2010-05-18 HEX# 10-004 Exhibit MCITY OF
L- Federal Way
November 10, 2009
CITY HALL
v
33325 8th Avenue South
Mailing Address: PO Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063 -9718
(253) 835-7000
www. cityoffederalwa ycorn
Heidi Swartz via e-mail: hpswartz@comcast_net
Swartz Company
5724 30`h Avenue
Seattle, WA 98105
RE: FILE #08-105555-UP; VILLAGE GREEN PHASE It DtsCUSSION
Dear Ms_ Swartz:
This letter is prepared in response to your August 3, 2009, Response to the January 16, 2009 Request for
Additional Information for the Village Green Phase II project. Specific responses to sections on Process
IV timeline and Affordable Housing are provided.'
THE PROCESS IV THAELINE
Your August 3, 2009, response memo stated:
"It is understood by the applicant that the time frame for a new approval would begin effective
with the Hearing Examiner's decision date, whenever that might occur. "
"Request for additional tinge due to proLect construction phasing.
The applicant's team met on June 77, -7009. with Public Works Director Marwan Salloum, and
numerous City staff members_ It was agreed between all present that City staff would support a
S+S decision with project final Certificate of Occupancys in 2021- This is a S year Hearing
Examiners Approval with a one-time 5-year extension. The 5-year extension would be subject to
application of the then current traffic and drainage standards for what ever construction remains
at that time_ A TIR Addendum is included, which briefly explains how the project can conform to
the anticipated adoption of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The Hearing
Examiner Decision is estimated at late 2009 or early 2010_ City staff is to provide traffic and
drainage language in second round comments and language is to be agreed upon by applicant
and City prior to the Hearing Examiner Decision_ "
Staff Response - Following are comments from the Public Works Development Services and Public
Works Traffic Department on the additional time request.
A. Storm Drainage Requirements"'- Public Works Development Services supports a five-year extension
to the Village Green Phase 11 Process 1V application based on the following water quality discussion
and only if the following condition is imposed:
' Previous comments on other items were forwarded in a September 24, 2009 letter_
2 As of this date, the project is subject to the requirements. of the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual and City
Addendum to the manual (1998 KCS WDM)_
EXHIBI ` M-m.-Nuo
PAGE l OFc#
GIs, su-artz
N'UVember 10, 200k)
Page 2
Water Ouality - Water quality shall be provided for the entire subject (Village Green) site as defined
by City Code. Currently, the required level of water quality treatment is per the Resource Stream
Protection Menu of the 1998 KCSWDM. Prior to Public Works recommending approval of Use
Process IV application, the plans shall show the proposed water quality treatment facility to be
utilized to --treat" the subject site-3 Water quantity ("detention/retention") shall be required for the
new buildings (currently identified as Buildings F, G, H, 1, and J) and other new impervious areas
associated with those buildings_ The current plans and engineering calculations show that the existing
detention facility can be modified to accommodate water quantity for the subject site -
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CONDMON OF APPRQVAL.
If the Villa c Green Phase 11 project is not M ly constructed or substantial( co [etc within the City
code -based five- ear timeline anted under Process IV A royal then the a licant shall deli n the
storm draina e s stern to conform to those drainage design requirements and standards ad fed b
the Cityaft the date that the first buildingpermit iicatio s for the Phase II roject is determined
to be coLnplete. This condition lies to agy extension beyond the five year timeline anted under
Process IV ursuant to Federal Way Revised Code F W RG 19-15.110,
B. Street MModi flcation - In addition to the drainage discussion, the following street modification
comments from Public Works Development Services are applicable. On January 14, 2009, the City
granted a street modification approval to modify roadway requirements along SW 356`h Street and I"
Avenue South (flle #08-105172-SM)_ The modification expires on January 14, 2010_ This letter
confirms that the January 14, 2009 '-street modification approval" to not require road improvements
on SW 356`h Street and V Avenue South shall remain valid through the. life. of Phacp rr annl;ratinr.
The eleven feet of additional right-of-way to be deeded to the City along the south property line (SW
3561h Street), and the four feet of additional right-of-way to be deeded along the east property line (13'
Avenue South) will be required at the time of the first building permit issuance.
C. Traffic Division - After evaluating the applicant's request, reviewing the Federal Way Revised Code
(FWRC) pertaining to Concurrency, as well as past direction provided by the City Council, the Public
Works Traffic Division is supportive of the applicant's request for "5+5" only based on the following
discussion and only if the following conditions are imposed:
Concurrency - Currently, under FWRC 19-90.100, Concurrency permits are tied to the underlying
land use decision as granted by the Hearing Examiner under the Process IV land use process.
Concurrency/traffic mitigation conditions are based on the current adopted Six -Year Transportation
Improvement Plan (TIP). The City's Six -Year TIP ranges only from years 2010 to 2015. Current
forecasts do show some failing intersections by 2012_
If a five year extension were granted, that extension could vest the development's trips up to ten years
(five initial years plus another five years), which is beyond the adopted 2010 to 2015 TIP time range
and beyond the City's ability to -retain" the identified traffic mitigation. Furthermore, since
Concurrency is on a `first come, first serve" basis, reserving the trips for those ten years could
potentially create level of service (LOS) problems for other future developments.
In order to address this, the Traffic Division staff proposes that the opening year on the Concurrency
application for the Village Green Phase It project be moved from year 2016 to 2011 in order to pass
3 Please be advised that this letter does not respond to the October 2l, 2009 letter from Duncanson Company, Inc.
08-105555
Doc 10 >M6
EXHIRITJD�
QA 0 _,4
vts. S«artz
November 10. 2009
Page 3
the concurrency test_ This would vest the development's trips to 2016 ' With this scenario, the traffic
division would recommend that the Hearing Examiner support a five-year extension to the Process IV
decision only if the following conditions are imposed:
TRAFFIC DIVISION CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
I_ If any building permits for the Village Green Phase It project have not been issued within the
code -based five-year timeline g4nted under Process IV A nova! the a licant shall
fund preparation of a new concurrency analysis_ This analy�is Hurst demonstrate that addeqqate
capacity for the unbuilt portions of the project still exists for the remainder of the project- In
the event that therc. is not adequate cLipacity the applicant shall be required to construct
whatever mitigation measures are necessary to obtain Level of Service (LOS) Eat an failin
intersection.
2. If any building_ permits for the Village Green Phase fl project have not been issued within the
City code -based five-year timeline granted_ under Process 1V Approval, the applicant shall
tnake payment of applicable transportation feeslconcmTency fees that are in effect at the
subsequent building permit issuance associated with any extension.
D. nesting - At the time the Process fV application was determined to be complete, the zoning code
stated that a project is considered to be vested to those codes in effect at the tune that land use
approval is granted.' As a result of this code amendment, ordinance 09-625, the Village Green Phase
It project is vested to those codes in effect at the time of complete application, which in this case is
December 20, 2008.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Your August 3, 2009, response memo stated:
"The affordable rate (monthly rent) is tied to King County's Median income_ The County sets income
rates annually based on statistics and household size. Therefore, the "affordable rate " will adjust or
float each year based on King County statistics and will not be "set " prior to final inspection and
issuance of certificate of occupancy_ Per the letter dated December 17, 2008. from Heidi Swartz to
Deb Barker, Cottages West affordable units will be provided in the un-built portion of Village Green
Phase ll_ "
Staff Response: Your August 3, 2009, letter notes that Phase If of the Village Green housing will provide
affordable housing required for the Village Green site. You have verbally indicated that as a matter of
policy, the company extends rental contracts when residents have run out of funds_ These are subsidized
levels that are equivalent to affordable housing rates. FWRC 19.110.010 requires that �An agreement in a
form approved by the city must be recorded with King County Department of Elections and Records
requiring affordable dwelling units which are provided under the provisions of this section to remain as
affordable housing for the life of the project. This agreement shall be a covenant running with the land,
binding on the assigns, heirs and successors of the applicant.'
In order to ensure that your company policy will satisfy FWRC affordable housing requirements, please
provide a sample of a written agreement that documents that affordable housing is provided at Village
a 2011 + 5 years is 2016.
5 Per the March 16, 2009, letter regarding issues around land use approval, vesting, and a right- of -way modification request_
OS-105555
PAGE-1-OF
JIs S%vartz.
November 10. 2009
Page 4
Green in ratios required by the FWRC for the life of the project. This agreement would be reviewed by
the City Attontey for compliance with the affordable housing goals and requirements of the FWRC.
S trnIAtARY
In summary, the Village Green Phase II project is vested to codes in effect at the date of complete
application or December 20, 2008. The right-of-way modification decision of January 14, 2009, is
extended for the life of this project with this letter_ The City will recommend that the Hearing Examiner
extend the Process IV approval for five years beyond the five year construction approval timeline, for a
total of no more than ten years, subject to the following conditions_
If any building permits for the Village Green Phase 11 project have not been issued within the City
code -based five-year timeline granted under Process IV Approval, the applicant shall fund
preparation of a new concurrency analysis. This analysis must demonstrate that adequate capacity for
the unbuilt portions of the project still exists for the remainder of the project_ In the event that there is
not adequate capacity, the applicant shall be required to construct whatever mitigation measures are
necessary to obtain Level of Service (LOS) E at any failing intersection.
2_ If any building permits for the Village Green Phase II project have not been issued within the City
code -based five-year timeline granted under Process IV Approval, the applicant shall make payment
of applicable transportation fees/concurrency fees that are in effect at the subsequent building permit
issuancc assoctatcd with any extetsion_
If the Village Green Phase It project is not fully constructed or substantially complete within the City
code -based five-year timeline granted under Process IV Approval, then the applicant shall design the
storm drainage system to conform to those drainage design requirements and standards adopted by
the City on the date that the first building permit application(s) for the Phase It project is determined
to be complete. This condition applies to any extension beyond the five-year timeline granted under
Process IV pursuant to FWRC 19.15- l 10-
Please do not hesitate to contact me at 253-835-2642 or via e-mail at deb_barker@cityoffederalway.com if
you have any questions about this letter. Kevin Peterson in Public Works Development Services can be
reached at 253-835-2734 and Soma Chattopadhyay in the Public Works Traffic Division can be reached
at 253-835-2745.
Sincerely,
Deb Barker
Senior Planner
c: Greg Fewins, Director of Community Development Services
Cary Roe, Director of Public Works/EOC,/Parks
Ken Miller, Deputy Director of Public Works
Marwan Sailoum, Deputy Director of Public Works
Rick Perez, City Traffic Engineer
Isaac Conlen, Planning Manager
Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer
Soma Chattopadhyay, Traffic Analyst
08-105555
� Doc I D 51836
EX &qp ITIT
-m-
PAGE 14 F