Planning Commission PKT 02-21-2018City of Federal Way
PLANNING COMMISSION
February 21, 2018 City Hall
6:30 p.m. Council Chambers
AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
February 7, 2018
4. AUDIENCE COMMENT — UNRELATED To COMMISSION BUSINESS
5. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
6. COMMISSION BUSINESS
• City Center Access Study, Desiree Winkler, Deputy Public Works
Director/Streets Systems Manager
• Continued Discussion on the Docket Process
7. ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
8. ADJOURN
Commissioners
Wayne Carlson, Chair
Tom Medhurst
Lawson Bronson, Vice -Chair
Hope Elder
Dawn Meader McCausland
Tim O Neil
Diana Noble-Gulliford
Anthony Murrietta, Alternate
Dale Couture, Alternate
KAPIa ing Commission\2018\Agenda\Agenda 02-21.18. doc
City Staff
Robert "Doc" Hansen, Planning Manager
Margaret Clark, Principal Planner
E. Tina Piety, Administrative Assistant
253-835-2601
W W NI, citrof4'dY.ralway. com
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
PLANNING COMMISSION
February 7, 2018 City Hall
6:30 p.m. City Council Chambers
MEETING MINUTES
Commissioners present: Lawson Bronson, Tom Medhurst, Wayne Carlson, Hope Elder, Diana Noble-
Gulliford, Tim O'Neil, Dawn Meader McCausland, Anthony Murrietta, and Dale Couture. Commissioners
absent: none. City Staff present: Planning Manager Robert "Doc" Hansen, Principal Planner Margaret
Clark, Deputy City Attorney Mark Orthmann, and Administrative Assistant Tina Piety.
CALL TO ORDER
Chair Bronson called the meeting to order at 6:30 P.m.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
The minutes of November 15, 2017, and January 17, 2018, were approved as presented.
AUDIENCE COMMENT
None
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Planning Manager Hansen announced that at last night's LUTC meeting, they moved to forward the
proposed amendments to Title 19 (incuding the addition of wineries, etc.) with one change. LUTC
recommended striking the word "micro" (and thereby having no cap to the amount of liquid produced) in
commercial zones. He also announced that the Community Development Department is currently going
through a Lean exercise, with the intent of improving our permitting process. Some of the proposals for
this exercise may need development regulation amendments and if so, will come before the Commission.
Commisisoner Noble-Gulliford asked if the entire city is going through this Lean process. Manager
Hansen replied that at this time it is only CD.
COMMISSION BUSINESS
Elections
Vice -Chair Medurst nominated Commissioner Carlson for Chair. Commissioner Carlson accepted the
nomination. Vice -Chair Medurst nominated Chair Bronson for Vice -Chair. Chair Bronson accepted the
nomination. Voting was held for Chair and Commissioner Carlson was uninamously voted in as Chair.
Voting was held for Vice- Chair and Chair Bronson was uninamously voted in as Vice -Chair. Current
Chair Bronson handed the gavel over to new Chair Carlson, who chaired the remander of the meeting.
KAPlanning CommissionM16\Meeting Summary 02.07.18.doc
Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 February 7, 2018
Examine the process to select items to be considered on the docket.
Planning Manager Hansen delivered the staff presentation. He went over the major tasks on the Planning
Commission Work Program and summarized the proposed docket items. There was discussion about the
timeline for when the City Council would hold its selection process and thereby, when docketed items
would considered. Chair Carlson asked staff to prepare Gnatt charts of the current process and any
proposed process. The charts should point out all the decision points and how the process fits together.
Commissioner Meader McCausland asked how much time would holding a public information meeting
add to the staff's workload. Manager Hansen replied that it would add time (how much would depend on
how many docket items) because staff would have to prepare for the meeting by researching the docketed
items sooner than done currently. Chair Carlson stated that some communities have dockets every other
year; has the staff considered this? Manager Hansen replied staff has considered it. He noted that if the
city receives a large number of proposed docket items, staff can suggest the City Council limit the number
considered in that year.
ADDITIONAL BUSINESS
None
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 P.M.
KAPlanning Commission\2016Weeting Summary 02-07-18.doe
41k
10'::tt
CITY OF ter!
Federal Way
February 15, 2018
Department of Communitxr Development
33325 8 Avenue South
Federal Way, WA 98003
253-835-2601 — Fax: 253-835-2609
wwwbtyoffederalway.com
MEMORANDUM
To: Chair Wayne Carlson and Federal Way Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Manager Robert "Doc" Hansen
RE: Gantt Chart for Continued Discussion on the Docket Process
Please find attached a simple Gantt chart showing the differences between the Docket process requiring a
hearing for the Council to choose the items to be considered, and a process where the Council choses the
docket items administratively. The upper graph simply shows the process that is being suggested with an
administrative determination of items to be heard by the Planning Commission. The lower graph shows
the process as it currently exists. The light brown bars are provided to illustrate the differences between
the two processes. The main differences are
• The council administrative decision is done earlier and does not require a public notice. It would be
conducted as "Council Business," and staff time for preparation would be minimal. Under the current
process, the code requires us to prepare rapidly after the first of the year for a hearing, posting the public
hearing, providing a 300 -foot notice, and holding an LUTC meeting before it's taken to the Council.
• The public discussion under the suggested process could occur earlier than under the existing process,
simply because staff is dedicating their time towards the preparation and research of the items that were
selected for consideration, rather than preparing for a hearing before the public discussion and Planning
Commission hearing.
• Under the suggested process, SEPA will be completed earlier and will allow more flexibility in meeting
the scheduled Planning Commission hearing (there are 35 days necessary between threshold
determination and public hearing).
• Only two public notices are necessary for the suggested process. The additional public hearing in the
existing process places an additional requirement for public notice, which consumes additional staff time.
While the lower graph represents the current process, at least one amendment is needed to assure that the 60 -
day Department of Commerce comment period is started before the end of the Planning Commission hearing.
I will present this and answer any questions at our meeting on the 21St
d'
N
0
Q
❑_
Q
H
J
O
3
w
E
o
c
N
❑
E J
u
O
U-1
U
ODC
CL
c
o
E
C
U
❑
m
tw
2
a.
I
v
O
E
xC
C
d
7
O
`o
v
u
E!
o
a
u_
m
E
N
U
U
a
Y
Q
d
U
O
Q
LU
N
0
3
m
v
c
-
>
v
v
x
lu
_
O
0
to
o
u
H
J
O
3