07-20-2021 Woodbridge Building BWoodbridge Building "B"
Follow -Up
July zo, 2021
City Council Meeting
9
Follow -Up to 7-6-21 Council Meeting
Public comment was provided at the July 6, 2021 City Council meeting
regarding the Woodbridge Building "B" land use decision.
Responses are being provided to questions raised at that meeting.
Federal Way
Question #i
* Public Comment: Why did the city not include in its published land use
decision more up to date DAH P findings submitted to the city during the
public comment period? The decision should have included I RG's updated
Built Environment Survey in which the DAH P agreed there were adverse
effects to the historic district dated October 1 5th.
* Response: The N H PA Section 1 o6 process is a separate, federal regulatory
procedure independent of the city's local project permit review framework.
The Section 1o6 process is not within the city's control, and it contains
standards that are different from those implicated in this Process III decision.
The city acknowledges that the outcome of the N H PA Section 1o6 process
may result in mitigation measures (either mandatory and/or voluntary) that
are separate from and in addition to any requirements imposed through the
city's review of the applicant's proposal.
- .1
Federal Way
Question#2
Public Comment: Throughout the decision there are numerous conditions
that state certain things must be met before the building permit is issued.
How will the public know if the applicant has met the requirements and/or if
the city has reviewed each but requires further analysis prior to approval?
* Response: Conditions of approval are common. It is a regular part of city
staff's responsibility to review projects for code compliance and to ensure
any conditions of approval are met pursuant to the timeframe stated in the
condition. If there is a question about a particular condition please contact
city staff.
F
Federal Way
Question #3
Public Comment: Clarification was requested regarding a condition of
approval related to pavement improvement --does it involve road widening?
Response: Condition 27 is strictly to address construction of the pavement to
support the additional truck loading. No widening is contemplated between
SR 18 and the driveway serving Buildings A and B. Similarly, the language
regarding pavement mitigation as far north as S 32oth Street does not
contemplate additional widening, other than frontage improvements that
may be required as part of the proposed warehouse on the Tech Center site.
The Comprehensive Plan does indicate a planned widenin to a width
consistent with that south of the Headquarters driveway 4-5 lanes with bike
lanes and sidewalks) between the Headquarters driveway and S 336th
Street, but there is no indication at this time of when or by whom that would
be constructed.
- .1
Federal Way