,70000 "ool $3..60il..O.u S2-00 $2.15000 $400 $3.600 00 $4 00 $3_60o...o.G
raoo V .,0000 S33 00 $9.90DOG ..... s.,1,150.00 $31 .0CI Si :!00.00 $3500 $10 5000[)
S4000 S22.'*D000 ..... 1,M9A11D0 $8800 $49,280.00 .s.\S.00 .S?'.5200.00 .... 00 $26000.QCI
m .oo $200000 S<7.00 S<I00.00 $92..50 $9250 00 $5100 1$10000 -ssooooo
$0 50 ~1.150 00 S.1.00 S2.3il0.00 UDO suoooo $0 so $1.150.0Q U.25 u.B7~00
56000 $\0 800 00 $36 00 $6 480 00 .$66 .00 $1168000 SlSOO 58_.,0000 $5000 $9.000.00
$5000 S22..000 00 :S"lD.00 Sl>.200.0G $67 00 $29 480 00 $35 00 S 1540000 $<$00 Sli.lUW},OCJ
$20000 $74 000 00 $120 00 $44 .4 00.00 1126.00 Wi.620.00 $15500 $57.350_0(;1 $1 3000 S4.B .1Cl0.Jl0
5100 00 $4.00000 $300 00 $6 000 ,0D 5300 00 Sti .000.00 Sl7!00 $5,$0000 $20000 i4 _00000
Mll.00 ss,_aoooo S.'3000 $3~000,0t! $38.50 $50.050.00 $5000 $65.000 00 SlS.CO $1lS .• ,oo
moo S19.IOO 00 S28,00 121.no.oo $25 50 $25245 00 $3200 sn.sao oo $CS.OD ... __...
$50000 $500.00 $1~400.00 St 400 00 $300000 $3 00001) $4...25000 $4.250.00 no.oooJJo 510.000-DO
S20.00 S600.00 54500 $1.350.01) $112.0J) $.3 .J60 00 fl.100 _., 520.00 S5500 SL65o.oca
$,0000 1.,11-000,00 5.J00 ,00 SiC:SOOC .00 S81 .0CI $3:1 ,810.00 ..... l36'.SOOOO $80.00 S34.400.DC
$20000 S>.00000 ~,.,~,00. !>1,!Y-1.M 1333-00 s.5 .... 00 $425.00 S1 .~-"° $1 50.00 $2 ,7 00.00
$1200.00 $2.400.00 $.2..400 00 S.4.80ClOL1 S3.00000 SC5 OOQDO ll.535..00 !5~070.00 $1.700.00 S3.400 00
S 1 40000 $2._60000 !a2..l00 00 $4.20.n rw :U.00000 sa.aoo.oo $2 725 00 $5 450 00 S2.000.00 uooooo
J.l"""",OG m . .11100.00 $6000 00 $120000 SII000.00 Sl2.0QQ.DO s:!~700 $17 074,00 $4,200 DO $5,.400,00
$40000 $1.200 00 S1 400.00 .SC 200.00 -SS5000 SU61l.OO $721 00 $.2 .16 3.00 $800.00 >2.400ll!l
n.oao oo .S-20000CI $1 .6 00 00 $1 600 QQ $1 650.00 $.1.65.rulO su1200 S3.&12..DO s,.000.00 $1 .000.00
$2600000' .S56 .0000Q S'l1 000.0D S5'.0!!0C> $35500 00, S7 1,000 00 $4 2.20000 S84..4000G ~.00000 SS0000.00
SUS,500,00 SHS.SOD 00 $20 000 OD $200000! $3.500.00 SJ 50000 S,~,0,00 S7:l50DO 115,000.00 .........
$10000 S'UD0..00 S100 00 $1 .to0.00 567 00 $95700 $6500 $7\5 .00 $11000 st21.0..00
'600 $4 uooo 5800 $5 92000 Sa.!10 $7 0:Y> CO SIIOO M 44000 S500 '3 700.00:
$5000 s2.ooooa 5.5-2.00 $2.oMOI $53.00 $2120.M s~oo ll..t90.00 sssoo SUDO.CO
>11600 Sl .. 11tt10D 575 00 $1 1.25 00 $75 00 $1,J.25 oa $77.00 $115501) $65 00 ms.oo
$20 00 $1.000 00 =-oo s,.100,0 S22 501 $1 125 00 S230D .$1 T!D.OD KOO ,S:lOQ,O(I
S1S.QO S4 '350.0D $1400 $4.060 0 $14,.50 $<,20~00 $14 00 $4.06000 S.12.00 Sl.""-00
S7S0 ,00 S7 500.ClCI SS2S.OO S5,10DOC $550 00 SS.500.00 $55500 S5 ,!$0DO snooo M.SOO,t>
S7,0.M Sl.000.00 $500.00 5200000 SSl"-00 ~ \0000 S529 00 $2,11600 $400.00 $lfiM04
.U.00000 nooooo ..$3-.00 ll:OD0.00 $3 000 OD S3 000.00 .l3JKIDOO ..$3000.00 n .ooo oo $30000C:
$20 00 $4 480 00 SIOOO 522-40.00 SID.OD S2.2AO 00 $900 S2_0 16 00 110.00 $2.240Dr:
S2000000 -ODO.OD 518.000J)O St&.000.0G $15.500 DO $15.500 00 .s,7_,50.60 Sl7.2SODO $10,000 00 $10.000 00
$2000 $2..200 00 $2.LOO $2.SlQ.ilJ) •20,00 ~200.00-$2200 $2..42000 S,O,CO S1 .~00
53000 :t2,.eoo.oo SllOO $31 •""".CIC moo $22.,niOGO U7DO f22.,41GOD S32 00 S26.560 OU
12500 52 soo 00 $3000 S3.000..00 St.C.00 $1 .COO .DO $3200 $3.200.00 s.50,00 S500000
S75.00 SS.l!IOOO $40001 52 B0000 $29.50 S2.065.00 s1,.ao i-1.970.00 !60.00 S<.-00
$5500 $11 00000 S4100 ~200.tlCI SSl .50 S1Q ,00..00 S7200 :li14 400.00 $60.00 .S.12.000-00
$750.00 $1.50000 s.iOO .<>O S,00.00 ....... S7010C S416.00 $832.00 IOOO.CO 11 OCI0.00
$36..00 $.6 _?40.00 $3400 ..u.1 .. 000 ~2.~ !7.4'f'S.tl[] $30.00 $6 900 00 14000 $9200.00
$110 00 $25 30000 S40DO SS.200.00 $22 co $5060.00 $115.00 -i26.4SO ,OO $35.00 $8.050.CJC
$5000 S30 00000 $42..00 $2.5200.00 S38,,0 m 100.oa $42 00 $25.20000 s.511.CO S30.0000C
$1.10000 S1100.00 $1.700.00 S1.7Q0.DO $1 90000 $1900.00 113!0.00 $1-35000 $2.30000 S2 3000C
$3500 S1 OSOOQ $35001 $1 OSQ.00 $J2:SO $975..00 $3200 $96000 $35.00 $105000
ie~.000.00 S6S ,OOOOQ 161 COO.OD S£i1 CIOQJ'JCI $52.00000 $52000_0(1 S7C 3'50.00 $14 l50 00 $99 000 00 S99~000.00
s20.ooo.oo $20 000 00 $2 1.00000 S21 OO QOO fflOOOOO $20.000..00 $22,225 00 $22.22.5 00 S23.000.CO msoo.oo
SB.000.00 $8 000 OQ $3 ,000.00 $3,000.00 $6,500.00 $6,500.00 SB,250 00 U.2!0.00 $3,000 00 $3 000 00
S4 .00 S? QQ.Q.Q $4.50 S.lUOO.QO "00 $7 .?00.Q 54-50 $6100.00 5250 k..500,00
512.00 $1.200.00 .... S900.D0 .. ,0 sa,Ooo S9!0 SS50.00 S5.00 .sOD.J)(I
5500.00 $1 .500.0D s,~.oo s•S"o.oo S135,DO $405,00 !22SD0 S6?500 s,oo.oo .... ...
53.COOOO 13.00000 $2,800.00 52,800.00 5.2500.00 S2.5DO.OO $2000.00 naoooo S>,000.00 .S'J.OD0.00
$1000000 s,~000.00 S·10 000.ooi $10 000 00 .:s10GQO.oo U0000.00 .ft.OG00 .00 •iOOOCOI $'1'0.000.00 $10 ooo ad
.SJo.:0000.0 J1DJJCMIDCI 1un1aooa ,-,_fJl)OQJI 'flt>-1111 , -.,o: 1.1.Doot>JX -$10,000 00 510JlCIO_OQ
$850,31 0...00 S862.,2150J '885,111 00. S1 ,057,67J .OO S894,840.00
Pllif':ldl
This page left blank intentionally.
16
COUNCIL l\fEETING D~ TE: 6/20/i 7 & 7 /5/17
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: ORDINANCE: Amendment to FWRC for Historic Preservation.
ITEM#:
POLICY QUESTION: Should the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) Chapter 19 "Zoning and Development
Code" be amended to add a new chapter FWRC 19 .285 "Protection and Preservation of Landmarks?"
COMMITTEE: LUTC MEETING DATE: 6/5/17
CATEGORY:
0 Consent
0 City Council Business
l:8J Ordinance
D Resolution
D
D
Public Hearing
Other
STAFF REPORT BY: Dave Van De Weghe , Senior Planner DEPT: CD/Planning
Attachments: LUTC Staff Report, Proposed City Ordinance FWRC 19.285 "Protection and Preservation
of Landmarks", King County Ordinance KCC 203.62 "Protection and Preservation of Landmarks,
Landmark Sites and Districts", King County Regional Historic Preservation Program Handout,
PowerPoint presentation.
Options Considered: 1) Adopt the Mayor's recommendation as shown in the Draft Adoption Ordinance; 2)
Adopt the Mayor 's recommendation as further amended by the City Council; 3) Do not adopt the Mayor's
recommendation.
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends adoption of the proposed amendment as written in the
Draft Adoption Ordinance.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward the proposed ordinance to First Reading on June 20, 2017.
Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION(S):
1 ST READING OF ORDINANCE (6/20/2017): "I move to forward approval of the ordinance to the July 511i, 2017
Council Meeting/or enactment."
2ND READING OF ORDINANCE (7/5/2017): "I move approval of the proposed ordinance."
(BELOW TO BE COMPLE I'E.D BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
0 APPROVED COUNCIL BILL#
D DENIED 15T reading
0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION Enactment reading
0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only) ORDINANCE#
REVISED-11/2016 RESOLUTION#
K:\2016 Code Amendments\Historic Preservation\LUTC 6-5-2017\" llenda Bill Historic Preservation.doc"
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 5, 2017
TO:
VIA:
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Jim Ferrell, Mayor
FROM: Dave Van De Weghe, Senior Planner
SUBJECT: Ordinance No. Protection and Preservation of Landmarks
BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission held study sessions on October 19, 2016 and December 7, 2016 to
discuss two options for establishing a historic preservation program:
1. The City should draft its own historic preservation ordinance and hire preservation staff, or
2. The City should enter into an interlocal agreement with King County for historic preservation
services and adopt King County's historic landmark designation ordinance by reference.
Commissioners preferred option #2 based upon the efficiencies of partnering with King County.
The proposed ordinance adopts the King County preservation ordinance by reference, with minor
changes. Following adoption of this ordinance, King County and the City will approve an
interlocal agreement.
The 2016 Planning Commission Work Programs lists the following discretionary action-"Adopt
an ordinance establishing a historic preservation program and request certification as a Certified
Local Government."
Historic preservation is accomplished through the official designation of historic landmarks by
the City. The City must first formalize the landmark designation process by adopting an
ordinance.
Certified Local Government (CLG)
CLG status helps a local government encourage, develop , and maintain its local preservation
efforts in coordination with its development plans. Benefits of CLG status include the following:
• Special grants from the State Historic Preservation Officer
• Local historic preservation expertise recognized by State and Federal agencies
• Technical assistance and training from the State Historic Preservation Office
• Participation in nominations to the National Register of Historic Places
• National historic preservation assistance network: publications, professional assistance
• Information exchange with the State Historic Preservation Office
• Participation in statewide preservation programs and planning
18
June 5, 2017
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Ordinance No. Protection and Preservation of Landmarks
Page2
The following responsibilities are required of a CLG:
• Maintain a historic preservation commission
• Survey local historic properties
• Enforce State or local preservation laws
• Provide for public participation
• Other functions delegated or required by the State
By partnering with an existing CLG (King County), the City will be entitled to all the benefits of
CLG status upon adoption of a preservation ordinance and interlocal agreement.
Costs
The forthcoming interlocal agreement will specify the application fees King County charges to
review landmark nominations and certificate of appropriateness applications. If the City
establishes application fee rates that equal review costs, the program will be self-sufficient.
PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT:
The proposed amendment adopts the King County preservation ordinance by reference, with
several minor edits, via a new chapter in the City zoning code. The major sections of the
ordinance are as follows.
1. Identify a historic preservation commission.
• City council will appoint one local citizen to serve on the nine-member King County
Landmarks Commission for a term length of five years.
2. Provide criteria for designating landmarks.
Must be at least 40 years old and:
• Is associated with historical events or significant historical persons; or
• Embodies distinctive characteristics of a period, style, design, etc.; or
• Yields historically important information; or
• Is an outstanding work of an important designer or builder.
3. Outline the process for nominating landmarks.
• · Applicant provides written owner consent to nominate landmark.
• City accepts nomination applications and forwards them to King County preservation
staff for review, then recommendation to approve or disapprove is sent to the
Landmarks Commission.
• Landmarks Commission approves or disapproves nomination in a public hearing.
4. Provide a review process for approving alterations to designated landmarks.
• City accepts nomination applications and forwards them to King County preservation
staff for review.
• King County preservation staff approves minor alterations or makes recommendation
to approve or disapprove to Landmarks Commission for major alterations.
• Landmarks Commission approves or disapproves major alterations in a public
hearing.
19
June 5, 2017
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Ordinance No. Protection and Preservation of Landmarks
Page 3
5. Establish a special tax valuation .
• The value of improvements to historic properties is exempt from property tax for 10
years.
TIMELINE:
Th £ 11 . h e o owmg 1s t e ant1c1pate d · r £ ] . f h time me or comp .. ehon o t e co d d e amen ment:
SEP A Notice to Newspaper 4/14/2017
Issue SEP A Determination 4/14/2017
14-Day Comment Period Ends 4/28/2017
Notice of Planning Commission Public Hearing 4/28/2017
Planning Commission Public Hearing 5/17/2017
21-Day Appeal Period Ends 5/19/2017
Land Use/Transportation Committee Meeting 6/5/2017
City Council 1st Reading 6/20/2017
City Council 2nd Reading 7/5/2017
Notice in Newspaper 7/7/2017
Ordinance Effective 7/10/2017
Following adoption of this ordinance, the City will approve an interlocal agreement and forward
it to King County for their approval, expected in late 201 7.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
At a Planning Commission public hearing held on May 17, 2017, the following public comments
were submitted via testimony:
Dana Halloway, Federal Way resident-She is in favor of the proposed ordinance. The city
incorporated in 1990 and it is time to have such an ordinance. Many of the historical properties
are on the verge of being lost. If we don't preserve our heritage, we will just be a bunch of strip
malls between Seattle and Tacoma. Our city is more than that.
Jerry Knutzen, Federal Way Historical Society Vice-President -He has lived in Federal Way
since 1947 (he remembers before it was called Federal Way). The historical society has been in
favor of such an ordinance for many years. He stated we need to maintain and retain our historical
places. Most of what we have are photographs, but there are some historic structures that need to
be saved. He lives in the Buenna area, which was platted as a city in 1895. He told the
Commissioners about a number of historic structures. He strongly encourages·the passage of the
proposed ordinance.
Ron Smith, Federal Way resident -He stated his wife loves old things. About 30 years ago they
were looking for a place to live and came across this old house overlooking the water and his wife
commented she would love to live there. They purchased the house. As far as he knows, they
have the oldest intact house in the area and have been careful to maintain its integrity. The only
change to the outside is a recent deck. He is in favor of the proposed ordinance.
20
June 5, 2017
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Ordinance No. Protection and Preservation of Landmarks
Page4
Doug Peffer, past president of the Federal Way Historical Society-He was involved with
moving the historical cabins and other projects. He is in favor of the proposed ordinance. He
questions dealing with King County because it could.leave open the possibility of certain
buildings be sold to a developer, who would not care about the historical value. The city should
review this possibility. It happened with the destruction of the old Redondo General Store. No
one knows how the developer received approval for a demolition permit. People need to put strict
controls on historic places, or they will be gone (most of what Federal Way had is gone).
Jason Ludwig, Federal Way resident -He is also with the historical society, but is not speaking
from that perspective tonight. He spoke of living in Phoenix, Arizona for many years (has been in
Federal Way for three years). Phoenix (which was incorporated in 1881) adopted a preservation
ordinance only two years ago and has destroyed most of their historical buildings. Development
trends go through phases and the phase during much of the destruction of historic structures was
strip malls; as a result, Phoenix is a land of strip malls. He is enthralled by Federal Way's sense
of history and the civic pride in our history. Saving history is an uphill battle unless it is protected
by such an ordinance. Don't repeat Phoenix's mistake.
Karen Meador, Auburn resident-She works for the historical society. Federal Way is a rare
exception to cities that are built on the water because we are built on roads. Military Road, 99
(Pacific Highway South) and I-5 are all located in Federal way. They were all cutting edge for
their time; representing a new era in the American experiment. Many of Federal Way's historic
properties are close to these important roads (Brooklake, historic cabins, Steel Lake Annex, etc.).
It is hard to find history so accessible. Heritage properties provide communities with unique
buildings suitable for different types of uses (tourist destinations, event centers, meeting centers,
etc.). They provide Federal Way with a unique identity and distinctive character. She urged the
Commissioners recommend adoption of the proposed ordinance. The only city in the U.S. named
for a federal highway is deserving of a historic preservation ordinance. It will help preserve
Federal Way's unique blend of historic highways, varied architecture, great scenic beauty,
wildlife habitat, and heritage.
Dorothy Bird, Federal Way resident -She has lived here for six years. This is a unique locality
(not farmland but a bog), developed in a way that is different. She is very glad she came here .
Marty Dickerson Auburn resident -He is involved with the historical society. He purchased an
old abandoned store last year on Military Road. He has had a lot of interaction with people who
have grown up in the area. Many people stop and ask what will happen with the store. They are
cleaning and up and saving what they can. They want to preserve this bit of history. He supports
Federal Way adopting the proposed ordinance.
Suzanne Vargo, Federal Way resident-She has lived and walked all over Federal Way. She
volunteers for the Auburn museum. There are strong roots throughout Federal Way and to lose
these would be to lose a part of all of us. Federal Way is unique and we should preserve that.
21
June 5, 2017
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Ordinance No. Protection and Preservation of Landmarks
Page 5
DECISIONAL CRITERIA:
FWRC 19.80.130 provides criteria for zoning text amendments. The following section analyzes
compliance of the proposed zoning text amendments with the criteria provided by this chapter.
The City may amend the text of the FWRC only if it finds that:
1. The proposed amendment is consistent with the applicable provisions of the comprehensive
plan.
Staff Response -The proposed code amendment is consistent with the following goals and
policies:
LUG 14 -Use historic resources as an important element in the overall design of the City.
LUP 65 -Identify vista points and historic buildings for preservation.
LUP 66 -Develop a process to designate historic landmark sites and structures. Use
developer incentives or other mechanisms to ensure that these sites and structures will
continue to be a part of the community.
LUP 69 -Safeguard and manifest Federal Way's heritage by preserving those sites,
buildings, structures, and objects which reflect significant elements of the City's history.
LUP 71 -Undertake an effort to publicly commemorate historic sites.
LUP 72 -The City shall continue to work with the Historical Society of Federal Way
towards attainment of historic resource policies.
EDP 25 -Implement zoning and provide financial incentives that encourage prioritized
development consistent with comprehensive and subarea plans and orderly, phased growth.
EDG 9 -Encourage and support the development of recreational and cultural facilities
and/or events that will bring additional visitors to Federal Way, and increase visitor
spending.
2. The proposed amendment bears a substantial relationship to public health, safety, or welfare.
Staff Response -The proposed code amendment bears a substantial relationship to public
welfare because it preserves historic sites for the cultural benefit of all citizens, offers
economic incentives to encourage the rehabilitation of historic properties, and facilitates
cultural heritage tourism.
3. The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the residents of the City.
Staff Response -The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the public and the
residents of the City of Federal Way because it preserves, protects, and enhances those sites,
buildings, districts, structures, and objects which reflect significant elements of the City of
Federal Way's, the county's, the state's, and the nation's cultural, aesthetic, social,
economic, architectural, ethnic, archeological, historic and other heritage, fosters civic pride
22
June 5, 2017
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Ordinance No. Protection and Preservation of Landmarks
Page 6
in the accomplishments of the past, and provides incentives for the continued ownership and
use of landmarks.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission recommends
approval of the proposed code amendment.
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding the proposed ordinance to
City Council for First Reading on June 20, 2017 and Adoption on July 5, 2017.
LUTC OPTIONS:
The LUTC has the following options:
1. Recommend adoption of the Planning Commission's recommendation as shown in the Draft
Ordinance;
2. Recommend adoption of the Planning Commission's recommendation as further amended by
the LUTC; or
3. Do not recommend adopting the Planning Commission's recommendations.
EXHIBITS:
Exhibit A: Proposed City Ordinance -FWRC 19 .285 "Protection and Preservation of
Landmarks"
Exhibit B: King County Ordinance -KCC 203.62 "Protection and Preservation of Landmarks,
Landmark Sites and Districts"
Exhibit C: Regional Historic Preservation Program
Exhibit D: King County Historic Preservation Officer email to Federal Way Planning
Commission re: staffing levels
cc: Project File
Day File
23
Exhibit A
Proposed City Ordinance -FWRC 19 .285 "Protection and Preservation of Landmarks"
24
ORDINANCE NO. __ _
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Federal Way, Washington, relating
to the protection and preservation of landmarks and adding new
Chapter 19.285 to the Federal Way Revised Code.
WHEREAS, the City recognizes the need to periodically modify Title 19 of the Federal
Way Revised Code · ("FWRC"), "Zoning and Development Code," in order to conform to state
and federal law, codify administrative practices, clarify and update zoning regulations as deemed
necessary, and improve the efficiency of the regulations and the development review process;
and
WHEREAS, this ordinance, containing amendments to development regulations and the
text of Title 19 FWRC, has complied with Process VI review, Chapter 19.80 FWRC, pursuant to
Chapter 19.35 FWRC; and
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest for the City Council to adopt rules and regulations
to protect and preserve the historic buildings, structures, districts, sites, objects, and
archeological sites within the City of Federal Way for the benefit of present and future
generations; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted public workshops on these code
amendments on October 19, 2016 and December 7, 2016; and
WHEREAS, the Land Use & Transportation Committee of the City Council of the City
of Federal Way conducted a study session on these code amendments on December 5, 2016; and
WHEREAS, an Environmental Determination of Nonsignificance ("DNS") was properly
issued for the Proposal on April 14, 2017, and no comments or appeals were received and the
DNS was finalized on May 19, 2017; and
Ordinance No. 17-__
25
Page 1 of 8
Rev 3/17 LU
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission properly conducted a duly noticed public hearing
on these code amendments on May 17, 2017, and forwarded a recommendation of approval; and
WHEREAS, the Land Use & Transportation Committee of the Federal Way City Council
considered these code amendments on June 5, 2017, and recommended adoption of the text
amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. F inding . The City Council of the City of Federal Way makes the following
findings with respect to the proposed amendments.
(a) These code amendments are in the best interest of the residents of the City and
will benefit the City as a whole by protecting and preserving the historic buildings, structures,
districts, sites, objects, and archeological sites within the City of Federal Way for the benefit of
present and future generations.
(b) These code amendments comply with Chapter 36.70A RCW, Growth
Management.
(c) These code amendments are consistent with the intent and purpose of Title 19
FWRC and will implement and are consistent with the applicable provisions of the Federal Way
Comprehensive Plan.
(d) These code amendments bear a substantial relationship to, and will protect and
not adversely affect, the public health, safety, and welfare.
(e) These code amendments have followed the proper procedure required under the
FWRC.
Ordinance No. 17-__
26
Page 2 of 8
Rev 3/17 LU
Section 2. Conclusions. Pursuant to Chapter 19.80 FWRC and Chapter 19.35 FWRC, and
based upon the recitals and the findings set forth in Section 1, the Federal Way City Council
makes the following Conclusions of Law with respect to the decisional criteria necessary for the
adoption of the proposed amendments:
(a) The proposed FWRC amendments are consistent with, and substantially
implement, the following Federal Way Comprehensive Plan goals and policies:
LUG 14 -Use historic resources as an important element in the overall design of the
City.
LUP 65 -Identify vista points and historic buildings for preservation.
LUP 66-Develop a process to designate historic landmark sites and structures. Use
developer incentives or other mechanisms to ensure that these sites and structures will
continue to be a part of the community.
LUP 69 -Safeguard and manifest Federal Way's heritage by preserving those sites,
buildings, structures, and objects which reflect significant elements of the City's history.
LUP 71 -Undertake an effort to publicly commemorate historic sites.
LUP 72 -The City shall continue to work with the Historical Society of Federal Way
towards attainment of historic resource policies.
EDP 25 -Implement zoning and provide financial incentives that encourage prioritized
development consistent with comprehensive and subarea plans and orderly, phased
growth.
EDG 9 -Encourage and support the development of recreational and cultural facilities
and/or events that will bring additional visitors to Federal Way, and increase visitor
spending.
Ordinance No. 17-__
27
Page3 of8
Rev 3/17 LU
(b) The proposed FWRC amendment bears a substantial relationship to the public
health, safety, and welfare because it preserves historic sites for the cultural benefit of all
citizens, offers economic incentives to encourage the rehabilitation of historic properties, and
facilitates cultural heritage tourism.
( c) The proposed amendment is in the best interest of the public and the residents of
the City of Federal Way because it preserves, protects and enhances those sites, buildings,
districts, structures and objects which reflect significant elements of the city of Federal Way's
cultural, aesthetic, social, economic, architectural, ethnic, archeological, historic and other
heritage, fosters civic pride in the accomplishments of the past, and provides incentives for the
continued ownership and use of landmarks.
Section 3. Title 19 of the Federal Way Revised Code is hereby amended to add a new
chapter 19.285 to read as follows:
Chapter 19.285
PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION OF LANDMARKS
Sections:
19.285.010 Purpose.
19.285.020 King County Code Chapter 20.62 Adopted.
19.285.030 Landmarks Commission Created -Membership and Organization.
19.285.040 Review of Building and Related Permits.
19.285.050 Appeal Procedure.
19.285.060 Redesignation of Existing Landmarks.
19.285.010 Purpose.
The purposes of this chapter are to:
(1) Designate, preserve, protect, enhance, and perpetuate those sites, buildings, districts,
structures and objects that reflect significant elements of the city's cultural, aesthetic, social,
economic, political, architectural, ethnic, archaeological, engineering, historic, and other
heritage;
(2) Foster civic pride in the beauty and accomplishments of the past;
(3) Stabilize and improve the economic values and vitality of landmarks;
(4) Encourage, protect, and enhance the city's tourist industry by promoting heritage-related
tourism;
Ordinance No. 17-__
28
Page 4 of 8
Rev 3/17 LU
(5) Promote the continued use, exhibition, and interpretation of significant sites, districts,
buildings, structures, and objects for the education, inspiration, and welfare of the people of the
city;
(6) Promote and continue incentives for ownership and utilization of landmarks;
(7) Assist, encourage and provide incentives to public and private owners for preservation,
restoration, rehabilitation, and use of landmark buildings, sites, districts, structures, and objects;
(8) Work cooperatively with other jurisdictions to identify, evaluate, and protect historic
resources in furtherance of the purposes of this chapter.
19.285.020 King County Code Chapter 20.62 Adopted.
As now or hereafter amended, the following sections of Chapter 20.62 King County Code
("KCC") are adopted as amended, added to, or excepted in this chapter and are incorporated by
reference:
(1) KCC 20.62.020-Definitions, except as follows:
(a) Subsection H is changed to read: "Director" is the director of the city of Federal Way
community development department or designee.
(b) Add Subsection Z: "Council" is the city of Federal Way city council.
(2) KCC 20.62.040 -Designation Criteria, except all references to "King County" are changed
to read "city of Federal Way."
(3) KCC 20.62.050 -Nomination Procedure, except that property owner written consent is
required prior to King County acceptance of a nomination request.
(4) KCC 20.62.070-Designation Procedure, except all references to "King County" are changed
to read "city of Federal Way."
(5) KCC 20.62.080 -Certificate of Appropriateness Procedure, except the last sentence of
Subsection A thereof.
(6) KCC 20.62.100 -Evaluation of Economic Impact.
(7) KCC 20.62.130 -Penalty for Violation of Section 20.62.080 (FWRC 19.285.020(5)).
(8) KCC 20.62.140-Special Valuation for Historic Properties.
19.285.030 Landmarks Commission Created -Membership and Organization.
(1) The King County Landmarks Commission ("Commission"), established pursuant to Chapter
20.62 KCC, is hereby designated and empowered to act as the landmarks Commission for the
city of Federal Way pursuant to the provisions of this chapter.
(2) The special member of the Commission, provided for in Section 20.62.030 KCC, shall be
appointed by the city council. Such special member shall have a demonstrated interest and
competence in historic preservation. Such appointment shall be made for a five-year term. Such
special member shall serve until his or her successor is duly appointed and confirmed by the city
council. In the event of a vacancy, an appointment shall be made to fill the vacancy in the same
manner and with the same qualifications as if at the beginning of the term, and the person
appointed to fill the vacancy shall hold the position for the remainder of the unexpired term.
Such special member may be reappointed but may not serve more than two consecutive, five-
year terms. Such special member shall be deemed to have served one full term, if such special
member resigns at any time after appointment or if such special member serves more than three
years of an unexpired term. The special member of the commission shall serve without
compensation.
Ordinance No. 17-__
29
Page 5 of 8
Rev 3/17 LU
(3) The Commission shall file its rules and regulations, including procedures consistent with this
chapter, with the city clerk.
19.285.040 Application Completeness.
Permit applications for changes to landmark properties shall not be considered complete unless
accompanied by a certificate of appropriateness pursuant to Section 20.62.080 KCC. Upon
receipt of an application for a development proposal which affects a Federal Way landmark or a
historic resource that has received a preliminary determination of significance as defined in
Section 20.62.080 KCC, the application circulated to the King County historic preservation
officer shall be deemed an application for a certificate of appropriateness pursuant to Section
20.62.080 KCC, if accompanied by the additional information required to apply for such
certificate.
19.285.050 Review of Building and Related Permits.
The official responsible for the issuance of building and related permits shall promptly refer
applications for permits that "affect" historic buildings, structures, objects, sites, districts, or
archaeological sites to the King County Historic Preservation Officer ("HPO") for review and
comment.
For the purposes of this section, "affect" shall be defined as an application for change to the
actual structure, on a property with a landmark structure or designated as a landmark property, or
on an adjacent property sharing a common boundary line, or included in King County's Historic
Resources Inventory. The responsible official shall seek and take into consideration the
comments of the HPO regarding mitigation of any adverse effects affecting historic buildings,
structures, objects, sites, or districts.
19.285.060 Appeal Procedure.
(1) A party ofrecord aggrieved by a decision of the Commission designating or rejecting a
nomination for designation of a landmark or issuing or denying a certificate of appropriateness
may appeal such decision pursuant to the procedures established for process IV review in
Chapter 19.70 FWRC.
(2) If, after the appeal hearing, the hearing examiner determines:
(a) An error in fact was made by the Commission, the hearing examiner shall remand the
proceeding to the Commission for reconsideration; or
(b) The decision of the Commission is based on an error in judgment or conclusion, the
hearing examiner may modify or reverse the decision of the Commission.
19.285.070 Redesignation of Existing Landmarks.
All King County landmarks designated pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 20.62 KCC that are
in compliance with this chapter and that are located within the boundaries of the city shall be
subject to the provisions of the ordinance codified in this chapter and considered city of Federal
Way landmarks.
Ordinance No. 17-__
30
Page 6 of 8
Rev 3/17 LU
Section 4. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared separate and
severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion of
this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall
not affect the validity of the remainder of the ordinance, or the validity of its application to any
other persons or circumstances.
Section 5. Correction . The City Clerk and the codifiers of this ordinance are authorized
to make necessary corrections to this ordinance including, but not limited to, the correction of
scrivener/clerical errors, references, ordinance numbering, section/subsection numbers and any
references thereto.
Section 6. Ratification . Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective
date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed.
Section 7. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective five (5) days after passage
and publication as provided by law.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this 5th day of July, 2017.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY:
MAYOR, JIM FERRELL
ATTEST:
STEPHANIE COURTNEY, CMC, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM :
Ordinance No. 17-__
31
Page 7 of 8
Rev 3/17 LU
J. RYAN CALL, CITY ATTORNEY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
PUBLISHED:
EFFECTIVE DATE:
ORDINANCE NO.:
Ordinance No. 17-__
32
Page8of8
Rev 3/17 LU
Exhibit B
King County Ordinance -KCC 203.62 "Protection and Preservation of Landmarks, Landmark Sites and
Districts"
33
Chapter 20.62
PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION OF LANDMARKS,
LANDMARK SITES AND DISTRICTS
Sections:
20.62.010 Findings and declaration of purpose.
20.62.020 Definitions.
20.62.030 Landmarks commission created -membership and organization.
20.62.040 Designation criteria.
20.62.050 Nomination procedure.
20.62.070 Designation procedure.
20.62.080 Certificate of appropriateness procedure.
20.62.100 Evaluation of economic impact.
20.62.110 Appeal procedure.
20.62.120 Funding.
20.62.130 Penalty for violation of Section 20.62.080.
20.62.140 Special valuation for historic properties.
20.62.150 Historic Resources -review process.
20.62.160 Administrative rules.
20.62.200 Severability.
20.62.010 Findings and declaration of purpose. The King County council finds that:
A. The protection, enhancement, perpetuation and use of buildings, sites, districts, structures and
objects of historical, cultural, architectural, engineering, geographic, ethnic and archaeological significance
located in King County, and the collection, preservation, exhibition and interpretation of historic and
prehistoric materials, artifacts, records and information pertaining to historic preservation and
archaeological resource management are necessary in the interest of the prosperity, civic pride and general
welfare of the people of King County.
B. Such cultural and historic resources are a significant part of the heritage, education and
economic base of King County, and the economic, cultural and aesthetic well-being of the county cannot be
maintained or enhanced by disregarding its heritage and by allowing the unnecessary destruction or
defacement of such resources.
C. Present heritage and preservation programs and activities are inadequate for insuring present
and future generations of King County residents and visitors a genuine opportunity to appreciate and enjoy
our heritage.
D. The purposes of this chapter are to:
1. Designate, preserve, protect, enhance and perpetuate those sites, buildings, districts, structures
and objects which reflect significant elements of the county's, state's and nation's cultural, aesthetic, social,
economic, political, architectural, ethnic, archaeological, engineering, historic and other heritage;
2. Foster civic pride in the beauty and accomplishments of the past;
3. Stabilize and improve the economic values and vitality of landmarks;
4. Protect and enhance the county's tourist industry by promoting heritage-related tourism;
5. Promote the continued use, exhibition and interpretation of significant historical or
archaeological sites, districts, buildings, structures, objects, artifacts, materials and records for the
education, inspiration and welfare of the people of King County;
6. Promote and continue incentives for ownership and utilization of landmarks;
7. Assist, encourage and provide incentives to public and private owners for preservation,
restoration, rehabilitation and use of landmark buildings, sites, districts, structures and objects;
8. Assist, encourage and provide technical assistance to public agencies, public and private
museums, archives and historic preservation associations and other organizations involved in historic
preservation and archaeological resource management; and
9. Work cooperatively with all local jurisdictions to identify, evaluate, and protect historic
resources in furtherance of the purposes of this chapter. (Ord. 14482 § 68, 2002: Ord. 10474 § 1, 1992:
Ord. 4828 §
1, 1980).
20.62.020 Definitions. The following words and terms shall, when used in this chapter, be defined
34
as follows unless a different meaning clearly appears from the context:
A. "Alteration'' is any construction, demolition, removal, modification, excavation, restoration or
remodeling of a landmark.
B. "Building" is a structure created to shelter any form of human activity, such as a house, barn,
church, hotel or similar structure. Building may refer to an historically related complex, such as a
courthouse and jail or a house and barn.
C. "Certificate of appropriateness" is written authorization issued by the commission or its
designee permitting an alteration to a significant feature of a designated landmark.
D. "Commission" is the landmarks commission created by this chapter.
E. "Community landmark" is an historic resource which has been designated pursuant to K. C. C.
20.62.040 but which may be altered or changed without application for or approval of a certificate of
appropriateness.
F. "Designation" is the act of the commission determining that an historic resource meets the
criteria established by this chapter.
G. "Designation report" is a report issued by the commission after a public hearing setting forth its
determination to designate a landmark and specifying the significant feature or features thereof.
H. "Director" is the director of the King County department of development and environmental
services or his or her designee.
I. "District" is a geographically definable area, urban or rural, possessing a significant
concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings, structures, or objects united by past events or
aesthetically by plan or physical development. A district may also comprise individual elements separated
geographically but linked by association or history.
J. "Heritage" is a discipline relating to historic preservation and archaeology, history, ethnic
history, traditional cultures and folklore.
K. "Historic preservation officer" is the King County historic preservation officer or his or her
designee.
L. "Historic resource" is a district, site, building, structure or object significant in national, state or
local history, architecture, archaeology, and culture.
M. "Historic resource inventory" is an organized compilation of information on historic resources
considered to be significant according to the criteria listed in K.C.C. 20.62.040A. The historic resource
inventory is kept on file by the historic preservation officer and is updated from time to time to include
newly eligible resources and to reflect changes to resources.
N. "Incentives" are such compensation, rights or privileges or combination thereof, which the
council, or other local, state or federal public body or agency, by virtue of applicable present or future
legislation, may be authorized to grant to or obtain for the owner or owners of designated landmarks.
Examples of economic incentives include but are not limited to tax relief, conditional use permits,
rezoning, street vacation, planned unit development, transfer of development rights, facade easements,
gifts, preferential leasing policies, private or public grants-in-aid, beneficial placement of public
improvements, or amenities, or the like.
0. "Interested person of record" is any individual, corporation, partnership or association which
notifies the commission or the council in writing of its interest in any matter before the commission.
P. "Landmark" is an historic resource designated as a landmark pursuant to K.C.C. 20.62.060.
Q. "Nomination" is a proposal that an historic resource be designated a landmark.
R. "Object" is a material thing of functional, aesthetic, cultural, historical, or scientific value that
may be, by nature or design, movable yet related to a specific setting or environment.
S. "Owner" is a person having a fee simple interest, a substantial beneficial interest of record or a
substantial beneficial interest known to the commission in an historic resource. Where the owner is a public
agency or government, that agency shall specify the person or persons to receive notices under this chapter.
T. "Person" is any individual, partnership, corporation, group or association.
U. "Person in charge" is the person or persons in possession of a landmark including, but not
limited to, a mortgage e or vendee in possession, an assignee of rents, a receiver, executor, trustee, lessee,
tenant; agent, or any other person directly or indirectly in control of the landmark.
V. "Preliminary determination" is a decision of the commission determining that an historic
resource which has been nominated for designation is of significant value and is likely to satisfy the criteria
for designation.
W. "Significant feature" is any element of a landmark which the commission has designated
35
pursuant to this chapter as of importance to the historic , architectural or archaeological value of the
landmark.
X. "Site" is the location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity, or a
building or structure, whether standing, ruined, or vanished, where the location itself maintains an historical
or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structures.
Y. "Structure" is any functional construction made usually for purposes other than creating human
shelter. (Ord. 14482 69, 2002: Ord. 11620 § 13, 1994 : Ord. 10474 § 2, 1992: Ord. 4828 § 2,
1980).
20.62.030 Landmarks commission created -membership and organization.
A. There is created the King County landmarks commission which shall consist of nine regular
members and special members selected as follows :
1. Of the nine regular members of the commission at least three shall be professionals who have
experience in identification, evaluation, and protection of historic resources and have been selected from
among the fields of history, architecture, architectural history, historic preservation, planning, cultural
anthropology, archaeology, cultural geography, landscape architecture, American studies , law, or other
historic preservation related disciplines. The nine regular members of the commission shall be appointed by
the county executive, subject to confirmation by the council, provided that no more than four members
shall reside within any one municipal jurisdiction. All regular members shall have a demonstrated interest
and competence in historic preservation.
2 . The county executive may solicit nominations for persons to serve as regular members of the
commission from the Association of King County Historical Organizations, the American Institute of
Architects (Seattle Chapter), the Seattle King County Bar Association, the Seattle Master Builders, the
chambers of commerce, and other professional and civic organizations familiar with historic preservation.
3. One special member shall be appointed from each municipality within King County which has
entered into an interlocal agreement with King County providing for the designation by the commission of
landmarks within such municipality in accordance with the terms of such interlocal agreement and this
chapter. Each such appointment shall be in accordance with the enabling ordinance adopted by such
municipality.
B. Appointments of regular members , except as provided in subsection C of this section, shall be
made for a three-year term . Each regular member shall serve until his or her successor is duly appointed
and confirmed. Appointments shall be effective on June 1st of each year. In the event of a vacancy, an
appointment shall be made to fill the vacancy in the same manner and with the same qualifications as if at
the beginning of the term, and the person appointed to fill the vacancy shall hold the position for the
remainder of the unexpired term. Any member may be reappointed, but may not serve more than two
consecutive three-year terms. A member shall be deemed to have served one full term if such member
resigns at any time after appointment or if such member serves more than two years of an unexpired term.
The members of the commission shall serve without compensation except for out-of-pocket expenses
incurred in connection with commission meetings or programs .
C. After May 4, 1992, the tenn of office of members becomes effective on the date the council
confirms the appointment of commission members and the county executive shall appoint or reappoint
three members for a three-year term, three members for a two-year term , and three members for a one-year
term. For purposes of the limitation on consecutive terms in subsection B of this section an appointment for
a one-or a two-year term shall be deemed an appointment for an unexpired term .
D. The chair shall be a member of the commission and shall be elected annually by the regular
commission members. The commission shall adopt , in accordance with K. C. C. chapter 2. 98, rules and
regulations, including procedures, consistent with this chapter. The members of the commission shall be
governed by the King County code of ethics, K.C.C . chapter. 3.04. The commission shall not conduct any
public hearing required under this chapter until rules and regulations have been filed as required by K. C. C.
chapter 2. 98.
E. A special member of the commission shall be a voting member solely on matters before the
commission involving the designation of landmarks witlrin the municipality from which such special
member was appointed.
F. A majority of the current appointed and confirmed members of the commission shall constitute
a quorum for the transaction of business. A special member shall count as part of a quorum for the vote on
any matter involving the designation or control of landmarks within the municipality from which such
36
special member was appointed. All official actions of the commission shall require a majority vote of the
members present and eligible to vote on the action voted upon. No member shall be eligible to vote upon
any matter required by this chapter to be determined after a hearing unless that member has attended the
hearing or familiarized him or herself with the record.
G. The commission may from time to time establish one or more committees to furl.her the
policies of the commission, each with such powers as may be lawfully delegated to it by the commission.
H. The county executive shall provide staff support to the commission and shall assign a
professionally qualified county employee to serve as a full-time historic preservation officer. Under the
direction of the commission, the historic preservation officer shall be the custodian of the commission's
records. The historic preservation officer or his or her designee shall conduct official correspondence, assist
in organizing the commission and organize and supervise the commission staff and the clerical and
technical work of the commission to the extent required to administer this chapter.
I. The commission shall meet at least once each month for the purpose of considering and holding
public hearings on nominations for designation and applications for certificates of appropriateness. Where
no business is scheduled to come before the commission seven days before the scheduled monthly meeting,
the chair of the commission may cancel the meeting. All meetings of the commission shall be open to the
public. The commission shall keep minutes of its proceedings, showing the action of the commission upon
each question, and shall keep records of all official actions taken by it, all of which shall be filed in the
office of the historic preservation officer and shall be public records.
J. At all hearings before and meetings of the commission, all oral proceedings shall be
electronically recorded. The proceedings may also be recorded by a court reporter if any interested person
at his or her expense shall provide a court reporter for that purpose. A tape recorded copy of the electronic
record of any hearing or part of a hearing shall be furnished to any person upon request and payment of the
reasonable expense of the copy.
K. The commission is authorized, subject to the availability of funds for that purpose, to expend
moneys to compensate experts, in whole or in part, to provide technical assistance to property owners in
connection with requests for certificates of appropriateness upon a showing by the property owner that the
need for the technical assistance imposes an unreasonable financial hardship on the property owner.
L. Commission records, maps or other information identifying the location of archaeological sites
and potential sites shall be exempt from public disclosure as specified in RCW 42.17.310 in order to avoid
looting and depredation of the sites. (Ord. 14482 § 70, 2002: Ord. 10474 § 3, 1992: Ord. 10371 § 1, 1992:
Ord. 4828 § 3, 1980).
20.62.040 Designation criteria.
A. An historic resource may be designated as a King County landmark if it is more than forty
years old or, in the case of a landmark district, contains resources that are more than forty years old, and
possesses integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association, and:
1. Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of
national, state or local history; or
2. Is associated with the lives of persons significant in national, state or local history; or
3. Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, style or method of design or
construction, or that represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack
individual distinction; or
4. Has yielded or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history; or
5. Is an outstanding work of a designer or builder who has made a substantial contribution to the
art.
B. An historic resource may be designated a community landmark because it is an easily
identifiable visual feature of a neighborhood or the county and contributes to the distinctive quality or
identity of such neighborhood or county or because of its association with significant historical events or
historic themes, association with important or prominent persons in the community or county, or
recognition by local citizens for substantial contribution to the neighborhood or community. An
improvement or site qualifying for designation solely by virtue of satisfying criteria set out in this section
shall be designated a community landmark and shall not be subject to the provisions of 20.62.080.
C. Cemeteries, birthplaces, or graves of historical figures, properties owned by religious
institutions or used for religious purposes, structures that have been moved from their original locations,
reconstructed historic buildings, properties primarily commemorative in nature, and properties that have
37
achieved significance within the past forty years shall not be considered eligible for designation. However,
such a property shall be eligible for designation if they are: ·
1. An integral part of districts that meet the criteria set out in 20.62.040A or if it is:
2. A religious property deriving primary significance from architectural or artistic distinction or
historical importance; or
3. A building or structure removed from its original location but which is significant primarily for
its architectural value, or which is the surviving structure most importantly associated with a historic person
or event; or
4. A birthplace, grave or residence of a historical figure of outstanding importance if there is no
other appropriate site or building directly associated with his or her productive life; or
5. A cemetery that derives its primary significance from graves of persons of transcendent
importance, from age, from distinctive design features, or from association with historic events; or
6. A reconstructed building when accurately executed in a suitable environment and presented in a
dignified manner or as part of a restoration master plan, and when no other building or structure with the
same association has survived; or
7. A property commemorative in intent if design, age, tradition, or symbolic value has invested it
with its own historical significance; or
8. A property achieving significance within tl1e past forty years if it is of exceptional importance.
(Ord. 10474 § 4, 1992: Ord. 4828 § 4, 1980).
20.62.050 Nomination procedure.
A. Any person, including the historic preservation officer and any member of the commission,
may nominate an historic resource for designation as a landmark or community landmark. The procedures
set forth in Sections 20.62.050 and 20.62.080 may be used to amend existing designations or to terminate
an existing designation based on changes which affect the applicability of the criteria for designation set
forth in Section 20.62.040. The nomination or designation of an historic resource as a landmark shall
constitute nomination or designation of the land which is occupied by the historic resource unless the
nomination provides otl1erwise. Nominations shall be made on official nomination forms provided by the
historic preservation officer, shall be filed with the historic preservation officer, and shall include all data
required by the commission.
B. Upon receipt by the historic preservation officer of any nomination for designation, the officer
shall review the nomination, consult with the person or persons submitting the nomination, and the owner,
and prepare any amendments to or additional information on the nomination deemed necessary by the
officer. The historic preservation officer may refuse to accept any nomination for which inadequate
information is provided by the person or persons submitting the nomination. It is the responsibility of the
person or persons submitting the nomination to perform such research as is necessary for consideration by
the commission. The historic preservation officer may assume responsibility for gathering the required
information or appoint an expert or experts to carry out this research in the interest of expediting the
consideration.
C. When the historic preservation officer is satisfied that the nomination contains sufficient
information and complies with the commission's regulations for nomination, the officer shall give notice in
writing, certified mail/return receipt requested, to the owner of the property or object, to the person
submitting the nomination and interested persons of record that a preliminary or a designation
determination on the nomination will be made by the commission. The notice sh~ll include:
1. The date, time, and place of hearing;
2. The address and description of the historic resource and the boundaries of the nominated
resource;
3. A statement that, upon a designation or upon a preliminary determination of significance, the
certificate of appropriateness procedure set out in Section 20.62.080 will apply;
4. A statement that, upon a designation or a preliminary determination of significance, no
significant feature may be changed without first obtaining a certificate of appropriateness from the
commission, whether or not a building or other permit is required. A copy of the provisions of Section
20.62.080 shall be included with the notice;
5. A statement that all proceedings to review the action of the commission at the hearing on a
preliminary determination or a designation will be based on the record made at such hearing and that no
further right to present evidence on the issue of preliminary determination or designation is afforded
38
pursuant to this chapter.
D. The historic preservation officer shall, after mailing the notice required herein, refer the
nomination and all supporting information to the commission for consideralion on the dale specified in the
notice. No nomination shall be considered by the commission less than thirty nor more than forty five
calendar days after notice setting the hearing date has been mailed except where U1e historic preservation
officer or members of the commission have reason to believe that immediate action is necessary to prevent
destruction, demolition or defacing of an historic resource , in which case the notice setting the hearing shall
so state. (Ord. 10474 § 5, 1992 : Ord. 4828 § 5, 1980).
20.62.070 Designation procedure.
A. The commission may approve , deny, amend or terminate the designation of a historic resource
as a landmark or community landmark only after a public hearing. At the designation hearing the
commission shall receive evidence and hear argument only on the issues of whether the historic resource
meets the criteria for designation oflandmarks or community landmarks as specified in K.C.C. 20.62.040
and merits designation as a landmark or community landmark; and the significant features of the landmark.
The hearing may be continued from time to time at the discretion of the commission . If the hearing is
continued, the commission may make a preliminary determination of significance if the commission
determines, based on the record before it that the historic resource is of significant value and likely to
satisfy the criteria for designation in K.C.C. 20.62 .040 . The preliminary determination shall be effective as
of the date of the public hearing at which it is made. Where the commission makes a preliminary
determination it shall specify the boundaries of the nominated resource, the significant features thereof and
such other description of the historic resource as it deems appropriate. Within five working days after the
commission has made a preliminary determination , the historic preservation officer shall file a written
notice of the action with the director and mail copies of the notice, certified mail , return receipt requested,
to the owner, the person submitting the nomination and interested persons of record .
The notice shall include :
1. A copy of the commission's preliminary determination; and
2. A statement that while proceedings pursuant to this chapter are pending, or six months from the
date of the notice, whichever is shorter, and thereafter if the designation is approved by the commission, the
certificate of appropriateness procedures in K.C .C. 20 .62 .080, a copy of which shall be enclosed , shall
apply to the described historic resource whether or not a building or other permit is required . The decision
of the commission shall be made after the close of the public hearing or at the next regularly scheduled
public meeting of the commission thereafter.
B. Whenever the commission approves the designation of a historic resource under consideration
for designation as a landmark, it shall, within fourteen calendar days of the public meeting at which the
decision is made, issue a written designation report, which shall include:
1. The boundaries of the nominated resource and such other description of the resource sufficient
to identify its ownership and location;
2. The significant features and such other information concerning the historic resource as the
commission deems appropriate ;
3. Findings of fact and reasons supporting the designation with specific reference to the criteria for
designation in K.C .C. 20 .62 .040; and
4. A statement that no significant feature may be changed, whether or not a building or other
permit is required , without first obtaining a certificate of appropriateness from the commission in
accordance with K.C.C. 20.62.080, a copy of which shall be included in the designation report . This
subsection B.4. shall not apply to historic resources designated as community landmarks.
C. Whenever the commission rejects the nomination of a historic resource under consideration for
designation as a landmark. it shall, within fourteen calendar days of the public meeting at which the
decision is made, issue a written decision including findings of fact and reasons supporting its
determination that the criteria in K.C.C. 20.62 .040 have not been met. Ifa historic resource has been
nominated as a landmark and the commission designates the historic resource as a community landmark,
the designation shall be treated as a rejection of the nomination for King County landmark status and the
foregoing requirement for a written decision shall apply . Nothing contained herein shall prevent
renominating any historic resource rejected under this subsection as a King County landmark at a future
time .
D. A copy of the commission's designation report or decision rejecting a nomination shall be
39
delivered or mailed to the owner, to interested persons of record and the director within five working days
after it is issued. If the commission rejects the nomination and it has made a preliminary determination of
significance with respect to the nomination, it shall include in the notice to the director a statement Uiat
K.C.C. 20.62 .080 no longer applies to the subject historic resources.
E . IfU1e commission approves, or amends a landmark designation, K.C.C. 20 .62 .080 shall apply
as approved or amended. A copy of the commission's designation report or designation amendment shall be
recorded with the records, elections and licensing services division, or its successor agency, together with a
legal description of the designated resource and notification that K.C.C. 20 .62 .080 and 20 .62 .130 apply . If
the commission terminates the designation of a historic resource, K.C.C. 20.62 .080 shall no longer apply to
the historic resource. (Ord. 14482 § 71, 2002: Ord. 14176 § 4, 2001: Ord. 11620 § 14, 1994 : Ord. 10474 §
6, 1992: Ord. 4828 § 7, 1980).
20.62.080 Certificate of appropriateness procedure.
A. At any time after a designation report and notice has been filed with the director and for a
period of six months after notice of a preliminary detennination of significance has been mailed to the
owner and filed with the director, a certificate of appropriateness must be obtained from the commission
before any alterations may be made to the significant features of the landmark identified in the preliminary
determination report or thereafter in the designation report . The designation report shall supersede the
preliminary detennination report . This requirement shall apply whether or not the proposed alteration also
requires a building or other permit. The requirements of this section shall not apply to any historic resource
located within incorporated cities or towns in King County, except as provided by applicable interlocal
agreement.
B. Ordinary repairs and maintenance which do not alter the appearance of a significant feature and
do not utilize substitute materials do not require a certificate of appropriateness . Repairs to or replacement
of utility systems do not require a certificate of appropriateness provided that such work does not alter an
e"-ierior significant feature.
C. There shall be three types of certificates of appropriateness, as follows:
1. Type I , for restorations and major repairs which utilize in-kind materials .
2 . Type II, for alterations in appearance, replacement of historic materials and new construction.
3. Type III, for demolition, moving and excavation of archaeological sites. In addition, the
commission shall establish and adopt an appeals process concerning Type I decisions made by the historic
preservation officer with respect to the applications for certificates of appropriateness.
The historic preservation officer may approve Type I certificates of appropriateness
administratively without public hearing, subject to procedures adopted by the commission. Alternatively
the historic preservation officer may refer applications for Type I certificates of appropriateness to the
commission for decision. The commission shall adopt an appeals procedure concerning Type I decisions
made by the historic preservation officer.
Type II and III certificates of appropriateness shall be decided by the commission and the
following general procedures shall apply to such commission actions :
1. Application for a certificate of appropriateness shall be made by filing an application for such
certificate with the historic preservation officer on forms provided by the commission.
2. If an application is made to the director for a permit for any action which affects a landmark, the
director shall promptly refer such application to the historic preservation officer, and such application shall
be deemed an application for a certificate of appropriateness if accompanied by the additional information
required to apply for such certificate . The director may continue to process such pennit application, but
shall not issue any such permit until the time has expired for filing with the director the notice of denial of a
certificate of appropriateness or a certificate of appropriateness has been issued pursuant to this chapter.
3. After the commission has commenced proceedings for the consideration of any application for a
certificate of appropriateness by giving notice of a hearing pursuant to subsection 3 of this section, no other
application for the same or a similar alteration may be made until such proceedings and all administrative
appeals therefrom pursuant to this chapter have been concluded.
4. Within forty five calendar days after the filing of an application for a certificate of
appropriateness with the commission or the referral of an application to the commission by the director
except those decided administratively by the historic preservation officer pursuant to subsection 2 of this
section, the commission shall hold a public hearing thereon . The historic preservation officer shall mail
notice of the hearing to the owner, the applicant, if the applicant is not the owner, and parties of record at
40
the designation proceedings, not less than ten calendar days before the date of the hearing . No hearing shall
be required if the commission, the owner and the applicant, if the applicant is not the owner, agree in
writing to a stipulated certificate approving the requested alterations thereof. This agreement shall be
ratified by the commission in a public meeting and reflected in the commission meeting minutes. If the
commission grants a certificate of appropriateness, such certificate shall be issued forthwith and the historic
preservation officer shall promptly file a copy of such certificate with the director.
5. If the commission denies the application for a certificate of appropriateness, in whole or in part,
it shall so notify the owner, the person submitting the application and interested persons of record setting
forth the reasons why approval of the application is not warranted.
D. The commission shall adopt such other supplementary procedures consistent with K.C.C. 2.98
as it determines are required to carry out the intent of this section. (Ord. 11620 § 15, 1994: Ord. 10474 § 7,
1992: Ord. 4828 § 8, 1980).
20.62.100 Evaluation of economic impact
A. At the public hearing on any application for a Type II or Type III certificate of appropriateness,
or Type I ifreferred to the commission by the historic preservation officer, the commission shall, when
requested by the property owner, consider evidence of the economic impact on the owner of the denial or
partial denial of a certificate. In no case may a certificate be denied, in whole or in part, when it is
established that the denial or partial denial will, when available incentives are utilized, deprive the owner of
a reasonable economic use of the landmark and there is no viable and reasonable alternative which would
have less impact on the features of significance specified in tl1e preliminary determination report or the
designation report.
B. To prove the existence of a condition of umeasonable economic return, the applicant must
establish and the commission must find, both of the following:
1. The landmark is incapable of earning a reasonable economic return witl1out making the
alterations proposed. This finding shall be made by considering and the applicant shall submit to the
commission evidence establishing each of the following factors:
a. The current level of economic return on the landmark as considered in relation to the following:
(1) The amount paid for tl1e landmark, the date of purchase, and party from whom purchased,
including a description of the relationship, if any, between the owner and the person from whom the
landmark was purchased; ·
(2) The annual gross and net income, if any, from the landmark for the previous five (5) years;
itemized operating and maintenance expenses for the previous five (5) years; and depreciation deduction
and annual cash flow before and after debt service, if any, during the same period;
(3) The remaining balance on any mortgage or other financing secured by tl1e landmark and
annual debt service, if any, during the prior five (5) years;
( 4) Real estate taxes for the previous four ( 4) years and assessed value of the landmark according
to the two (2) most recent assessed valuations;
(5) All appraisals obtained within the previous three (3) years by the owner in connection with the
purchase, financing or ownership of the landmark;
(6) The fair market value of the landmark immediately prior to its designation and the fair market
value of the landmark (in its protected status as a designated landmark) at the time the application is filed;
(7) Fonn of ownership or operation of the landmark, whether sole proprietorship, for profit or not-
for-profit corporation, limited partnership, joint venture, or both;
(8) Any state or federal income tax returns on or relating to the landmark for the past two (2)
years.
b. The landmark is not marketable or able to be sold when listed for sale or lease. The sale price
asked, and offers received, if any, within the previous two (2) years, including testimony and relevant
documents shall be submitted by the property owner. The following also shall be considered:
(1) Any real estate broker or firm engaged to sell or lease the landmark;
(2) Reasonableness of the price or lease sought by the owner;
(3) Any advertisements placed for the sale or lease of the landmark.
c. The unfeasibility of alternative uses that can earn a reasonable economic return for the landmark
as considered in relation to the following:
(1) A report from a licensed engineer or architect with experience in historic restoration or
rehabilitation as to the structural soundness of the landmark and its suitability for restoration or
41
rehabilitation;
(2) Estimates of the proposed cost of the proposed alteration and an estimate of any additional cost
that would be incurred to comply with the recommendation and decision of the commission concerning the
appropriateness of the proposed alteration;
(3) Estimated market value of the landmark in the current condition after completion of the
proposed alteration; and, in the case of proposed demolition, after renovation of the landmark for continued
use;
( 4) In the case of proposed demolition, the testimony of an architect, developer, real estate
consultant, appraiser or other real estate professional experienced in historic restoration or rehabilitation as
to the economic feasibility of rehabilitation or reuse of the existing landmark;
( 5) The unfeasibility of new construction around, above, or below the historic resource.
d. Potential economic incentives and/or funding available to the owner through federal, state,
county, city or private programs.
2. The owner has the present intent and the secured financial ability, demonstrated by appropriate
documentary evidence to complete the alteration.
C. Notwithstanding the foregoing enumerated factors, the property owner may demonstrate other
appropriate factors applicable to economic return.
D. Upon reasonable notice to the owner, the commission may appoint an expert or experts to
provide advice and/or testimony concerning the value of the landmark, the availability of incentives and the
economic impacts of approval, denial or partial denial of a certificate of appropriateness.
E. Any adverse economic impact caused intentionally or by willful neglect shall not constitute a
basis for granting a certificate of appropriateness. (Ord. 10474 § 8, 1992: Ord. 4828 § 10, 1980).
20.62.110 Appeal procedure.
A. Any person aggrieved by a decision of the commission designating or rejecting a nomination
for designation of a landmark or issuing or denying a certificate of appropriateness may, within thirty-five
calendar days of mailing of notice of such designation or rejection of nomination, or of such issuance or
denial or approval of a certificate of appropriateness appeal such decision in writing to the council. The
written notice of appeal shall be filed with the historic preservation officer and the clerk of the council and
shall be accompanied by a statement setting forth the grounds for the appeal, supporting documents, and
argument.
B. If, after examination of the written appeal and the record, the council determines, that: 1. An
error in fact may exist in the record, it shall remand the proceeding to the commission for reconsideration
or, if the council determines that:
2. the decision of the commission is based on an error in judgment or conclusion, it may modify or
reverse the decision of the commission.
C. The council's decision shall be based solely upon the record, provided that, the council may at
its discretion publicly request additional information of the appellant, the commission or the historic
preservation officer.
D. The council shall take final action on any appeal from a decision of the commission by
adoption of an Ordinance, and when so doing, it shall make and enter findings of fact from the record and
reasons therefrom which support its action. The council may adopt all or portions of the commission's
findings and conclusions.
E. The action of the council sustaining, reversing, modifying or remanding a decision of the
commission shall be final unless within twenty calendar days from the date of the action an aggrieved
person obtains a writ of certiorari from the superior court of King County, state of Washington, for the
purpose ofreview of the action taken. (Ord. 10474 § 9, 1992: Ord. 4828 § 11, 1980).
20.62.120 Funding.
A. The commission shall have the power to make and administer grants of funds received by it
from private sources and from local, state and federal programs for purposes of:
1. Maintaining, purchasing or restoring historic resources located within King County which it
deems significant pursuant to the goals, objectives and criteria set forth in this chapter if such historic
resources have been nominated or designated as landmarks pursuant to this chapter or have been designated
as landmarks by municipalities within King County or by the State of Washington, or are listed on the
National Historic Landmarks Register, the National Register of Historic Places; and
42
2 . Developing and conducting programs relating to historic preservation and archaeological
resource management. The commission shall establish rules and regulations consistent with K.C.C. chapter
2. 98 governing procedures for applying for and awarding of grant moneys pursuant to this section.
B. The commission may, at the request of the historic preservation officer, review proposals
submitted by counly agencies to fund historic preservation and archaeological projecls through the Housing
and Community Development Act of 1974 (42 U .S.C . Secs . 5301 et seq.), the State and Local Fiscal
Assistance Act of 1972 (31 U .S.C . Secs. 1221 et seq .) and other applicable local, state and federal funding
programs . Upon review of such grant proposals, the commission may make recommendations to the county
executive and county council concerning which proposals should be funded , the amounl of the grants that
should be awarded, the conditions that should be placed on the grant, and such other matters as the
commission deems appropriate. The historic preservation officer shall keep the commission apprised of the
status of grant proposals, deadlines for submission of proposals and the recipients of grant funds. (Ord
14482 § 72, 2002: Ord. 10474 § 10, 1992: Ord. 4828 § 12 , 1980).
20.62.130 Penalty for violation of Section 20.62.080. Any person violating or failing to comply
with the provisions of Section 20.62.080 of this chapter shall incur a civil penalty ofup to five hundred
dollars per day and ea ch day's violation or failure to comply shall constitute a separate offense ; provided,
however, that no penalty shall be imposed for any violation or failure to comply which occurs during the
pendency of legal proceedings filed in any court challenging the validity of the pro vision or provisions of
this chapter, as to which such violations or failure to comply is charged. (Ord. 4828 § 13 , 1980).
20.62.140 S1>ecial valuation for historic properties.
A. There is hereby established and implemented a special valuation for historic properties as
provided in chapter 84.26 RCW.
B. The King County landmarks commission is hereby designated as the local review board for the
purposes related to chapter 84.26 RCW, and is authorized to perform all functions required by chapter
84.16RCW and chapter 254-20 WAC.
C . All King County landmarks designated and protected under this chapter shall be eligible for
special valuation in accordance with chapter 84.26 RCW. (Ord. 14482 § 73 , 2002: Ord. 10474 § 12 ,1992:
Ord. 9237 §§ 1-3 , 1989).
20.62.150 Historic Resources -review process .
A. King County shall not approve any development proposal or otherwise issue any authorization
to alter, demolish , or relocate any historic resource identified in the King County Historic Resource
Inventory, pursuant to the requirements of this chapter. The standards contained in K.C .C. 21A.12,
Development Standards -Density and Dimensions and K.C.C. 21A.16, Development Standards -
Landscaping and Water Use shall be expanded, when necessary, to preserve the aesthetic, visual and
historic integrity of the historic resource from the impacts of development on adjacent properties.
B. Upon receipt of an application for a development proposal located on or adj acent to a historic
resource listed in the King County Historic Resource Inventory, the director shall follow the following
procedure:
1. The development proposal application shall be circulated to the King County historic
preservation officer for comment on the impact of the project on historic resources and for recommendation
on mitigation. This includes all permits for alterations to historic buildings, alteration to landscape
elements, new construction on the same or abutting lots, or any other action requiring a permit which might
affect the historic character of the resource. Information required for a complete permit application to be
circulated to the historic preservation officer shall include:
a. a vicinity map;
b. a site plan showing the location of all buildings, structures, and landscape features ;
c. a brief description of the proposed project together with architectural drawings showing the
existing condition of all buildings, structures, landscape features and any proposed alteration to them;
d . photographs of all buildings, structures, or landscape features on the site ; and
e . an environmental checklist, except where categorically exempt under King County SEP A
guidelines.
2. Upon request, the historic preservation officer shall provide information about available grant
assistance and tax incentives for historic preservation . The officer may also provide the owner, developer,
43
or other interested party with examples of comparable projects where historic resources have been restored
or rehabilitated.
3. In the event of a conllict bet ween the development proposal and preservation of an historic
resource, the historic preservation officer shall:
a. suggest appropriate alternatives to the owner/developer which achieve the goals of historic
preservation.
b. recommend approval, or approval with conditions to the director of the department of
development and environmental services; or
c. propose that a resource be nominated for county landmark designation according to procedures
established in the landmarks preservation ordinance (K.C.C. 20.62).
4. The director may continue to process the development proposal application, but shall not issue
any development permits or issue a SEP A threshold determination until receiving a recommendation from
the historic preservation officer. In no event shall review of the proposal by the historic preservation officer
delay permit processing beyond any period required by law. Permit applications for changes to landmark
properties shall not be considered complete unless accompanied by a certificate of appropriateness pursuant
to K.C.C. 20.62.080.
5. On known archaeological sites, before any disturbance of the site, including, but not limited to
test boring, site clearing, construction, grading or revegetation, the State Office of Archaeology and
Historic Preservation (OAHP), and the King Count}' historic preservation officer, and appropriate Native
American tribal organizations must be notified and state permits obtained, ifrequired by law. The officer
may require that a professional archaeological survey be conducted to identify site boundaries, resources
and mitigation alternatives prior to any site disturbance and that a technical report be provided to the
officer, OAHP and appropriate tribal organizations. The officer may approve, disapprove or require permits
conditions, including professional archeological surveys, to mitigate adverse impacts to known
archeological sites.
C. Upon receipt of an application for a development proposal which affects a King County
landmark or an historic resource that has received a preliminary determination of significance as defined by
K.C.C. 20.62.020V, the application circulated to the King County historic preservation officer shall be
deemed an application for a certificate of appropriateness pursuant to K.C.C. 20.62 .080 if accompanied by
the additional information required to apply for such certificate. (Ord. 11620 § 12, 1994 ).
20.62.160 Administrative rules. The director may promulgate administrative rules and
regulations pursuant to K.C.C. 2.98, to implement the provisions and requirements of this chapter. (Ord.
11620 § 16,
1994).
20.62.200 Severability. If any provision of this chapter or its application to any person or
circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of the chapter or the application of the provision to other
persons or circumstances is not affected. (Ord. 10474 § 14, 1992).
(King County 12-2002)
44
Exhibit C
Regional Historic Preservation Program
45
REGIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAM
What is the Regional Historic Preservation Program? King County is partnering with
cities throughout the county to provide historic preservation services. This cooperative
approach to preserving our region's history and cha.racter has many benefits:
• cost efficient delivery of professional services
• preservation and enhancement of significant aspects of local history
• access to incentives for property owners
• access to state and federal funding sources for preservation
• basis for tourism development programs
• enhancement of community character
What are the services? Services include, but are not limited to: landmark designation
and protection, preparation of landmark nomination applications, survey and inventory
of historic properties, developing design guidelines, archaeological review, and assisting
with preservation planning or other preservation-related work, all at the City's option.
Who provides the services? Services are provided through the County's Historic
Preservation Program (HPP), located in the Department of Natural Resources and Parks,
via an interlocal agreement between King County and the participating city.
What is the cost? The County is required by state law to receive full reimbursement for
its services; however, grants from the State Department of Archaeology and Historic
Preservation and other funders are available to defray some costs. Cities are billed
quarterly for HPP staff time. The City must authorize all work before it begins.
What are the benefits? One of the primary benefits of the program is that owners of
designated landmark properties are eligible to apply for a variety of incentive programs
including property tax reductions, brick-and-mortar grants, and technical assistance
from qualified preservation professionals. City planners also have access to professional
expertise for assistance with archaeological issues.
ti King County Historic Preservation Program, Department of Natural Resources and Parks
201 S. Jackson, Suite 700, Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 477-4528
46
Regional Historic Preservation Program
Page 2 of 2
How is the program implemented? Cities adopt a preservation ordinance modeled after
the King County ordinance and enter into an interlocal agreement (service contract)
with the County. When the agreement is in place the City appoints a special member to
the King County Landmarks Commission, which acts on all landmark nominations that
are forwarded from the City. The City may elect to conduct design review (review of
proposed changes to landmark properties) itself or have King County provide the
service. Meetings involving city properties are conducted in the city whenever possible.
To date, 22 cities participate in the Regional Preservation Program .
For more information contact:
Jennifer Meisner
Historic Preservation officer
jennifer.meisner@kingcounty.gov
(206) 477-0384
tQ King County Historic Preservation Program, Department of Natural Resources and Parks
201 S. Jackson, Suite 700, Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 477-4528
47
ExhibitD
King County Historic Preservation email to Planning Commission re: staffing levels
48
David VanDeWeghe
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hello,
Tina Piety
Friday, May 19, 2017 3:20 PM
Anthony Murrietta; Brian Davis; Dale Couture; Dawn Meader McCausland; Diana Noble-
Gulliford; Hope Elder; Lawson Bronson; Margaret Clark; Mark Orthmann; Robert Hansen;
Tim O'Neil; Tom Medhurst; Tonia Proctor; Wayne Carlson
David VanDeWeghe
FW: Historic Preservation staffing levels
At our meeting on Wednesday, the following questions were asked:
• Does King County's Historic Preservation Program have adequate staff to handle the increased workload of
adding another city (Federal Way)?
• Will the initial wave of landmark applications from our city overwhelm their staff, resulting in review delays?
Please see the following for King County's response.
Tina
From: Meisner, Jennifer [mailto:Jennifer.Meisner@kinqcounty.gov]
Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 12:02 PM
To: David VanDeWeghe
Cc: Scott, Todd
Subject: RE: Draft ILA for Landmark Services
Hi Dave,
I'm glad the Planning Commission public hearing went well. Thank you for checking in about our staffing levels related to
the anticipated increase in landmark nomination activity. We are adequately staffed, we do not anticipate processing
delays, and we will welcome landmark nominations from Federal Way. Todd and I have toured many of Federal Way's
historic resources with Karen Meador and Diana Noble-Gulliford of the Federal Way Historical Society, and I believe
Artifacts Architectural Consulting identified many excellent examples of mid-century modern residential properties, so
we know there is a rich inventory of potential landmarks in your city. Are there properties that have already been
identified as priorities for landmark designation? Do you anticipate a number of nominations being submitted as soon
as the ILA is in place?
Just to clarify, the timeframe for our office to process landmark nominations mainly depends on how complete the
nomination is when we receive it. Our staff is generally able to review nominations within a week or two of receipt. If we
find that sufficient research has been conducted and all required supporting materials are there, processing can go
quickly, bearing in mind that 30 day public notice is required before the nomination can be considered by the Federal
Way Landmarks Commission. If the nomination is incomplete, we will let the preparer know what information is missing
and work with them to get it in shape for consideration by the commission. Nominations can't be scheduled for
commission consideration until they are complete. Our office manages a Historic Resources Inventory Database of
properties that have been surveyed, inventoried, and identified as having some historic significance. We are happy to
look up properties to see if they are included in our inventory and if so, share any historical information we have on file,
as well as refer preparers to other repositories of information.
Finally, anyone can prepare a landmark nomination and there are a number of professional preservation consultants
who can also be retained to help. Our office can't recommend consultants but we can share a list of
consultants/contractors who have prepared successful nominations for King County or ILA City landmarks in the past.
I hope this additional information is helpful and please don't hesitate to contact me with any follow-up questions. I'll
look forward to getting the draft ILA back and moving it forward.
Enjoy the sun this weekend -
Jennifer
Jennifer Meisner
Historic Preservation Officer
King County Historic Preservation Program I 201 S. Jackson Suite 700 I Seattle, WA 98104
office: 206.477.0384 I cell: 206.402.8977 I lennlfer.meisner@kingcounty.gov I www.klngcounty.gov/landmarks
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2017 ITEM#:
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION: 2018-2023 Transportation Improvement Plan
POLICY QUESTION: Should the Council authorize staff to proceed with the adoption of the 2018-2023 City of
Federal Way Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) and Arterial Street Improvement Plan (ASIP) on
June 20, 2017?
COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
D Consent
D City Council Business
D Ordinance
IS] Resolution
MEETING DATE: June 5, 2017
~ Public Hearing
D Other
STAFF REPORT BY: Rick Perez, P.E.,_City Traffic Engineer_{([f _______ ~~!~:_Public Works ______ _
Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated June 5, 2017.
Options Considered:
1. Adoption of the draft 2018-2023 TIP and ASIP.
2. Do not adopt the draft 2018-2023 TIP and ASIP and provide direction to staff.
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding Option 1 to the Ju ne 20, 2017 City Council
consent agenda for approval.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Committee recommends forwarding Option 1 to the June 20, 2017 City
Council consent agenda for approval.
Bob Celski, Chair Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move the adoption of 2018-2023 Transportation Improvement Plan and
Arterial Street improvement Plan as presented. "
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
0 APPROVED
0 DENIED
0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION
0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED -08/12/20 I 0
51
COUNCIL BILL#
18T reading
Enactment' reading
ORDINANCE#
RESOLUTION#
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
June 5, 2017
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
Land Use/ Transportation Committee
Jim Ferrell, Mayor "\. ~
Marwan Salloum, P.E., Director of Public Works ~
Rick Perez, P .E., City Traffic Engineer ,/q?
2018-2023 Transportation Improvement Plan
BACKGROUND:
In accordance with the requirements of Chapters 35.77 and 47.26 of the Revised Code of Washington, the City
of Federal Way adopted its original TIP and ASIP on July 23, 1991. The City is also required to adopt a
revised TIP and ASIP on an annual basis reflecting the City's current and future street and arterial needs.
These plans identify capital projects that the City intends to construct over the next six years. In order to be
eligible for grant funding, projects are required to be listed in the City's TIP.
The City is required to hold a minimum of one public hearing on the revised plan, which is proposed for the
June 20, 2017 Council meeting. Once the revised plans have been adopted by Resolution, a copy of the
respective plans must be filed with the Washington State Secretary of Transportation and the Washington State
Transportation Improvement Board.
Attached for your review and comment are draft resolution for adoption (Exhibit A), the proposed 2018-2023
TIP (Exhibit B), and a location map (Exhibit C). The six-year .TIP and ASIP respond to the Growth
Management Act concurrency requirements as well as other emerging needs. Projects are selected based on
criteria adopted in the City's Comprehensive Plan policy TP2.3, which reads, "Prioritize transportation
projects considering concurrency, safety, multimodal enhancements, environmental impacts, and cost
effectiveness." Each project was ranked using the scoring criteria established for Transportation TIP/CIP
Prioritization. Staff also reviewed and analyzed available grant-eligible programs suitable for project
programming.
The new prioritization criteria adopted by the Council on February 21, 2017 appear to be functioning as
intended. Project rankings changed so significantly that removal of some projects is proposed. Non-motorized
projects are scoring in many cases similarly to many capacity projects, and the highest scoring projects
typically are in need of improved safety, increased capacity, and the addition of sidewalks and/or bicycle
facilities. One issue to be monitored is that, depending on the grant funding program, our highest-ranking
projects may not score well with available grant funding program criteria. Over time, additional changes to the
criteria may be necessary to assure that our highest-ranking projects have a better chance of attracting grant
funding.
Completed Projects
• l s, Avenue Sat S 3281h Street
• 28th A venue S at S 304th Street
• Citywide Flashing Yell ow Arrow Retrofits
• S 288th Street Overlay: Military Road S -1-5
• S 324th Street Overlay: SR 99 -S 322nd Street
52
June 5, 2017
Land Use and Transportation Committee
2018-2023 Transportation Improvement Plan
Page2
• 20th Avenue Sand S 316th Street Sidewalk
Removed Projects
• 10th Avenue SW at SW Campus Drive
• SW 344th Street: 12'h Avenue SW-21st Avenue SW
• SR 99 at S 312'h Street
• SR 161 at S 356th Street
• Weyerhaeuser Way Sat S 344th Way
• 8th Avenue S Sidewalk: S 312'h Street-S 315th Street
• S 314 th Street Sidewalk: 20th A venue S -23rd A venue S
• S 336th Street Sidewalk: SR 99 -20th A venue S
• 26th Avenue SW Sidewalk: S 327th Street -SW 330th Street
Modified Projects
• SW 33611' Way/ SW 340th Street: 261h Place SW -Hoyt Road split into multiple phases:
o SW 340th Street: 3ih Avenue SW -City Limits
o SW 340th Street: 31st A venue SW -3i" A venue SW
o SW 336th Way/ SW 340th Street: 26th Place SW -31st Avenue SW (not on TIP)
Proposed New Projects
• Military Road S at S Star Lake Road
• 1st Avenue Sat SW 301st Street
• 161h A venue S Overlay: SR 99 -SR 18
• SW Campus Driver Overlay: 1st Avenue S -19th Way SW
• Citywide Greenways
• 16th Avenue S Trail: S 288th Street-SR 509
• Citywide LED Street Lighting Retrofit
Attachments: Exhibit A -Draft Resolution
Exhibit B -Draft TIP
Exhibit C -Location Map
cc: Project File
Day File
53
RESOLUTION NO. __
A RESOLUTION of the City of Federal Way, Washington, adopting an
extended and revised Transportation Improvement Program and Arterial
Street Improvement Plan for 2018-23, and directing the same to be filed
with the Washington State Secretary of Transportation and the
Transportation Improvement Board.
WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of Chapters 35.77 and 47.26 RCW, the Federal
Way City Council adopted an original Transportation Improvement Program ("TIP") on July 23, 1991
(Resolution No. 91-67); and
WHEREAS, the Federal Way City Council updated a'TIP annually thereafter; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Way City Council held a public hearing on the revised TIP on
June 20, 2017, in compliance with the requirements of State laws; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined current and future City street and arterial
needs, and based upon these findings has prepared a revised and extended TIP and an Arterial Street
Improvement Plan ("ASIP") for the ensuing six calendar years; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapters 35.77 and 47.26 RCW, the City Council is required
annually to revise and adopt an extended TIP and ASIP; and
WHEREAS, the City's SEPA Responsible Official has adopted a Determination ofNon-
Significance ("DNS"), Federal Way File 17-102278-00-SE, issued for the City's 2018-23 TIP and
ASIP, which includes the extended and revised projects contained in the TIP adopted herein; and
WHEREAS, adoption of the City's 2018-23 TIP and ASIP DNS reflects the fact that there
will be no significant adverse environmental impacts as a result of adoption or implementation of the
extended and revised TIP and ASIP adopted herein;
Resolution No. 17-__
54
Page 1 of 3
Rev 3/17
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY,
RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Program Adopted. The extended and revised Transportation Improvement
Program and Arterial Street Improvement Plan for the City of Federal Way, a copy of which is
attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference, which sets forth the City's
transportation project locations, types of improvements, and the estimated costs thereof, is hereby
approved and adopted for the ensuing six (6) calendar years (2018-23 inclusive).
Section 2. Filing of Program. Pursuant to Chapter 35.77 RCW, the City Clerk is hereby
authorized and directed to file a copy of this Resolution, together with Exhibit A, with the
Washington State Secretary of Transportation and the Washington State Transportation Improvement
Board.
Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this resolution should be
held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence,
clause or phrase of this resolution:.
Section 4. Corrections. The City Clerk and the codifiers of this resolution are authorized to
make necessary corrections to this resolution including, but not limited to, the correction of
scrivener/clerical errors, references, resolution numbering, section/subsection numbers and any
references thereto.
Section 5. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of
this resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed.
Resolution No. 17-
55
Page 2 o/3
Rev 3/17
Section 6. Effective Date. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage by the
Federal Way City Council.
RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY,
WASHINGTON this ___ day of _______ , 20_.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY:
JIM FERRELL, MAYOR
ATTEST:
STEPHANIE COURTNEY, CMC, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
J. RY AN CALL, CITY ATTORNEY
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:
RESOLUTION NO.:
Resolution No. 17-
56
Page3 of3
Rev 3/17
EXHIBITB
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN , ,..., • 2018 TO 2023
I I I I I I I I
Map r<uftJ)WAY CAPITAL PRWECTS Ynr 2017 Cosh In$ mousanas
10-location Description Previous Years 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2<=< 2023 Total
1a City Center Access Phase 1 • Environmental Update envltonmental documentation for mOdified access at S 320th St & S 3241h St 500 2 ,000 2.500
jb CiiV Center Access Phase 2 • S 320111 St @. 1-5 Bridae Add HOV lanes on S 320th St realian ramps in SE auadrant 5,612 2.123 62187 62.187 132,10li
2 S 352nd St: SR 99 • SR 161 Extend 3 lane principal collector and sianal at SR-99 4,519 50 4.569
3 SW 3201/1 St@. 47th Ave SW lnstafi traffic slanal 569 569
4 S 312th St@. 28th Ave S Add SB riahl-tum lane 771 771
5 SW 340th St: 37th Ave SW· Citv Limits Widen to s lanes 150 60 500 1,500 4000 6.21C
6 S 356th SC SR 99 • SR 161 Widen to 5 lanes, bike laneS. sldewalkS, IUumlnaf,on 974 5,147 6,121
7 S 320th St & 1st Ave S0Uth Add EBL, WBL. WBR. NBT. SBR: widen to 5 laneS N to 316 or AltemaUive Measure 569 989 989 7 ,913 10.46C
8 SR 99 HOV Lanes Phase 5: S 340th St -S 356th St Add HOV lanes. instaU ra~ median; roundabout-at 34oth S~ wm lanes at 348th 4 ,680 6.460 6,460 17.60(
9 16th Ave S : S 344th S1 • S 348th St Add SB auxiliary lane 400 1,600 4,105 6 .105
10 Milit:,n, Rd S @ S 2981h St Construct COlnDact roundabc<Jt 100 105 598 803
11 Citvwide lmolemenl Adaolive Traffic Contml S""'""' 200 900 900 2,00C
12 C"""'•de Install variable lane use control sions 200 800 1,000
13 SW Campus Dr: 1st Ave S • 19th Ave SW Overlay 1 ,600 1,600
14 16th Ave S: SR 99-SR 18 Ove~av 800 800
15 Militarv Rd S @ S Star Lake Rd Add EB riaht-1\Jm lane, sidewalk 200 1,000 1.200
16 1st Ave S@ SW 301st St lnstan compact roundabout . 150 700 650
f7 SW 340th St: 31st Ave SW· 37th Ave SW Widen to 5 lanes 500 1.500 4,000 ti,
I Subtotal Roadway Capital Projects 10,892 12,517 11 ,765 4,598 10,952 4 ,182 67,176 79,205 201,267
I I I I
Map NON•MUTOKIZED CAPITAL PROJECTS Year 2017 Costs i n $ thousands
ID Location Description PreVIOUS Years 2017 2018 2019 2uzo 2021 2022 2023 •=•
18 21st Ave S : S 314th St -S 316th St Pedestrian Coonecllon 300 500 2,000 2,800
19 1st Ave S : S 292nd St· S 312th St Shoulder improvements a.no 3.no
20, 21st Ave S: S 316th St-S 3201h St Install sidewalk on west sfde 472 884 1.358
21~ SR 509: 11th Pl S -16th Ave S Install s!dewalk on south side 1.200 300 1,500
22 Citvwide Pedestrian Safety Install mid-block crossin<1 treatments 320 320 320 320 320 320 1 ,920
23 SR 509: SW 312th St· 21st Ave SW Install sidewalk and streetrlohts on soUth side 200 1,300 1.500
24 S 312th St: 24th Ave S • Steel l..alco Pask Install sidewalk and streetliahts on south side 100 944 1.044
2S S 31211, St steel Lake Park -28th Ave S Install sidewalk and streeUiahts on south side 100 650 750
28 Citvwide lmolement oreenwav clan 320 320
27 16th Ave S Trail: S 264th St-SR 509 Construct multi-use path 300 1,918 2,218
Subtotal Non-Motorized Capital Projects I 2,092 2,528 1,670 3,620 620 7,_v 320 4,090 17,178
I I I I
Map STREET LIGn 11NG CAPITAL PROJECTS Year 2017 Cosb i n $ lhousanos
ID Location Description I t"'AWIOU$ Years ~,T 2018 2019 2020 2021 I 2022 20:t~ rotal
28 Citywide LEO Retrofits 160 3 ,2uu I 3.oou
l::iut:l\otar ::;1J1!1!t J.Jgnbng c;oll>ital Pro u ·~ ···= u u 0 1 0 u J ,-,-·
I I
f fVIAL ~Mr'IIKL. ,~ ,o,=a o. coo 11,,,. Of, -·
C,Jmlm•,1•Nmt'Jlf
Ba.:·
Puget Sound
Dunws
Ba.v
SW320thS1
\ t-, I •
I " L ... ,
-=> -,:
/',r..-rtj
Ba_1 ,
aw
Mirrur
City of Federal Way
2018-2023
Transportation
Improvement Plan
Legend
• Intersection Improvement
Lake 1 1 L___L_J -1 " \ 1 1 1 -Non-Motorized Improvement
....
'· '
Loktt
G,me ,•a
Trc,111
l.llkl'
-Overlay Improvement
=·== Roadway Improvement
Original Map Date: May, 2017
City of Federal Way,
33 325 8th Ave S,
Federal Way, WA 98003
(253) 835-7000
05 6 1 N
Miles
~ Federal Way
This map is accompanied by no warranties,
and is simply a graphic representation .
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2017 ITEM#:
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: 2017 SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ( CIP) UPDATE
POLICY QUESTION: Should Council approve the proposed 2017 updates to the SWM Capital Improvement
Program (CIP)?
COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
IZJ Consent
D City Council Business
D Ordinance
D Resolution
MEETING DATE: June 5, 2017
D
D
Public Hearing
Other
STAFF REPORT BY: Theresa Thurlow, P.E. Surface Water Manager Y DEPT: Public Works
Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee memorandum dated June 5, 2017
Options Considered:
1. Adopt the proposed 2017 updates to the SWM CIP
2. Do not adopt the proposed 2017 updates to the SWM CIP and provide direction to staff.
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: Option 1
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward Option 1 to the June 20, 2017 consent agenda for
approval.
Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to approve the 2017 updates to the Surface Water Management
Capital Improvement Program"
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
0 APPROVED
D DENIED
0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION
0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED-11/2016
59
COUNCIL BILL#
1 ST reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE#
RESOLUTION#
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
June 5, 2017
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Jim Ferrell, Mayor ~
Marwan Salloum, Public Works Director ,:A ,t/'
EJ Walsh, Public Works Deputy Director "V•
Theresa Thurlow, Surface Water Manager~
2017 Surface Water Management Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Update
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of the SWM Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is to identify, design, and construct surface
water related projects within the City that will enable the City to continue meeting both its National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II permit requirements and meet surface water
related needs of the citizens of Federal Way.
While it is the intent of the SWM utility to construct the SWM CIP Projects as scheduled, CIP projects
will at times be delayed, removed, added or modified based on unforeseen infrastructure failure, new
information gathered through engineering studies, operational observations, permit monitoring and
continual re-evaluation of our surface water related needs.
The most recent SWM CIP update was approved December 7, 2015 and since that time, six of the seven
projects planned for 2015/2016 have been completed. Attached for your review and comments is the
proposed SWM CIP update (Attachment 1) and a City map showing project locations (Attachment 2).
Completed Projects
• 3561h St RDF Water Quality Retrofit
• Phase V Highway 99 Project Property Acquisition for Water Quality Infrastructure
• Marine Hills Stormwater Conveyance System Repair Phase I
• W Hylebos Conservation Property Acquisition -Larson/Justice parcel
• W Hylebos Conservation Property Acquisition -Snyder parcel
• SW 320th St Conveyance System Restoration at 1st Ave S (slip line)
• Town Square Park LID Demonstration Project
For 2017-2025 SWM CIP update, the proposed changes are as follows:
Proposed Proiect Additions
• Lakota. Wetlands Berm and Pipe Repai1· Project
In 2015, water within the wetlands detention area overtopped the berm, flooded the fields and track. The
flooded area extended onto 21st Ave SW and Dash Point Road, partially flooding north and east bound
travel lanes. This flooding was caused by a combination oflocalized settlement of the berm and blockage
at the outlet control structure. Further investigation also determined that the 18-inch diameter outlet pipe
is deteriorated and in need of repair. The proposed project will mitigate berm settlement with engineered
60
placement of low permeability soil (LPS) topped with three inches of crushed surfacing and replace up to
4 70 If of deteriorated 18-inch concrete pipe. On April 18, 2017, City Council approved staff's request to
apply for the 2017 King County Flood Control District Flood Reduction Grant to help fund this project.
• Surface Water Facility Plan/CIP Update and Rate Analysis
Since 2008, requirements under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit
have changed and the SWM utility is working to implement low impact development (LID) where
feasible, install water quality and flow control infrastructure where required, identify opportunities for
water quality retrofits, as well as improve watershed habitat and utilize a watershed approach when
planning and programming capital improvements. In order to integrate these interrelated demands while
planning for anticipated impacts of an aging drainage conveyance infrastructure, SWM Staff has
determined there is a need for consultant services to evaluate our surface water facilities and watershed
needs to allow for planning of future CIP updates.
Anticipating increased requirements under the new 2018-2023 NPDES Permits, SWM proposes
incorporating a rate study within this project to analyze the impact of implementing new permit
requirements and the recommendations to be developed under this project. Results from the rate study
would be available for use in the biennium 2019-2020 budget planning and to determine if a rate
adjustment would be required and when.
• 373rd St Bridge Channel -Sediment Removal
King County bridge inspections have identified the need for sediment removal under and surrounding the
City's oldest bridge along S 373rd Street in order to completely inspect the structural integrity of the
bridge. This project will require environmental approval from Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife for the removal of sediment from the stream channel. The project is planned to take place before
the next scheduled bridge inspection in 2018.
• Conveyance System E valuation and Assessment
As part of the SWM Utility Asset Management Program, video assessment and integrity rating of the
City's conveyance system is needed. The first of these assessments resulted in the Marine Hills
Conveyance Repairs project currently underway. There are not enough in-house resources to implement
the needed video assessment program and also provide video support services necessary to implement
permit requirements for SWM maintenance, water quality, and source control programs. This project will
provide video assessment of two areas within the City that have been identified as having older
conveyance or at risk conveyance systems. The first assessment would begin in 2017 and the next in
2018.
• Conveyance System Rehabilitation Project (Location TBD)
Based on integrity ratings from the Conveyance System Evaluation and Assessment project, it is expected
there will be a need for drainage system repairs at multiple locations. Design for the first set of repairs
would begin early 2019, following the final conveyance system assessment. Design in 2019 and
construction starting 2020 will also allow for project integration of any related infrastructure or financial
needs identified under the proposed Surface Water Facility Plan/CIP Update and Rate Analysis.
• W Hylebos Wetlands Trail (Brook Lake Connection)
This project would connect the end of the West Hylebos Park Wetlands Trail to the Brook Lake Center.
The West Hylebos Wetlands Park and trail system is critical to SWM's public education and outreach
efforts, including the annual Storming the Sound with Salmon Release Event, which has grown
substantially since 2014. Logistics, safety, and parking are a challenge as the number of students, school
61
buses, education stations, and salmon fry to be released have increased. At present the wetlands
boardwalk trails erids at the northern end of Brook Lake, approximately 300 If from Brook Lake Center.
Extension of the boardwalk to connect to Brook Lake Center would allow for adequate parking and
facilities for the students as well as the 40+ volunteers that sponsor the education stations. Connection of
the board would also exponentially increase efficiency in logistics and decrease demand on SWM
resources that are used to hold this four day e"'.ent every year.
Project Removed from SWM CIP
• LID Retrofit Project
After geotechnical investigation was conducted, it was determined that the locations identified for this
project were not suitable for Low Impact Development (LID) infrastructure and SWM Staff recommend
removing this project from the SWM CIP.
Proposed Project Modifications/Schedule Adjustment to Approved SWM CIP
• Bridges Property Culvert Removal and Replacement
Due to the need for repairs to Lakota Berm and Pipe, SWM staff proposes moving this project to 2021.
The structural integrity of the culvert is adequate for current road use and as a habitat enhancement
project it ranks lower than flood risk reduction repairs.
• 373rd St Stream Crossing Re-route and Restoration (Kim's Pond)
SWM staff conducted an initial study to determine the feasibility of stream restoration for this section of
the West Hylebos Creek to improve juvenile Salmon habitat. However, the water quality of Kim's Pond
was such that no life can be sustained under current conditions. This project would restore the water
quality within Kim's Pond and allow for its use in habitat conservation and restoration within this section
of the Hylebos.
• W Hylebos Conservation Property Acquisition
Staff proposes to reallocate funds for this project and revise the project title to 'Hylebos Conservation
Property Acquisition'. On February 6, 2017 City Council approved staffs request to apply for
Conservation Futures Funds (CFT) for the purpose of acquiring parcels in the East Hylebos Basin. City
Council directed staff to amend the approved 2015 CIP to create a project for property acquisition in the
East Hylebos Basin and reallocate funds within the SWM CIP.
• W Hylebos Land Acquisition (Larson/Justice Demolition)
It was determined that historic mitigation prior to the demolition of the structures on the Larson/Justice
parcel required historic mitigation. Council approved historic mitigation efforts and demolition of
Larson/Justice structures on September 16, 2016.
• S 356111 St Culve1tReplacement
SWM staff proposes moving this project to 2023. The culvert replacement is dependent on a Streets
project that has not yet been funded.
• W Hylebos Education Center and Trail
This project was to be designed in 2017 and constructed in 2018. However, this project is dependent on
the final use determination for Brook Lake Center and Parks Comprehensive Plan. Staff proposes
moving this project to start in 2019.
62
• W Hylebos Trail (Spring Valley)
This project was to be designed in 2017 and constructed in 2018. However, this project is grant
dependent and staff requires additional time to identify funding sources for a project of this magnitude.
Staff proposes moving this project to start in 2019.
• S 336111 Water Quality Facility
This project was to be designed in 2018 and constructed in 2019. However, recent work with Washington
Fish and Wildlife service and other stakeholders (private property owner) has identified a need to move
this project forward to 2017/2018. Staff proposes moving this project to start in 2017.
Although the proposed changes to the SWM CIP will result in significant expenditure of funds in 2018,
SWM staff has confirmed ending fund balance projection will remain above the required 17% of SWM
revenues to 2021 (as shown in Attachment 3).
63
304 SWM CIP Projects
Annual Programs
)D4.•.11 1 Simll C!P Expcndiru,..
~·-i.snS6<h.s.. RDf" w....-Qu:,Jiiy-Ramfil =-=---~
}ll,j,•.2msm S,~('~~it:~IOlllillld~(Kim's Pond)
Jl);l.s~.Vl H1·ao.~.-.A~
~·-~ Wl,Mctil:l<:Bm<in und.l:afi,ttltlon(SQ ) & l...er.ion HOt.lSe def.Tlo~ition
JlJ4.0 -272 Sill6dii"Sl'Cul ,<ir.Ko,i~
304-'·:nl ~W'Hl..,,.,,,..911l'ro.J<C1 , S 3'l-lth S1 at Hfgh-99
l04-'.274 S 3S"9th SI Weir R.co,i,
.i:-.-. -,~ .... .
3~·~_..,.-_.~l,m~~~cm<nf
"l~"-27J To""""°""'eP,ul< LID ---::==:c::=--
.-:.•~'JS W'ffv1,bn~Sliii,a<•~1•J'Cc,,J,,r&,Tr>i!
JOt."·'l'l!l'WJlj[d,i,o B><i#'~ rlow-'C-rcl /Jtenllli,~.t\,......,
304-'-280S.120thStCoo=Sy<ian~at l <tA""S
_ __,
r:::,
JOJ.~1 W Hj,lct,il<Tr:ail .._,......, \'alri,il
i!M-·•W S-ll6ili;Si~ Qu,,lif) hOJll"'
~•-26$ r,ionqc Hills'Ccn •'C'.1'>11==<m ~·Pl>=.[ &.Phase ii
l04-•xxx Lakom Wedaod" 8am l;'fflllllr
Jllf.'= S\mn. w.,.,..c.,,,. Pl111 ~r 111d rate 1m111·
30'-">'ll.GDA,q"""' SJl!ll<m ~a!oo .-.1..._...._
,04-"xxx•Slncd ~Clionn,;1-So&mmt.iwna\111
300-"ntn'po'.lkbnbillinlino1'toj,o::t(Lill<llllm,l8Dl
;04-•~xx W H-. Wctl.tlld<1'r.,il.{Braa1; uu,.Qxio«:ilonl
Subtotal CJP (Assumed LOS):
304-+-268 Marine Hil!s Conveyance System Repairs -Phase l & Phase 11 (Granl) -Received
J():.•.2;6 DridO<S l'ral><"• Cu l,-crL Removal & R..,1-.nl (Gr.mil -llmir;i,..«d
304-"-278 Wat tM<bw. Edua 1lon:il C.nm & Tr.ill !Ornrn). A.mi<l 1'>1ol
304-*-281 West HylebosTrail (Sorin,g Valley) (Grant)-A.nticioated
l04-"-lS2 s !36th s, wa,crOwllrv facilirv -Anlic:ln:irod
304-*-27 l K.iru?: Counlv Conservation Fuiw-es -A..o.ticiuated
j ~Xltl Sl7Jrd St &idtc Cluinn c:1 • Sediment RffllO v.111
;<:r ·.a ood Z<>n< Gr>nJ.
Completed Projects/Projects to be completed in 2017
Proposed Project Additions (New Protects) Pr--Mod>ltcat-
Attachment 1
Subtotal CJP Grants:
2016
150.000
SN
678
22,313
%5,000
••• -'P" ··-ti
351.089
0
30,01)()
100.000
299;806
5(i,O(J(J"
2,090.675
350.195
350,.195
Proposed 2017 SWM CIP Update
2017 2018 2019
150.000 150,000 150,000
19,000 273.000
2.000,000 JillJ.O!KJ
100.000
~ .....::..
~
IJJl!.000
18.000 .'!ll.000
100~000
50,00Q ]50,000
1,133 ,000
53.000 no.uoo·
150.000
100.000 l()j).000
75 ,QQO
100.000
50.()00 150,000
1,665,000 3,348,000 836,000
400 .000
Q
S0 .000
75.000
250 ODO
1,000 .000 150 .000
220 .000
120.021
400.000 1.470.000 425.027
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
150.000 150.000 150,00 0 150,000 150,000 150.000
100.000 300.000 --
50,000 261.000
'If.ODO 240.000, -
lOS.000 1.188.000
700.000 700.00G 800.000 500,000
~ -
150,000 J50.000
1,158,000 2,624 ,000 1,190,00Q 750,00Q 450,000 150,000
80 ,00Q %n.OOO
525 .000 525 .000 600 000 375 .000
120.027 120,027 L.20.021 l20.IU7 120.027 120.02]
725.02 7 1.611.027 720.027 495.027 120.027 120.027
2017 TO 2025 SURFACE WATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGAM
1D Project
304-*-I J l Small CIP fap_enditures
2 304-*-267 356th Street RDF Water Quality Retrofit
3 304-*-270 S 373 st. Stream Crossing Re-route and Restoration (Kinis Pond)
4 304-*-27 I Hylebos Conservation Property Acquisition
5 304-*-256 W Hylebos Basin Land Acquisition (S nyder/Caslellar) & Larsori House de,rolition
6 304-"-272 S 356th St Culvert Ri:11laocm=ru
7 304-*-273 P1135C V Highway 99 'Project -S 344th St at Highway 99
8 304-*-274 S 359th St Weir Repair
9 !3 04-*-275 LID Retrofit Project
1 O 1304-*-276 Brid.~es Property Culvert Rerooval & Replacement
11 1304-*-277 Town S_(luare Park LID
12 13 04-*-278 West Hy!ebos Educational Center & Trail
13 1304-*-280 S 320th St Convecl'ance System Restoration at 1st Ave S
14 1304-*-28 I West Hylebos Trail _(_Sprin_[ Valley)
15 13 04-*-282 S 336th St Water _QualitvFacili'
16 1304-*-268 Marine Hills Conveyance S~temRepairs -Pbase I & Pbase II
17 [304-*xxx Lakota Wetland Berm Repair
18 1304-*xxx S373rd Street Bridie Channel-Sedim,nt Re,roval
1 LJ304-*xxx West Hylebos Wetlands Trail {Brook Lake Connection)
I Added Project a Modified Project
I Removed Project
I
d!J
Current Project
CompletedfTo Be Completed
Project In 2017
N
<\
••
I
WeUands
D Citylimits + j • Lr-''-----,
0 1,500 3,000
1 inch; 3,000 feet
6,000
Feet
City of Federal Way, Public Works
Surface Water Management Division
(253) 835-2700
Note: All facilities displayed are for
storm water. No polable water or
sewer facilities are shown.
Disclaimer: This map is intended for
use as a graphical representation only.
The City of Federal Way makes no
warranty as lo its accuracy.
ttachment 2
•
...
SW '20TB S1' _ -SW<32e>nr
~
"' ~ ; ..
~
!
, -1
.. , · ) .: .
;L3S6TH_L
@J -,
PROJECT LOCATION MAP
.,, ,s e. I I
i
... =
SR 18RWy E
' ~ ..
t. :.
1 .,
Cl)
u ·-~
Cl) en ....
0 -Cl)
> Cl)
-l
C ·-t: cu
0 ... ·.,::; C u ·-C1J cu ·o ... ~ c..
C1J u
t: C ~ m 0 cc ·-"'C ...
t: u :::, Cl) u.
I """"'I
C1J 0 .... ... m
-0 D. C.
::) Cl) c.. u Ci C ~ cu 3: -Vl cu
r-,.. m .-i
0 "'C N
"'C C C1J
VI :l 0
C. LL 0 ... en c..
C ·-"'C
C w
(0
~
11
!
1 u.
' ti w
1 iJ Q) ·e
UJ a.
I
LO C\I
( SUO!ll!V'J)
sJe11oa u1 enueAe~
66
0 ~
I
2025
2024
2023
2022
I
2021 I ... m
~
2020
I
I
2019 1
I
2018
2017
2016 1
rt') ....
C:
QJ
E ..c: u
"' ~
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2017 ITEM#:
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: PRESENTATION OF DATA ANALYSIS REPORT FOR UPPER JOE'S CREEK WATERSHED NUTRIENT
REDUCTION STUDY
POLICY QUESTION: NIA, informational only. Council informational update on the findings of the Upper Joe's
Creek Watershed Nutrient Reduction Study
COMMITTEE: Land Use Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
D Consent
[XI City Council Business
D Ordinance
D Resolution
STAFF REPORT BY: Theresa Thurlow, Surface Water Manager
Attachment: LUTC Memo dated June 5, 2017
MEETING DATE: June 5, 2017
Public Hearing
Other
DEPT: Public Works
Background: In 2015, City of Federal Way was awarded a grant from the Washington State Department of
Ecology (DOE) Water Quality Algae Control Program for the Upper Joe's Creek Nutrient Reduction study. The
goals of the study were: 1) to collect comprehensive and credible surface water and stormwater quality data, 2)
use the results to guide implementation of corrective actions, and 3) to implement a public education component.
The data analysis is complete and a summary report has been provided to staff. Under the grant agreement and
to meet goal 3, the City will provide an outreach effort to residents of Twin Lakes to publicize the results of the
study and provide public education on best management practices (BMPs) that can help reduce the nutrient
loading from surface water sources. As part of this outreach effort, SWM staff will present the results of the
Upper Joe's Creek Nutrient Reduction study to LUTC on June 5, 2017, and City Council on June 20, 2017.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: NIA, informational only.
Committee Chair Committee Member Committee Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: NI A
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
0 APPROVED
0 DENIED
0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION
0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED-11 /2016
67
COUNCIL BILL#
lsT reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE#
RESOLUTION#
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
DATE: June 5, 2017
TO: Land Use and Transportation Committee
VIA:
Marwan Salloum, Public Works Director
FROM:
Jim Ferrell, Mayor ~
EJ Walsh, Public Works Deputy Director
Theresa Thurlow, Surface Water Manager ~
SUBJECT: Presentation of Data Analysis Report for Upper Joe's Creek Watershed Nutrient Reduction
Study
BACKGROUND:
In 2015, the City of Federal Way (City) was awarded a grant from the Washington State Department of
Ecology (DOE) Water Quality Algae Control Program for the Upper Joe's Creek Nutrient Reduction
study. The goals of the study were:
1) To collect comprehensive and credible surface water and stonnwater quality data and
hydrologic modeling within the Upper Joe's Creek Watershed to help identify problematic
surface water and stonnwater nutrient sources entering into the Twin Lakes (Lake Lorene and
Lake Jeane),
2) Use the results to guide implementation of corrective actions for the reduction and/or
elimination of identified surface water and stonnwater nutrient sources, and
3) To implement a public education component that provides information on best management
practices (BMPs) for controlling urban sources of nutrients to targeted populations based upon
the assimilation of project data.
To meet the first goal of this study, nine stations were identified in the Quality Assurance Project Plan
(QAPP) for sampling. The sampling locations are shown in the attached map labeled Figure 1-Joe's
Creek Monitoring Stations. Water quality samples were collected from January 2016 to December 2016
and sent to area laboratories for analysis. The samples were analyzed for total phosphorus (TP), soluble
reactive phosphorus (SRP), nitrate+nitrite nitrogen, and fecal coliform (FC). In addition, rainfall data for
each storm sampled was collected and flow monitoring equipment was installed at three of the nine
sampling locations to measure water volume for each seasonal flow type (summer base, summer storm,
winter base, and winter storm) and allow for calculation of annual pollutant loading.
The City hired Herrera Environmental Consultants to analyze the laboratory data and provide a report
summarizing the results. Under the grant agreement and to meet goal 3, the City will conduct an outreach
effort targeting the residents of Twin Lakes to publicize the results of this study and provide public
education on BMPs that can help reduce the nutrient loading from surface water sources to the Twin
Lakes. As part of this outreach effort, SWM staff will present the results of the analysis from the Upper
Joe's Creek Nutrient Reduction study to LUTC and City Council, which are both public forums. SWM
staff will also present the results of this study at an outreach meeting with Twin Lake residents and
stakeholders at a yet to be determined time and location.
cc: Project File
Day File
68
Sample Locations [~ Subbasins Boundary
Q Water Quality • Storm Outfall
o Storm Structure 0 Water Quality & Flow Control :11 111111~ Stream/Ditch
Lake Basins
8 L.a l(a Jeans
Lake Lorene
Storm Facilities
-Lake
-Storm Drains
CJ cities
D Parcel Borders
~I.A.4!i-•1' ..,...~ .•
\!!•~
~•.!Mil')•
k.lii.t.-..H
Ji·~·'r' ..... ,~.
ult,t ft.M•
.J,!f\OOOM
LJi~1.,t,ri
,bi• 1:19
~ .. .,.. .... -~•)!,_SM
This page left blank intentionally.
70
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2017 ITEM#:
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: SUBMITTAL OF TRANSPORTATION GRANT APPLICATION
POLICY QUESTION: Should City Council authorize staff to submit a Federal Highway Administration (FHW A)
Emergency Relief funding application for the Dash Point Road Mud Slide?
COMMITTEE: Land Use/ Transportation MEETING DATE: June 5, 2017
CATEGORY:
~ Consent D Ordinance D Public Hearing
D City Council Business D Resolution D Other
STAFF REPORT B~ee Winkler, P.E., Deputy Public Works Director DEPT: Public Works
Attachments: Memo to LUTC dated June 5, 2017
Options Considered:
1. Authorize Staff to submit a Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) Emergency Relief funding
application for the Dash Point Road Mud Slide.
2. Do not authorize staff to submit a Federal Highway Administration (FHW A) Emergency Relief funding
application for the Dash Point Road Mud Slide.
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding Option 1 to the June 20
Council Consent Ageod approval.
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward Option 1 to the June 20, 2017 consent agenda for
approval.
Bob Celski, Chair Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: '/ move approval of Option 1 to autho rize staff to submit a Federal Highway
Administration (FHWA) Emergency Relief funding application for the Dash Point Road Mud Slide."
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
D APPROVED
D DENIED
0 TAB LED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION
0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED -l/2015
71
COUNCIL BILL#
15T reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE#
RESOLUTION#
DATE: June 5, 2017
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
TO: Land Use I Transportation Committee
VIA: Jim Ferrell, Mayor . n \ ~
FROM· , ~arwan Salloum , P.E ., Director of Public Works ~
· t;}vJ ~esiree Winkler, P .E ., Deput y Public Works Director /Street System Manager
SUBJECT· Submittal of FHW A Emergency Relief Funding Application for the Dash Point
· Road Mud Slide
BACKGROUND:
This memorandum provides the Council with the current status of potential Federal Highway
Administration (FHW A) Emergency Relief (ER) Funding for the Dash Point Road Mud Slide.
Since the March 16, 2017 mud slide at the 2800 Block of Dash Point Road, staff has been in contact with
Washington State Department of Transportation on the potential to receive funds for the initial clean-up
and permanent restoration of the impacted roadway. Staff met with WSDOT and FHW A staff on site and
reviewed work completed to date as well as additional work required to complete the permanent
restoration. WSDOT and FHW A staff were confident that the work completed to date including: mud and
debris removal, minor shoulder reconstruction, ditch re-establishment, guard rail and concrete barrier
replacement, and erosion control was eligible for up to 100% reimbursement. There is a strong potential
that additional work required to provide additional armoring of the shoulder, removing the guardrail from
the creek, and removal of some silt to reestablish the original stream alignment may be eligible for ER
fund reimbursement also . The permanent restoration work cannot take place until the city receives a
permit from Department of Fish and Wildlife, and in-stream work window is open -generally in late
summer.
In addition, the City's geotechnical consultant is waiting for the hillside to dry so that they may complete
their soil borings and on-site investigation to confirm the stability for the continuous operation of the
roadway. The property owner has been notified of his responsibility to perform additional slope
stabilization if required.
Costs to date, broken out in the three Emergency Relief funding categories is as follows:
72
June 5, 2017
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Page2
Project '(.Funding Pht1cs'e}
~ant
Es:timated l>roje ~t
Gost
Dash Point Road Mud Slide Clean up and Repair
(Design and Construction)
2017 FHW A Emergency Relief Funding
(Federal Funds) -TOTALS
Temporary I Emergency Repair
(Immediate work required to
clean up roadway to get it open -
does not include materials that
remain in-place permanently.)
Incidental Repair (Immediate
work required to get the roadway
open that will remain in-place
permanently.)
Permanent Restoration
(Permanent roadway Festoration to
include: shoulder re-
establishment. Need Fisheries
Permit in order to complete.)
*Maximum grant funding is at 100%.
cc : Project File
Day File
$181,00
$48,000
$46,000
$87,000
73
PossU,le Gi:J i,lf
ll1Undf<
$181,000
$48,000
$46,000
$87,000
~eqllited ,
eity Match
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
This page left blank intentionally.
74
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: June 20, 2017 ITEM#:
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA BILL
SUBJECT: SOUND TRANSIT -CITY SERVICES AGREEMENT
POLICY QUESTION: Should City Council authorize execution of an Inter-Local Agreement with Sound Transit to
allow for reimbursement for incurred costs associated with the Federal Way Link Extension project?
COMMITTEE: Land Use and Transportation Committee
CATEGORY:
~ Consent
D City Council Business
D Ordinance
D Resolution
STAFF REPORT BY: EJ W alsb~ PE; De u Public Works Director
MEETING DATE: June 5, 2017
D
D
Public Hearing
Other
DEPT: Public Works
Attachments: Land Use and Transportation Committee Memorandum dated May 4, 2017.
Options Considered:
1. Approve the Inter-Local Agreement with Sound Transit to allow for reimbursement for incurred costs
associated with the Federal Way Link Extension project and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement.
2. Not aevrove the Inter-Local Agreement with Sound Transit and provide direction to staff.
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION: The Mayor recommends forwarding option 1 to the June 20, 2017 City Council
consent agenda for approv
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: I move to forward Option 1 to the June 20, 2017 City Council consent agenda for
approval.
Bob Celski, Chair Lydia Assefa-Dawson, Member Mark Koppang, Member
PROPOSED COUNCIL MOTION: "I move to approve the Inter-Local Agreement with Sound Transit to allow for
reimbursement for incurred costs associated with the Federal Way Link Extension project and authorize the Mayor
to execute the agreement. "
(BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERKS OFFICE)
COUNCIL ACTION:
0 APPROVED
0 DENIED
0 TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION
0 MOVED TO SECOND READING (ordinances only)
REVISED-1/2015
75
COUNCIL BILL #
lsT reading
Enactment reading
ORDINANCE#
RESOLUTION#
DATE:
TO:
VIA:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
May 4, 2017
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
MEMORANDUM
Land Use and Transportation Committee
Jim Ferrell, Mayor ~V---
Marwan Salloum, P.E., Director of Public Works ,, A /
EJ Walsh, P.E., Deputy Public Works Director ,/~
Sound Transit City Services Agreement
BACKGROUND:
Sound Transit has completed the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Federal Way Link
Extension (FWLE) project which has been approved by both the Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
and the Federal Highway Administration (FHW A).
Funding of the construction of the project has been approved by the voters via ballot measure Sound
Transit 3 (ST3).
With the approved EIS and construction funding, Sound Transit is commencing the design process for the
Federal Way Link Extension which will extend light rail mass transit from the existing Angle Lake
station to a proposed interim terminal station at the existing Federal Way Transit Center.
To complete the preliminary design, which is being done by Sound Transit and associated consultants;
permitting and final design, which will be completed by the successful bidder under a design-build
arrangement; interaction is required between the City and Sound Transit to prepare, review, and approve
agreements, review and approve construction plans, and review and approve permits.
To facilitate the above, the attached Inter-Local Agreement has been prepared that creates the framework
to define responsibilities, procedures, and task orders which allows Sound Transit to reimburse the City
for our incurred costs associated with the above activities.
The first Task Order (Task Order 1), attached, provides funding for coordination, communication,
management, administration, review of plans and agreements, and review of station access and right of
way improvements. The available funding is retroactive to time incurred starting in January of 2017 and
continues through the end of the year.
Subsequent Task Orders will be required for joint projects (if applicable), permitting, inspection, and
activities in 2018 and beyond.
The Development Agreement, which will also require Council approval, and outlines Sound Transit's
responsibilities for construction, station, track and surrounding improvements, is not part of this Inter
Local Agreement and will be a separate, stand alone, agreement.
cc: Project File
Day File
76
CITY SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY AND SOUND TRANSIT
FOR CITY COSTS RELATED TO SOUND TRANSIT PROJECT REVIEW AND PERMITIING
This Agreement is entered into between the City of Federal Way (City), a Washington municipal
corporation, and Sound Transit, a regional transit authority of the State of Washington for the purposes
set forth below.
RECITALS
A. The City is a non-charter municipal code city incorporated under the laws of the State of
Washington, with authority to enact laws and enter into agreements to promote the health, safety, and
welfare of its citizens and for other lawful purposes.
B. Sound Transit is a regional transit authority created pursuant to Chapters 81.104 and 81.112
RCW with all powers necessary to implement a high capacity transit system within its boundaries in
King, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties.
C. The City is responsible for administering state and local land use laws and development
regulations that will apply to Sound Transit projects located within the City jurisdiction. The City is also
responsible for managing streets and municipal utilities within its jurisdiction and for providing
municipal services such as public safety.
D. The Sound Transit Long Range Transit Plan identifies the Federal Way Link Extension Project
(FWLE) Project within the City\ jurisdiction.
E. Sound Transit completed environmental review of the FWLE Project with the issuance of a Final
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on November 18, 2016 and the Sound Transit Board identified
the project to be built by passing Resolution R2017-02 on January 26, 2017. FTA issued a Record of
Decision on March 6, 2017and FHWA issued a Record of Decision on March 9, 2017.
1. General
1.1 Purpose . Sound Transit's FWLE Project includes facilities to be constructed within the City's
jurisdiction. Interaction will be required between the City and Sound Transit to prepare, review and
approve agreements, prepare construction plans and to secure property rights, permits, and approvals
from the City for the construction of Sound Transit's facilities. The intent of this Agreement is to
establish (1) roles and responsibilities with regard to the FWLE Project, (2) terms and procedures for the
City to review and approve the proposed use and permits, and (3) a task order process for Sound Transit
to pay the City for the costs of providing design, permitting, and public right-of-way review and approval
services that will be required to allow construction of Sound Transit facilities within the City.
2. Designated Representatives
The City and Sound Transit have designated formal points of contact and coordination for this
Agreement as shown below. Each designated representative is responsible for coordinating the input
and work of its agency, consultants, and staff as it relates to the objectives of this Agreement. The
Page 1
77
Parties may change designated representatives by written notice to the other Party during the term of
this Agreement. Task orders may designate other individuals as points of contact for each task order.
Name EJ Walsh, PE
Title Deputy Public Works Director
Address 33325 8th Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
Phone 253-835-2713
Email edward.walsh@cityoffederalway.com
3. Cooperation and Good Faith Efforts
Name
Title
Address
Phone
Email
Sound Transit
Dan Abernathy
Project Director
401 S. Jackson Street
Seattle, WA 98104-2826
(206) 903-7170
dan.abernathy@soundtransit.org
3.1 The Parties understand and agree that the activities described in this Agreement depend upon
timely and open communication and cooperation between the Parties. In this regard, communication of
issues, changes, or problems that arise with any aspect of the work should occur as early as possible in
the process, and not wait for explicit due dates or deadlines. Each Party agrees to work cooperatively
and in good faith toward resolution of any such issues.
3.2. The Parties acknowledge that this Agreement contemplates the execution and delivery of a
number of future documents, instruments and permits, the final form and contents of which are not
presently determined. The Parties agree to provide the necessary resources and to work in good faith to
develop the final form and contents of such documents, instruments and permits, and to execute and
deliver the same promptly.
4. Environmental Review
4.1 Sound Transit is the lead agency for compliance with SEPA. In coordination with the City and
other agencies with jurisdiction, Sound Transit has completed the substantive and procedural
environmental review for the Project in accordance with SEPA requirements. The environmental review
covers the City's issuance of permits for the Project as well as environmental mitigation, and the City will
use and rely upon the existing environmental documents to satisfy its SEPA responsibilities, consistent
with WAC 197-11-600. The foregoing does not limit the City's authority to impose reasonable permit
conditions pursuant to its development regulations and is not a substitution for approval of any permits
required under City code .
5. Essential Public Facilities
5.1 The Parties agree that the FWLE Project is a regional transportation facility that has the status of
an essential public facility (EPF) and that the requirements of RCW 36.70A.200 are applicable. The siting
and location of the FWLE project shall be consistent with RCW Chapter 36.70A.
6. Task Orders for City Services
6.1 General Approach. Sound Transit agrees to pay the City for the costs associated with particular
tasks that:
Page 2
78
• Are required or necessary because of the implementation of Sound Transit's FWLE Project in the
City; and
• Sound Transit asks the City to undertake.
Costs for services will be based on the current hourly rate adopted as part of the City's Fee Ordinance
Schedule at the time that charges are incurred.
This may include tasks that Sound Transit asks the City to complete on a shorter schedule than the City
would otherwise follow. City services are described in further detail in Section 6.3.
In general, Sound Transit will not pay the City for the costs associated with the following:
• Coordination between Sound Transit and the City normally provided as between government
agencies.
• City services provided in the ordinary course of business and on the City's usual time and
schedule that the City does not ordinarily charge fees for.
• City services that ST will pay for under existing land use, permitting, or other fee schedules. An
exception to this exclusion would occur if a task order or other agreement establishes a
different payment structure in lieu of the established payments and fees.
6.2 Task Orders. A task order shall be prepared and executed by the Parties for each work effort to
be covered by this Agreement. A list of antieipated task orders is attached as Exhibit A. Task orders shall
be in a format similar to that shown in Exhibit B. Each task order shall contain a scope of work, a detailed
cost estimate, and a schedule of work. The cost estimate shall establish a maximum funding level for the
task order. Each task order shall be executed by authorized representatives of Sound Transit and the
City and shall incorporate by reference the provisions of this Agreement.
6.3 City Services. Task orders may address some or all of the following types of activities as
appropriate to the project or phase. Each task described below is optional and should only be included
in Task Orders when the City and Sound Transit agree it is appropriate.
A. Proiect Administration.
A.l. Coordination and Communication. Activities including participation at regularly scheduled
project-level coordination meetings and providing on-going project management activities, as
well as central coordination of all submittal reviews, comment coordination and consolidation,
and identification of projects or proposals (e.g., utility or public works projects or private
development projects) that have the potential to conflict with or interfere with Sound Transit's
Projects.
A.2 Management and Administration. Project management activities including staffing, budget,
and schedule management, progress reports and invoicing, and other related activities.
A.3 Agreements. Review and approval of Memoranda of Understanding, Development
Agreements, Services Agreements, Task Orders and other related activities.
79
Page 3
B. Design Review. Project design review consisting of informal "over the shoulder" (OTS)
reviews and formal design submittals for which the City is expected to provide formal comments
to Sound Transit.
B.1. OTS Re vi ew. OTS review meetings may be scheduled on an as-needed basis to keep Project
team members apprised of developments in the design process, seek feedback or concurrence
from the City on aspects of the design as it is progressing, and to determine whether the design
is consistent with City codes and regulations.
B.2. Formal Submittals. Sound Transit will occasionally submit desi~n review packages to the City
for formal review and comment during the earlier project phases and regularly during the
permitting and construction phases. The design review packages, including specific timeframes
for Sound Transit to provide advance notification to the City and for City review, are to be
described in the scopes of work included in Task Orders. If the City foresees that comments will
not be returned within the agreed upon timeframe, the City shall notify Sound Transit of the
delay as soon as possible so the Parties can determine an acceptable solution. City comments
should identify any aspects of the design that do not meet City codes and regulations so the
inconsistency can be corrected.
C. Planning and Design Coordination.
C.1 Station Acc ess Im p roveme nts . Coordination between the City and Sound Transit with regard
to station access improvements, such as placement of kiss and ride facilities, parking, ride share
services, and other emerging technologies, transit integration, wayfinding, and non-motorized
access improvements.
C.2 Transit Oriented Development (TOD). City services to partner with Sound Transit to
incorporate TOD principles during project design and permitting and to support Sound Transit in
evaluating and planning for TOD around Sound Transit facilities and on Sound Transit owned
properties that will no longer be needed for future transit operations or maintenance after
construction is complete.
C.3 Rig ht-of-W ay (ROW}. Coordination between the City and Sound Transit with regard to City
ROW. This may include review of a Transit Way Agreement, temporary easements or street
vacations, required improvements, or any other actions/transfers involving City ROW.
C.4 Join t Proj ects o r Partn er shi ps . City services that meet the general approach described in
Section 6.1 where partnership will occur for a related separate City project, that Sound Transit
may be contributing to as mitigation or project enhancement, or if there is a third party project
(private, WSDOT, utility) that Sound Transit and the City need to coordinate with, or if there is
something specific that Sound Transit needs to incorporate into the Sound Transit Project.
D. Permits and Approvals.
D.1. Est abl ish Permit Proc es s. City coordination with Sound Transit to determine a streamlined
and consolidated permitting process for the Project that will allow for the City to review and
process permits in the most expeditious manner allowable under applicable laws. This may
Page 4
80
include the preparation of a development agreement, development code amendments, or other
types of documents to implement a permitting process.
D.2. Permitting and Inspection Activities. City permit activities directly related to permit
processing, approval, and issuance including inspections, if these activities are not already
provided for through standard permitting fees.
E. Other Services. Other services as deemed appropriate by the City and Sound Transit.
6.4 Eligible Costs. The following types of expenditures shall be eligible for reimbursement:
6.5
• Direct project costs including labor charges at the employees' current rates in accordance with
the City adopted fee schedule on an hourly basis at the time the charge is incurred.
• Direct non-salary costs reimbursed at the actual cost to the City.
• All consultant costs that are consistent with the activities identified in the Task Order Scope of
Work and within the Task Order Cost Estimate.
• Mileage for meetings requested by Sound Transit outside of the City of Federal Way limits will
be charged at the standard IRS rate in effect at the time the charge is incurred.
• This Agreement does not cover the City's normal capital and operating expenses such as
buildings, office equipment, maintenance, security, utilities, or vehicles, except those expenses
normally included in the City's cost-based fee calculation for services.
Performance. If the City does not perform the services described in the Task Orders, provide
formal review comments within the Design Submittal review times as agreed upon in accordance with
Section 6.3 or provide notice to Sound Transit as set forth in Section 6.3.B.2, or fails to identify
development code conflicts that require design changes during the permitting process, and if the failure
to perform is solely attributable to the City's actions or inactions, appropriate corrective action will be
discussed and agreed to by the City and Sound Transit Designated Representatives. Should the
corrective action not be agreed to or resolve the problem within one (1) week, the dispute resolution
process may be commenced and Sound Transit may request specific resolutions including a reduction in
the fees owed by Sound Transit to the City.
7. Invoicing
7.1 The City shall submit invoices and supporting documentation for task order payments. The
invoices must include the appropriate purchase order number, which Sound Transit will provide after
execution of each task order, a cover memo including a description of services provided by the City, and
supporting documentation detailing the work completed and associated costs.
7.2 The City shall submit its invoices with the required documentation via email or mail to
AccountsPayable@SoundTransit.org, or Sound Transit, Accounts Payable, 401 S. Jackson St., Seattle, WA
98104-2826. Invoices must be paid within (30) days of Sound Transit's receipt of the invoice and
acceptable documentation.
7.3 If Sound Transit determines that an invoice lacks sufficient documentation to support payment,
Sound Transit will notify the City of its determination and request that the City provide additional
Page 5
81
documentation. Sound Transit may withhold payment for contested portions of the invoice until
supporting documentation for the contested portions are provided; however, such approval shall not be
unreasonably withheld.
8. Suspension and Termination
8.1 If the City has not received payment from Sound Transit as provided in ~ection 6, the City may
suspend performance of all or any part of the associated work after giving Sound Transit thirty (30) days'
notice of the City's intent to do so. Such suspension shall remain in effect until payment is made in full,
at which time the suspension shall be lifted.
8.2 Either Party may terminate this Agreement for cause in the event that the other Party fails to
fulfill its material obligations under this Agreement in a timely manner or breaches any material
provision of this Agreement and the dispute resolution process identified in Section 10 has failed to
reach resolution within the timelines described therein. The Party wishing to terminate this Agreement
for cause· shall provide the other Party with notice of its intent to terminate and shall give the other
Party an opportunity to correct the failure to perform or breach within thirty (30) days of the notice or
within such longer period as may be necessary in the event that correction cannot reasonably be
accomplished within thirty (30) days. If the failure or breach is not corrected or cured, this Agreement
may be terminated by the aggrieved party by giving ninety (90) days' notice to the other Party.
8.3 This Agreement shall also terminate with the mutual consent of both parties.
8.4 Except as provided in this Section, a termination by either Party shall not extinguish or release
either Party from liability for costs or obligations existing as of the date of termination. Any costs
incurred prior to proper notification of termination will be borne by the Parties in accordance with the
terms of this Agreement.
9. Indemnity
9.1 Each Party agrees to hold harmless, indemnify, and defend the other Party, its elected officials,
officers, agents, and employees, from and against any and all claims, losses or liability, for injuries,
sickness or death of persons, including employees of the indemnifying Party, or damages, arising out of
any willful misconduct or negligent act, error, or omission of the indemnifying Party, its officers, agents,
or employees, in connection with the services required by this Agreement, provided, however, that:
9.1.1 The indemnifying Party's obligations to indemnify, defend and hold harmless shall not
extend to injuries, sickness, death, or damage caused by or resulting from the sole willful
misconduct or sole negligence of the other Party, its elected officials, officers, agents or
employees; and
9.1.2 The indemnifying Party's obligations to indemnify, defend and hold harmless for
injuries, sickness, death, or damage caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence or
willful misconduct of the indemnifying Party and the other Party, or of the indemnifying Party
and a third party other than an elected official, officer, agent, or employee of the indemnifying
Party, shall apply only to the extent of the negligence or willful misconduct of the indemnifying
Party, its elected officials, officers, agents, or employees.
Page 6
82
9.2 Each Party agrees to bear full responsibility for any and all tax liabilities owed that may arise in
relation to this Agreement, and each Party shall fully indemnify and hold the other Party, its officers,
agents and employees harmless from any tax liability owed by other Party arising from or related to the
transactions set forth herein, including, but not limited to, any taxes, penalties, fines, and/or interest
that are assessed by any tax authority against the indemnifying Party and further including all attorneys'
fees and costs incurred in response to any claims or assessments by any tax authority against
indemnifying Party, its officers, agents and employees.
9.3 The obligations in this Section shall survive termination or completion of this Agreement as to
any claim, loss or liability arising from events occurring prior to such termination or completion.
10. Dispute Resolution
10.1 The Parties agree that neither party shall take or join any action in any judicial or administrative
forum to challenge actions of the other party associated with this Agreement or the Project, except as
set forth herein. Prior to taking or joining any action in any judicial or administrative forum to challenge
actions of the other party associated with the Agreement or Project, the Parties agree to follow the
dispute resolution process set out in this section 10. The Parties agree to use their best efforts to
prevent and resolve potential sources of conflict at the lowest level possible.
10.2 Any disputes or questions of interpretation of this Agreement or the performance of either
Party under this Agreement that may arise between Sound Transit and the City shall be governed under
the dispute resolution provisions in this Section. The Parties agree that cooperation and communication
are essential to resolving issues efficiently.
10.3 Either Party may refer a dispute to the dispute resolution process by providing written notice of
such referral to the other Party's Designated Representative. The Parties agree to use their best efforts
to resolve disputes arising out of or related to this Agreement using good faith negotiations by engaging
in the following dispute resolution process should any such disputes arise:
10.3.1 Level One -Sound Transit's Designated Representative and the City's Designated
Representative shall meet to discuss and attempt to resolve the dispute in a timely manner. If
they cannot resolve the dispute within fourteen (14) days after referral of that dispute to Level
One, either party may refer the dispute to Level Two.
10.3.2 Level Two -Sound Transit's Executive Project Director, and the City's Public Works
Director shall meet to discuss and attempt to resolve the dispute, in a timely manner. If they
cannot resolve the dispute within fourteen (14) days after referral of that dispute to Level Two,
either party may refer the dispute to Level Three.
10.3.3 Level Three -Sound Transit's Executive Director, Engineering and Construction
Management or Designee and the City's Mayor or Designee shall meet to discuss and attempt to
resolve the dispute in a timely manner.
10.4 Except as otherwise specified in this Agreement, in the event the dispute is not resolved at Level
Three within fourteen (14) days after referral of that dispute to Level Three, the Parties may file suit,
seek any available legal remedy, or agree to alternative dispute resolution methods such as mediation.
At all times prior to resolution of the dispute, the Parties shall continue to perform any undisputed
Page 7
83
obligations and make any undisputed required payments under this Agreement in the same manner and
under the same terms as existed prior to the dispute. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to
the contrary, neither party has an obligation to agree to refer the dispute to mediation nor other form
of dispute resolution following completion of Level Three of the process described herein. Such
agreement may be withheld for any reason or no reason.
11. Remedies and Enforcement
11.1 The Parties reserve the right to exercise any and all remedies available under the law, singly or
in combination, and consistent with the dispute resolution and default Sections of this Agreement, in
the event the other violates any provision of this Agreement. These remedies include, but are not
limited to:
11.1.1 Commencing an action at law for monetary damages;
11.1.2 Commencing an action for equitable or other relief;
11.1.3 Seeking specific performance of any provision that reasonably lends itself to such
remedy; and/or
11.2 All remedies set forth above are cumulative and the exercise of one shall not foreclose the
exercise of others.
11.3 Neither Party shall be relieved of its obligations to comply promptly with any provision of this
Agreement by reason of any failure by the other Party to enforce prompt compliance, and such failure
to enforce shall not constitute a waiver of rights or acquiescence in the other Party's conduct.
11.4 Each party consents to the personal jurisdiction of the state and federal courts in King County,
Washington and waives any objection that such courts are an inconvenient forum. If either Party brings
any claim or lawsuit arising from this Agreement, each Party shall pay all its legal costs and attorney's
fees and expenses incurred in defending or bringing such claim or lawsuit, including all appeals, in
addition to any other recovery or award provided by law; however, nothing in this paragraph shall be
construed to limit the Parties' rights to indemnification.
12. Duration of Agreement
12.1 This Agreement shall take effect upon the last date of signature by the Parties as set forth
below. This Agreement shall remain in effect until all Sound Transit Projects contemplated by this
Agreement are completed and open to the public, unless this Agreement is extended by mutual
agreement of the Parties, or unless this Agreement is superseded by a future agreement or is sooner
terminated as provided in Section 8 above.
13. Warranties
13.1 By execution of this Agreement, the City warrants:
13.1.1 That the City has the full right and authority to enter into and perform this Agreement,
and that by entering into or performing this Agreement the City is not in violation of any law,
regulation or agreement by which it is bound or to which it is bound or to which it is subject; and
Page 8
84
13.1.2 That the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by the City has been
duly authorized by all requisite corporate action, that the signatories for the City hereto are
authorized to sign this Agreement, and that upon approval by the City, the joinder or consent of
any other party, including a court or trustee or referee, is not necessary to make valid and
effective the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement.
13.2 By execution of this Agreement, Sound Transit warrants:
13.2.1 That Sound Transit has the full right and authority to enter into and perform this
Agreement, and that by entering into or performing this Agreement Sound Transit is not in
violation of any law, regulation or agreement by which it is bound or to whic~ it is bound or to
which it is subject; and
13.2.2 That the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement by Sound Transit has
been duly authorized by all requisite corporate action, that the signatories for Sound Transit
hereto are authorized to sign this Agreement, and that upon approval by Sound Transit, the
joinder or consent of any other party, including a court or trustee or referee, is not necessary to
make valid and effective the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement.
14. Administration of Agreement
14.1 This Agreement will be jointly administered by Sound Transit's Designated Representative and
the City's Designated Representative.
14.2 Each Party shall bear its own costs of administering this Agreement.
15. Posting of Agreement
15.1 Pursuant to RCW 39.34.040, each party shall list this Agreement on its website by subject matter
and shall post a copy in an electronically retrievable source for public viewing.
16. Assignment and Beneficiaries
16.1 Neither Party may assign all or any portion of this Agreement without the express written
consent of the other Party. There are no third party beneficiaries to this Agreement.
17. Notices
17.1 Unless otherwise provided herein, all notices and communications concerning this Agreement
shall be in writing and addressed to the Designated Representative.
17 .2 Unless otherwise provided herein, all notices shall be either: (i) delivered in person, (ii)
deposited postage prepaid in the certified mails of the United States, return receipt requested, (iii)
delivered by a nationally recognized overnight or same-day courier service that obtains receipts, or (iv)
delivered electronically to the other party's Designated Representative as listed herein; however, notice
under Section 7, Suspension and Termination, must be delivered in person or by certified mail, return
receipt requested.
18. Audits
Page 9
85
18.1 Sound Transit and the City shall maintain accounts and records, including contract and financial
records, which sufficiently and properly reflect all direct and indirect costs of any nature expended for
work performed under this Agreement so as to ensure proper accounting for all monies paid to the City
by Sound Transit. These records shall be maintained for a period of six (6) years after termination or
expiration of this Agreement unless permission to destroy the records is granted by the Office of the
Archivist pursuant to RCW Chapter 40.14 and agreed to by the City and Sound Transit.
19. General Provisions
19.1 The Parties shall not unreasonably withhold requests for information, approvals, or consents
provided for in this Agreement; provided, however, that approvals or consents required to be given by
vote of the Sound Transit Board or Federal Way City Council are recognized to be legislative actions. The
Parties agree to take further actions and execute further documents, either jointly or within their
respective powers and authority, to implement the intent of this Agreement provided, however, that
where such actions or documents must be first approved by vote of the Sound Transit Board or Federal
Way City Council, such actions are recognized to be legislative actions. The City and Sound Transit agree
to work cooperatively with each other to achieve the mutually agreeable goals as set forth in this
Agreement.
19.2 This Agreement shall be interpreted, construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the
State of Washington. Venue for any action under this Agreement shall be King County, Washington.
19.3 This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of successors and assigns of the
City and Sound Transit.
19.4 Time is of the essence in every provision in this Agreement. Unless otherwise set forth in this
Agreement, the reference to "days" shall mean calendar days unless otherwise noted. Any reference to
"working days" shall exclude any City holidays and weekend days. If any time for action occurs on a
weekend or legal holiday, then the time period shall be extended automatically to the next business day.
19.5 This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the Parties
hereto and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any
provision of this Agreement.
19.6 No joint venture or partnership is formed as a result of this Agreement. No employees, agents
or subcontractors of one party shall be deemed, or represent themselves to be, employees of any other
party.
19.7 This Agreement has been reviewed and revised by legal counsel for all parties and no
presumption or rule that ambiguity shall be construed against the party drafting the document shall
apply to the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement. The Parties intend this Agreement to be
interpreted to the full extent authorized by applicable law.
19.8 Each Party shall be responsible for its own costs, including legal fees, incurred in negotiating or
finalizing this Agreement, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Parties.
19.9 This Agreement and related task orders may be amended only by a written instrument executed
by each of the Parties hereto. The Designated Representatives may agree upon amendments to Exhibits
or to extend the term of this Agreement. Such amendments shall be binding upon the parties without
Page 10
86
the need for formal approval by the Sound Transit Board and the Federal Way City Council, as long as
the amendments are generally consistent with this Agreement and do not exceed the authority granted
by the Sound Transit Board and City Council.
19.10 This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an
original, and all counterparts together shall constitute but one and the same instrument.
20. Severability
20.1 In case any term of this Agreement shall be held invalid, illegal, or unenforceable in whole or in
part, neither the validity of the remaining part of such term nor the validity of the remaining terms of
this Agreement shall in any way be affected thereby.
21. City's Permitting and Regulatory Authority
21.1 Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed a waiver of the City's regulatory authority nor a
predetermination of the compliance of the Project with applicable codes and regulations.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has executed this Agreement by having its authorized
representative affix his/her name in the appropriate space below:
SOUND TRANSIT
By: _____________ _
Peter M. Rogoff, Chief Executive Officer
Date : --------------
Authorized by Motion No .
M2017-XX
Approved as to form :
By :. _____________ _
Amy Jo Pearsall, Senior Legal Counsel
THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
By : ____________ _
Jim Ferrell, Mayor
Date: _____________ _
Authorized by City Council
Motion on 2017 .
Approved as to form :
By : ____________ _
J. Ryan Call, City Attorney
Page 11
87
EXHIBITS
Exhibit A: Anticipated Task Orders under this Agreement
Exhibit B: Task Order Format
88
Page 12
Exhibit A
Anticipated Task Orders
Task Order 1 -Federal Way Link Extension Request for Proposals Preparation Phase
Task Order 2 -Federal Way Link Extension Design-Build Procurement Phase
Task Order 3 -Federal Way Link Extension Permitting and Pre-Construction Phase
Task Order 4 -Federal Way Link Extension Construction Phase
89
Page 13
Exhibit B
Task Order Format
CITY SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY AND SOUND TRANSIT
FOR CITY SERVICES AND COSTS RELATED TO SOUND TRANSIT PROJECT REVIEW AND PERMITTING
Task Order _: Title
This Task Order is issued under the Funding Agreement between the City of Federal Way and
So _und Transit for City Services and Fees Related to Sound Transit Project Review and Permitting dated
___ _, 2017 (Funding Agreement). This Task Order establishes the scope, schedule, and budget for
the services provided by the City (Services) for the Sound Transit PROJECT/PHASE. The City agrees to
perform the Services in the manner set forth in this Task Order. The terms and conditions of the Funding
Agreement are incorporated into this Task Order unless expressly modified below.
The effective date of this Task Order is 20_. -------~
Project Description. General Description of the work to be performed. May also include definitions if
helpful/appropriate.
• The Scope of Work is included as Attachment 1 to this Task Order.
• The Schedule is included as Attachment 2 to this Task Order.
• The Cost Estimate is included as Attachment 3 to this Task Order.
The authorized representatives of the parties have agreed to the terms of this Task Order by signing
below.
Fo r the City For Sound Transit
Signature Signature
Title Title
Date Date
Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form:
Name, City Attorney Name, Sound Transit Legal Counsel
Page 14
90
Task Order Attachment 1: Scope of Work.
Provide detailed information regarding City Services contemplated by each task order. Use "Not used"
for items not included in the scope for consistency among task orders.
A. Project Administration.
A.1. Coordination and Communication.
A.2 Management and Administration .
A.3 Agreements.
B. Design Review.
B.1. ors Review.
B.2. Formal Submittals.
C. Planning and Design Coordination.
C.l Station Access Improvements.
C.2 Transit Oriented Development (TOD).
C.3 Right-of-Way.
C.4 Joint Projects or External Project Coordination.
D. Permits and Approvals.
D.l. Establish Permit Process.
D.2. Permitting and Inspection Activities.
E. Other Work.
91
Page 15
Task Order Attachment 2: Estimated Schedule.
Task Start Month End Month
A.1. Coordination and Communication
A.2. Management and Administration
A.3 Agreements
B.1. OTS Review
B.2. Formal Submittals
C.1. Station Access
C.2. Transit Oriented Design
C.3. Right-of-Way
C.4. Joint Projects or Partnerships
D.1 Establish Permit Process
D.2. Permitting and Inspection Activities
Page 16
92
Task Order Attachment 3. Cost Estimate.
Contract contingency will be used per Sound Transit discretion and in accordance with signature
authority procedures.
Spreadsheet to be inserted.
93
Page 17
CITY SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY AND SOUND TRANSIT
FOR CITY SERVICES AND COSTS RELATED TO FEDERAL WAY LINK EXTENSION
PROJECT REVIEW AND PERMITTING
Task Order 1: Request for Proposals Preparation
This Task Order is issued under the City Services Agreement between the City of Federal Way
and Sound Transit for City Services and Fees related to Federal Way Link Extension Project Review and
Permitting dated 2017 . This Task Order establishes the scope, schedule, and budget for the
services provided by the City (Services) for the Federal Way Link Extension (FWLE) Project/Request for
Proposals (RFP) Preparation Phase. The City agrees to perform the Services in the manner set forth in
this Task Order. The terms and conditions of the City Services Agreement are incorporated into this Task
Order unless expressly modified below.
The effective date of this Task Order is------~ 20_.
Project Description. Work during the RFP Preparation phase will support the advertisement of a RFP for
a Design-Build Contractor to complete Final Design and Construct the FWLE Project. The RFP will contain
detailed Project Requirements that the Design-Build Contractor must meet. City involvement is needed
to provide input regarding codes, design and permitting prior to advertisement so that the Project
Requirements describe a project that complies with City codes and requirements.
• The Scope of Work is included as Attachment 1 to this Task Order.
• The Schedule is included as Attachment 2 to this Task Order.
• The Cost Estimate is included as Attachment 3 to this Task Order.
The authorized representatives of the parties have agreed to the terms of this Task Order by signing
below.
For t he City For Sound Transit
EJ Walsh, PE Signature
Deputy Public Works Director
Title
Date
Approved as to Form: Date
Approved as to Form:
J. Ryan Call, City Attorney
Name, Sound Transit Legal Counsel
94
Task Order 1 Attachment 1 -RFP Preparation: Scope of Work.
A. Project Administration.
A.l. Coordination and Communication. The key purpose of coordination and communication
during this phase is to identify and resolve key issues that need to be addressed in the Design-
Build RFP. Activities include participating in regularly scheduled (as needed weekly or bi-weekly)
project coordination meetings with Sound Transit and preparing for and/or following up on key
topics to advance resolution of issues for inclusion in the Project Requirements, Development
Agreement, and Transit Way Agreement. Also included, is identification of and discussion
regarding projects and/or proposals (e.g., utility, public works projects, or private development
projects) that present partnership opportunities or the potential to conflict with Sound Transit's
Projects.
Deliverables
Attend Sound Transit project coordination meetings.
A.2 Management and Administration. The key purpose of this task is to provide accurate and
timely project administration and production of quality work products to allow for Sound
Transit's design and construction ofthe project. This task will be continuous throughout the
duration of this phase and includes the City's work necessary to set up and participate in
meetings, design reviews, monthly or quarterly invoicing, monitoring and reporting progress,
preparing for future Project phases, and providing overall project coordination.
Deliverables
Provide monthly or quarterly invoicing and progress n~porting and on-going project
management activities.
A.3 Agreements. The key purpose of this task is to provide for timely approval of task orders and
other relevant agreements.
Deliverables
The City will work with Sound Transit to approve one or more letters of concurrence on key
design and/or code issues and to develop a final draft of the Development and Transit Way
Agreement.
B. Design Review .
8.1. Over the Shoulde r (OTS) Review. The key purpose of OTS review during this phase is to
ensure that the Project design and Project Requirements are consistent with City codes and
regulations. Close coordination, through the regularly scheduled meetings referenced in A.1
and additional meetings as needed, will be necessary to advance, review, and communicate
design developments with Project team members and to seek feedback or concurrence from the
City.
8.2. Formal Submittals. The RFP Preparation Phase includes two formal submittals; the Draft
RFP and Final RFP. As part of these submittals, City staff will review performance based and
95
prescriptive Project Requirements and associated reference drawings, as well as Development
Agreement and Transit Way Agreement language. City review of formal submittals is intended
to ensure that the Project design and Project Requirements are consistent with City codes and
regulations. Sound Transit will notify the City two (2) to four (4) weeks in advance of providing
design review packages to the City and the City will perform a review of the packages and return
unified and coordinated comments from all relevant City departments within thirty (30) days. If
for any reason the City requires additional review time the City will notify Sound Transit as soon
as possible.
Deliverables
• Submit consolidated and coordinated comments on the Draft RFP and Final RFP
submittals.
• The City will work with Sound Transit to approve a letter of concurrence on the Project
Requirements that are included in the Final RFP.
C. Plann i ng and Design Coordination.
C.l. St at ion Access Improvements. The purpose of coordination between the City and Sound
Transit during this phase is to support safe and convenient multi-modal access to the stations.
This will be accomplished through close coordination to develop project requirements for
station access improvements, such improvements may include, but not be limited to, a kiss and
ride, bus, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities that meet City codes and regulations.
Deliverables
• The City will work with Sound Transit to develop project requirements for station access
improvements.
C.2. Transit Oriented Development (TOD). The purpose of coordination between the City and
Sound Transit during this phase is to identify and incorporate TOD principles into Project
Requirements and/or the Development Agreement. City services will also support Sound Transit
in evaluating and planning for TOD around Sound Transit facilities and on Sound Transit owned
properties that will no longer be needed for future transit operations or maintenance after
construction is complete.
Deliverables
• The City will work with Sound Transit to develop project requirements and/or language
for the Development Agreement to incorporate TOD principles into the project.
C.3. Right -of-Way (ROW). The purpose of coordination between the City and Sound Transit
during this phase is to ensure that plans in the ROW are consistent with City codes and
regulations. Approval for Sound Transit to construct, operate and maintain the light rail within
the City's ROW will be through a separate Transit Way Agreement or similar standalone
agreement, which Sound Transit views as a key approval.
96
Deliverables
• The City will work with Sound Transit to develop a final draft of the Transit Way
Agreement.
C.4. Joint Projects o r Partne rships . The purpose of coordination on joint projects or partnerships
is to support collaboration on related City projects that Sound Transit may be contributing to as
mitigation or project enhancement, third party projects (private, WSDOT, utility) that require
Sound Transit-City collaboration, or additional project elements that need to be incorporated
into the Sound Transit Project. Said joint projects or partnerships will be further defined and
responsibilities outlined under separate task orders or agreements.
D. Perm its and Approvals .
D.l. Establish Permit Process . A key activity during this project phase is to jointly develop and
approve a permitting plan that supports the project schedule and provides the City with the
information and time needed to provide approvals. City and Sound Transit staff will work
together to establish mutually agreeable procedures and to streamline processes where
possible. These processes and procedures will be documented in the Project Requirements
and/or Development Agreement, as appropriate.
Deliverables
The City will work with Sound Transit to develop a mutually agreeable permitting plan and
relevant project requirements and/or language for the Development Agreement.
D.2. Permitti ng and Inspecti o n Activities . Not Used. Permitting and inspection activities will be
undertaken in a subsequent project phase and addressed through a later task order.
E. Other Work. Not used.
97
Task Order Attachment 2: Estimated Schedule.
Task Estimated Start Estimated End
Month Month
A.l. Coordination and Communication January 2017 December 2017
A.2. Management and Administration January 2017 December 2017
A.3 Agreements January 2017 December 2017
B.l. OTS Review January 2017 December 2017
B.2. Formal Submittals June 2017 November 2017
C.l. Station Access January 2017 December 2017
C.2. Transit Oriented Design January 2017 December 2017
C.3. Right-of-Way January 2017 December 2017
C.4 . Joint Projects or Partnerships TBD TBD
D.1 Establish Permit Process March 2017 December 2017
D.2. Permitting and Inspection Activities NA NA
98
Task Order Attachment 3: Cost Estimate.
Contract contingency will be used per Sound Transit discretion and in accordance with signature
authority procedures.
Labor 1 '1
Task Hours Rate 0/H Rate Total
Task 1.0 (TO 1 Ongoing Review and
Sections A, B.1, C, D) Coordination 992 $122.48 Incl. $121,500
Task 2.0 (TO 1
Section B.2) Formal Submittal Review 1,240 $122.48 Incl. $151,873
Subtotal 2,232 $273,373
Other Direct Costs (ODCs) $0
Contingency $27,337
Total Estimated
Cost $300,710
(1) Weighted average labor rates, actual reimbursement is based on applicable hourly rate per
section 6.1 of the City Services Agreement.
99