Loading...
Council PKT 07-06-1999 Special/RegularCI T Y CO UNCIL MEE TING AGENDA C O UNCIL MEMBERS Ron Gintz, Mayor Jeanne Burbidge Jack Dovey Mary Gates Linda Kochmar Michael Park Phil Watkins City Manager Kenneth E. Nyberg II. III. II. III. IV. AGENDA FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers - City Hall July 6, 1999 (www. ci.federal-way, wa. us) SPECIAL SESSION - 4:30 PM CALL MEETING TO ORDER ETHICS BOARD & DIVERSITY COMMISSION INTERVIEWS ADJOURNMENT REGULAR MEE~G - 7:00 PM CALL MEETING TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE PRESENTATIONS a. SPIRIT Award/Month of July b. Proclamation/Tom Vander Ark Day c. Emerging Issues CITIZEN COMMENT PLEASE COMPLETE THE PINK SLIP & PRESENT TO THE DEPUTY CLERK PRIOR TO SPEAKING. Citizens may address City Council at this time. When recognized by the Mayor, please come forward to the podium, a~just the microphone to proper height, and state your name and address for the record. PLEASE LIMIT YOUR REMARKS TO THREE O) MINUTES. The Mayor may interrupt citizen corntnents that continue too long, relate negatively to other individuals, or are otherwise inappropriate. ~ over please . . . V. CONSENT AGENDA (Items listed below have been previously reviewed by a Council Committee of three members and brought before full Council for approval; all items will be enacted by one motion; individual items may b~ removed by a Councilmember for separate discussion and subsequent motion.) mo Minutes/June 15, 1999 Regular Meeting Voucher/July 6, 1999 Monthly Financial Report/May 1999 Soroptimist Flag Display Blueberry_ Farm Operation CDBG & HOME Agreements/2000-02 Twin Lakes/Bfigadoon Neighborhood Traffic Safety Task Force Recommendations VI. PUBLIC HEARING VII. 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update/Selection Process - Staff Presentation - Citizen Comment - City Council Deliberation CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS VIII. me Ethics Board Appointment Diversity Commission Appointments INTRODUCTION ORDINANCE IX. Council Bill #226/Courtyard Village Development Agreement AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH LAWRENCE H. DRAPER AND YEN, CHEN, CHANG & ASSOCIATES. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Ko CITY MANAGER REPORT ADJOURNMENT ** THE COUNCIL MAY ADD AND TAKE ACTION ONDTHER ITEMS NOTLISTED ON THE AGENDA ** PROCLAMATION WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Federal Way, Washington, wishes to recognize Tom Vander Ark, Superintendent of the Federal Way Public Schools, for his dedication and professionalism as an outstanding community leader; and WHEREAS, Tom Vander Ark's passion for learning excellence and forward thinking during his tenure as Superintendent brought our schools into the national forefront by implementing literacy, reading and other campaigns; and WHEREAS, Tom Vander Ark has caused his innovative ideas to become a reality, guaranteeing the district's students a lifelong learning experience and higher academic standard,, and WHEREAS, Tom Vander Ark was instrumental in establishing the Advancing Leadership Program, as well as pioneering various partnerships among the city, schools and business community; NOW, THEREFORE, we, the City Council of the City of Federal Way do hereby proclaim June 22, 1999, as "Tom Vander Ark Day" in the City of Federal Way, Washington, in recognition ofhis dedication and "flair" as Superintendent of the Federal Way Public Schools for the past five years. DATED effective the 6th day of July, 1999. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY n Gintz~ Mayor ~ ,~ Michad P~t~/~put~Mayor ?~. eanne Burbidge, Councilme~ber ~k~ Dovey, Co~,mber ~ Ma,,~Gate, s~Couticilmember l. Znda Kochmar, Ctiuncilmember Phil Watkin~, Councilmember MEETING DATE: July 6, 1999 ITEM# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA ITEM CATEGORY: ~X CONSENT ORDINANCE BUSINESS HEARING FYI RESOLUTION STAFF REPORT PROCLAMATION STUDY SESSION OTHER BUDGET IMPACT: Amount Budgeted: $ N/A Expenditure Amt: $ N/A Contingency Reqd: SN/A ATTACHMENTS: Minutes of June 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting. SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: Official City Council Meeting Minutes for Permanent Record Pursuant to RCW Requirements. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: N/A CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: Approve Official Minutes APPROVED FOR INCLUSION IN COUNCIL PACKET: (BELOW TO BE COMPLE~D BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION COUNCIL BILL # 1st Reading Enactment Reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # I:\COVERCC-5/14/96 DRAFT FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting June 15, 1999 - 7:~ PM MINUTES CALL MEETING TO ORDER Deputy Mayor Park called the meeting to order at 7:05 PM, excused Mayor Gintz, and announced City Manager Kenneth Nyberg would not be present this evening. Council Present: Deputy Mayor Park, Councilmembers Burbidge, Dovey, Gates, Kochmar and Watkins. Staff Present: Deputy City Manager Philip Keightley, City Attorney Londi Lindell, City Clerk Chris Green, Deputy City Clerk Laura Ulanowski, and Department Directors. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Girl Scout Troop 1865 led the Pledge of Allegiance. me PRESENTATIONS Planning ¢ommis$i0n Introduction/Certificate Councilmember Watldns introduced and presented a certificate to Hope Elder as a regular member of the Planning Commission. .Economic Development Update - Debra Coates updated Council on various economic development issues. Ms. Coates stated the City has received two qualifying responses from landscape architects regarding the International District; the sign program is approaching the deadline and more businesses are contacting her regarding compliance; the next Retail Forum is scheduled for 11:30 AM on June 29~ at Borders Books and Ms Coates will be conducting semi-annual updates of service groups. Emerging Issues - Deputy City Manager Philip Keightley announced there would be no emerging issues report. IV. CITIZEN COMMENT Barbara Reid, opposed to the Character City Initiative citing separation of church and state. Liz Conner, spoke in support of the Character City Initiative. David Larson, steering committee member, stated he supports the principals behind the Character City Council Regular Meeting June 15, 1999 - Page 2 City Initiative but asked Council to table the decision until the steering committee had a chance to report back. Bill Linehan, spoke in support of the Character City Initiative and encouraged Council to table the decision until the steering committee had a report. Peggy LaPorte, supports he Character City Initiative. Lisa Lewis, spoke in opposition of the Character City Initiative stating she has researched the organization and is disturbed by the program. Ms. Lewis asked Council to carefully research the program and it's founder. CONSENT AGENDA ao Co Minutes/June 1. 1999 Regular Meeting - Approved Ouadrant/Tract 17 (Elley) Annexation/Acceptance of 10% Intention to Petition - Approved Council Bill #224/Tacoma Public Utilities Non-Exclusive Franchise/ Enactment Ordinance - Approved Ordinance It 99-344 Council Bill #225/1999-2000 Capital Facility Plan Budget Adjustment/ Enactment Ordinance - Approved Ordinance Il 99-345 21st Ave SW & SW 334a' St Traffic Signal & Sidewalk Improvements/Bid Award - Approved SeaTac Mall Area Drainage System Improvement Public Works Trust Fund (PWTF} Construction Loan - Approved So 312~ St Access Management/West of Pacific Highway So - Approved COUNCILMEMBER GATES MOVED APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. COUNCILMEMBER DOVEY SECOND. Councilmember Kochmar pulled Consent Item (d) - Council Bill 225/1999-2000 Capital Facility Plan Budget Adjustment. The motion to approve Consent Items (a), (b), (c), (e), (f) and (g) carried as follows: Burbidge yes Dovey yes Gates yes Gintz absent Kochmar yes Park yes Watkins yes Consent Item (d) - Councilmember Kochmar asked that the $75,000 set-aside for the Economic Development Coordinator be discussed at committee level. COUNCILMEMBER GATES MOVED APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT ITEM (D). COUNCILMEMBER DOVEY SECOND. Deputy Mayor Park asked for a roll call vote. City Council Regular Meeting June 15, 1999 - Page 3 Councilmember Watkins called for point of order asking why the Deputy Mayor was calling for a roll call vote and asked if it followed Council Procedures. City Attorney Londi Lindell responded that any member of Council could ask for a roll call vote. Councilmember Dovey then asked for a roll call vote on Consent Item (d). The motion passed 4-2 as follows: Burbidge yes Dovey yes Gates yes Gintz absent Kochmar no Park yes Watkins no VI. CITY COUNCIL BUSINESS Lakehaven Utility District Comprehensive Water System Plan/Resolution - Approved Resolution # 99-301 Public Works Director Cary Roe asked Council to extend the time needed to review the Lakehaven Utility District Comprehensive Water System Plan for another 55 days and stated this extension fell within state statute granting up to 90 days to review the plan. COUNCIl.MEMBER DOVEY MOVED ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION EXTENDING THE TIME TO ADOPT THE WATER SYSTEM PLAN BY 55 DAYS. COUNCILMEMBER BURBIDGE SECOND. Councilmember Kochmar recused herself from the vote as she works for Lakehaven Utility District. The motion carded 5-0 as follows: Burbidge yes Dovey yes Gates yes Gintz absent Kochmar rex:used Park yes Watkins yes b. Community of Character - Postponed to August 3, 1999 MOTION BY COUNCILMEMBER BURBIDGE TO POSTPONE THE ISSUE TO THE AUGUST 3, 1999 CITY COUNCIL MEETING ALLOWING THE STEERING COMMITTEE TIME TO REPORT TO COUNCIL. COUNCILMEMBER DOVEY SECOND. Councilmember Watldns asked the City Attorney if meetings of the Steering Committee will be open to the public. City Council Regular Meeting June 15, 1999 - Page 4 City Attorney Londi Lindell stated the Steering Committee is not a Council Committee, it is a group of volunteers/citizens, and therefore not subject to the public disclosure act. Ms. Lindell further stated that it was appropriate for the Committee, as with any other citizen group, to address the Council during public comment. Ms Lindell also stated city facilities can be used for a public forum. The motion carried as follows: Burbidge yes Dovey yes Gates yes Gintz absent Kochmar yes Park yes Watkins yes VII. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS Councilmember Dovey stated the next meeting of the Parks/Recreation/Human Services/Public Safety Committee is scheduled for June 28, 1999 at noon. Councilmember Watkins stated the next meeting of the Land Use/Transportation Committee will be held on July 7, 1999 at 5:30 PM (rescheduled due to holiday), and stated he and School Board Member Joel Marks taped a Character City audio discussion for KJR radio and King AM public affairs programming which will air in the future. Councilmember Burbidge stated she attended a South King County Area Transit Board Meeting today. Councilmember Kochmar stated the Airport Communities Coalition will meet on June 16, 1999 and praised the synchronized swimming event held at the Aquatic Center on June 11-13, and asked if there was interest in a community song to express community pride. Councilmember Gates stated the next meeting of the Finance/Economic Development/Regional Affairs Committee has been rescheduled for June 29, 1999 at noon and stated she would attend a South West King County Visions 2000 meeting tomorrow. Deputy Mayor Park stated he attended a Private Industry Council meeting on June 8, 1999 and the City Manager Search Committee will meet on June 17, 1999 at 7:30 AM to review the report by the Mercer Group. VIII. CITY MANAGER REPORT Deputy City Manager Philip Keightley stated City Manager Kenneth Nyberg will be out of the office next week but will be available by phone; extended his thanks to Finance Director Iwen Wang and the Management Services Division stating for the 5~h year in a row the State Auditor found no findings against the City; and announced the Red, White & Blues Festival will take place on July 4, 1999 at Celebration Park. City Council Regular Meeting June 15, 1999 = Page 5 IX. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business before the Federal Way City Council, Deputy Mayor Park adjourned the regular meeting at 8:03 PM. Laura Ulanowski, Deputy City Clerk MEETING DATE' July. 6, 1999 ITEM# L~ ) CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT: VOUCHER CATEGORY: BUDGET IMPACT: X CONSENT ORDINANCE BUSINESS HEARING FYI RESOLUTION STAFF REPORT PROCLAMATION STUDY SESSION OTHER Amount Budgeted: $1,944,672.40 Expenditure Amt: $1,944,672.40 Contingency Reqd: ATTACHMENTS: VOUCHER LIST SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: I, the undersigned, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the materials have been furnished, the services · endered, or the labor performed as described herein and that the claims are just and due obligations against the City of F. edera~W~ash~; an~.at I am authorized to authenticate and certify to. said claims. ....... u...~..n...ag ....~-(~~... ............................................................................ ~ .~_~ ': '~ ............. ~ ................... :'~ .............. ~-.-- ...5~.~...r.~..~.e...~.t.t...a.s..h...e..d...~..°.us..h..~..~.ur~.t...t.s.~..c.....w.....~..2......2..~. .............................................................................................. .......................................... CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: ~ f~ ~,ro~ ~/o~c I.e ~ ............................................................................................................................................................................. ~ ....................... ....... ESz'~'"~::~ .............. APPROVED FOR INCLUSION IN COUNCIL PACKET: " (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION COUNCIL BILL # ORDINANCE # FIRST READING ENACTMENT READ RESOLUTION # U o o o 0 0 0 0 ~J > 0 > 0 0 o o o o o o o E~ O 0 Z 0 0 oo o 0 o o o 0 o o o o 0 U o 0 r-~ H 0 > 0 q~ ~0~00000 ~00~000~ ~OUO00~O0000000000 ~ oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo co ~ co% m r~ tn u~ 0 Le 0 tn 0 o o> o> o::> 0 0 U 0 0 > o 0 > 0 Q 0 Z < coJ2 bq 0 HH~~H HH~~H ~HHHHHH~ '~H~HH~ 0~00~~0000000~ 0000000000000000000 000.0000000000000000 0 0 0 > 0 Z m ~ 0 m U HZ o H HO <0 0 0 e >0 ~O :~ 0 o o t~ 0 ~ O u~ 0 o> U ~ 0 ~ U UO o o 0 {J 0 0 > H 0 :::> u o o o ooo ooo 0 ~:0~ H Hr.~ 000 000 000 0 0 U U ~ ~.. ~.. ~.. O0 O0 0 O UH O~ 0~1 m~ o 0 0 DO n,0 ~.U H H ~.q cq cq ~o © ~ ~ 0 u~ O ~ 0 ~ C uq 0 ~ 0 ~ C ~O 0 - U 0 o o o o cq u u~ 0 o cot~ u~ 0 o> U ooo · ooo 0 0 u o o Z ,< ,<0 ~J..~ ~ 0 o:> co~,~ 040 ~ O o."> o~> {JO U 0 O ~J :> 0 0 ~0 0 0 ~:O ~O ZO U 0 o 0 > 0 u o ~ 0 ~ 0 o;:> Z ~ 0 0 Z 0 r~. 0 U Z ~:>, 0>-, 0 r~l 0 Zr..) mU 0 tn 0 o;:> H C: o o ~J o > 0 (D [) o 0 H ~ rtl 0 H ~>~ z~ o ~ 0 zm ~q 0 z o U U ~.. ~o :>~ oo 0~o~ oo oo oral ~o u z x ~ 0 O~ o ~ 0 ch 0 {J 0 E ,< 0 > ¼ 0 ;> Q m m o~ :> mm [ml ,-I tnt'~ O0 n.~. '7. *- DO H D 0 m u 0 H ~-~ 0 o ¢'- tn 0 cn 0 o;> ©> HH 000 ~0o ooo ooo 0 Q nl n, U II II .U I~ 0 IE II 0 Ii II rj > H ro 0 > U r..j 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ cq 0 ~U c~ U 0 u U 0 > Ln 0 Lq 0 t,a C 0 0 ~ 0 uq 0 u~. 0 ~q 0 o ::> © :> o:> o > o:> o:> o~ o > ~U ~0 ~0 ~0 o> o> Lq C uq 0 u~ 0 o> o> o~ k~ co,z:; 04 L) u~ 0 o> ;4. 0 {J U {J 0 > H 0 q~ ~U ~ ~ 0 o oo o o oo ~ 0 ~ U O~ · <-- ~-. Z.- ~ ~ O~ O0 ~0 ~0 m Z o Z DO ~d o ~3 · 0 un O o o · 0 0 H > H 0 > 0 uno o 0 [-~ rj (9 -,H 0 0 m [j . ~ U ~ ~ :> 0 0 ,~ (D 0 ~H ~O {'~ 0 ~U ~U ~O ~ ~L; ~L~ ~C ~U ~ ~U ~U ~O ~U ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ O ~ O un O -u~ 3 uq 0 J 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 o~ o> o> o> o> o> o> o~ o> o> o> o> 0 .-~ fl) U 0 > H 0 o> o> o? o> o> o> ~ 0 o> 0 E 0 I~ II (D o~,< :> .-.] .~ H rjr,. ..,C:: ~ (JO rj ~ 0 ~ , :::, H Ct 0 ?-4 U CID (ND {N D ,% D {ND ,--ID Cq U ex1 U {ND {ND ~ U ~ U ~ U ~ U ~ D ~ U ~ 0 ~ 0 a~ C -- 0 unO u~ 0 ~ O. ~ 0 unO ~ 0 ~ 0 unO m 0 m 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 .-~ {J (J II II II (..) 0 > H 0 ~3 0 0 0 0 0 Z <0 rod O~ o o o o o o Uo 0 (J < r. tl n. o o U r~ 0 O0 O 0 0 Z 0 ~ o 0 U~ O~ 0-- 0" 0-. DO ~0 0 OOZ 0~0 H~ ~ O~ o ;:> [JO ~O 0 < L9 Z 0 n. o < c~ 0 o o o o 0 o o >., ~ .. 'ID o ~ 9~U ~U ~U ~U ~0 ~U =~0 ~0 ~0 ~0 ~0 ~0 o> o> o> o> o> o> 0 0 ~ 0 ~ ~ H ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -- -- 0 ~ o ~ o o ~o ~o ~o ~o OO -o Uu zo -u ou zu ~o Zo ~u ~u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o ~ ~c ~ O~ O~ H~ ~ ~ ~ 040 040 CqL' CXU 6'40 O4U 040 C40 6'40 EMU ~ O ~ 0 ' ' u~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ O~ ~ 0 ~ O ~ 0 ~0 ~0 ~0 ~0 ~0 ~0 o~ o~ o~ o~ o~ o~ ~ ~ o o ~ ~ o 0 0 0 m > o C o 0o 0 0 o 0 0 o 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 0 0% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O. ['- 0 CD t/~ C'- U~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 t.O 04 L9 0 L9 0 r.D ~ ~ 0 L~ 0 t.'~ ~5 - z,q 0 ~,q T uq © ~,~ 0 W, 0 LFI 0 LFI 0 LF~ 0 LF~ 0 klq 0 L,q 0 o::> o7- ~' '~ o i> o > o i> o L~ o > o > o i> o ~ o~> o > cD > 0 fJ ~J u~ 0 u% 0 u~ 0 _n © u% 0 un 0 ~0 Z >- 0 "J Z~ 0 -U 0 U U 0 q~ o CD 0 0 0 o 0 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E: 0 II r,j 0 I-4 0 ,.~ c ;:> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r~ U (D ~c: (J 0 < 0 0 0 ~J ~0 OU ~n un 0 o> o o o o o o o o o -? UO 0 (3 (13 I[ It 1[ 0 > 0 0 U Z H zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz HH HHHHHH NH HN HH HH HH ~m~oooooooooo~oom~ooo~o~ oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 0 0 r..) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o~ o> o~ o~ o~ o~ ~ U ~ 0 o ~J 0 rj 0 0 > 0 U CD 0 > c~ o~o Z Z~ ~ 0 U O~ r,.m ~0 ~0 ~0 ~ 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 c ,? '~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 O0 U 0 U 0 Z 0 0 ~ 0 > rj 0 > 0 (P > ~m r~ 0 0 ~'~ ~q Z < o <0 o~ o> o~ o> o> < Z Z~ ~0 0 HO MO O~ ~0 O0 0 0 co ~ o> o> ~o 0 (J E Z 0 0 0 U 0 0 (~ o o o 0 © 0 ~0 ZU U U 0 H 0 0 0 n. O0 ~O 0 ~ 0 m ~ 0 rj n ~, n c~ 0 r~ adc3 _'> o> H > .. 0 Z ~ o ~ ~ ~ o > ~ 0 o ~ ~ U o ~ ~ o ~ H ~ 0 H ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 a; ~ <-- z-- u.. ~0 UO ~0 0 -0 O~ Z~ ~ ~ O~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~0 ~0 ~0 o> o> o> 0 {J U 0 ,< {J 0 > 0 ~J :x:O0 0 000 ~ ,.-] r.J LJn.~ ~j~.~ ~ 0 ~ G u~ 0 ~ 0 u~ ? ~ 0 o 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 (D H 0 o o o o o o 0 H.~ O~ t/] 0 o o o 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 o~ o~ o> o> o> o~ o~ 0 > m 0 OO 0 :> ~) ~ U ~ ~o 0 o o o o Z er' o 0 mO r,-O0 r~ O0 Z~ H 0 0 0 0 ~J o o ~ >~ 0 ~ ~ 0 2 C ~ 0 ~ O ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~P O ~> o~ o> o> o> o> o> 0 0 ,< 0 > 0 c' Z 0 rj 0 m 0 0 II ~ 0 0 > 0 0 Z ~ 0 o 000 0 000 0 0 0 0 O0 0 0000 O0 0 0 0 H H ,~ Z ~ 0 0 ~ H O ~ 0 0 ~.- 0-' 0-' ,0 ~0 ~0 ~O ~0 ~0 mO o> o> 0 U rj 0 0 0 0 0 ~1~ 0 0 ~:} ¢,1 0 I~ 0 0 {" 0 mO ~ ~ oo U ~ 0 D~ U Z C} 0 U ~ >, Z,.-~ U 0 c~ c~ ooo 0 'U HO 'T'm ~ 0 Z ~'. U 0 '-r' c~. H ~ m t.D {.... o c'~ o o u% ,-4 i Z 0 Z 0>, DO DE 0 Z 0 ~ 0 ~U '~0 ~0 ~0 ~0 o> o> o~ 0 H n. c> ~0 p- o r~ m Z~ 0 D 0 ~ r~ ~O ~U ~U ~D ~0 mO mO mO ~'0 '-4 0 JJ eq tn t~- ~;~ (x)04 0 M:} ('q 000 0 ,-I ~ cci ~-Icq 0 cq rO 0 0 0 o m H o , L) rD ,< < ~ 0 ~ 0 %~ 0 ~ £ ~s 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 < C %~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 o> oN oN o> o> o> U 0 0 E ,< {J 0 > 0 OU U~ ~ o 0 o ~] o :> o to 0 0 < 0 0 C ~ 0 ~sO ~ 0 C~-- 2:'"0 r.:J 0 Z r..8 Q 0 ,~ 0 O~ OQ 0 O~ o to ~ ko ~ o 0 ,.8 0 ~:0 On~ II 0 [~ (D 0 m 0 >0 ,) U 0 {J 0 > H 0 0 0 0 0000000000 O0 0 0 0 0 ooooooo0o0 ~ 0 0 0 0000000000 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 um Z r.~ Z Z ~ ~0 E~ Z ~ 0 o o o o ,,o rj 0 O0 ~ ~ ~O~Doooo ~  ~ 00000000~0~000" .-~ ~J · 0 U ~J 0 0 ~J i-4 -Pi 0 > 0 ~U ooo 0 0 CO 0 U o 0 ~ 0 .. --tn ooo~ooooooo ~ o ~ o co ~ o o o t/~ o o 0 ~ 0 o4 > ~ o~. ~ 0 Z cO ~ ~ Z 0 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ O o 0 'o C ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ZO ~ rd ,.o 0 o:> o o ~- ~-~ ~ .... < ~.. ~.- ~.. ~.. z.. ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~0 ~ 0 ~ 0 Z 0 -0 ~ 0 -0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 UO ~ o o 0 > © © H ,~ H ~ '[ilo [ilo ~ o 0 ~J C) o - o 0 (J t'xl H 0 ~-] 0 0 :> o .-Io n 01~ tD t"-{'~ r.j n. 0 > r'-O mO H rjm ::r:m o o o 0 ~-.~U o o o o o o o o o o ~ 0 ~o 0 ~o0 ~o0 o:> o:> o~. o;> DO OU O0 ~0 mm mm O0 0 0 u o~ O0 ,-~o~ ~0 mid 0 0 MEETING DATE: July 6, 1999 ITEM# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT: May Financial Report CATEGORY: X CONSENT ORDINANCE BUSINESS HEARING FYI RESOLUTION STAFF REPORT PROCLAMATION STUDY SESSION OTHER BUDGET IMPACT: Amount Budgeted: $ Expenditure Ami: $ Contingency Reqd: $ ATTACHMENTS: May Financial Report SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: Month of May 1999 CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: Was approved by the Finance Committee during their meeting on June 29, 1999. CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: /~ppr~¢ APPROVED FOR INCLUSION IN COUNCIL PAC~'-~~ (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION COUNCIL BILL it 1st READING ENACTMENT READ ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # CITY MEMORANDUM Date: To: From: Subject: June 29, 1999 Finance, Economic Development & Regional Affairs Committee Marie Mosley, Deputy Management Services Director May 1999, Monthly Financial Report Action Requested: Accept the Monthly Financial Report and forward to the July Council meeting for approval. APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE REPORT Committee Chair: MaryGates ~(~'"~/ .~4'¢/,~f., Committee Member: JeanneBurbi~ Committee Member: Linda Koch..~~_,..,.,.,_..~ "A City for All of Us" 40.00 35.00 30.00 25.00 20.00 15.00 I 0.00 5.00 1999 Projected Revenues & Expenditures Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec +Revenues -- Expenditures / Overview Significant Events General Government Revenues Expenditures Supplemental Schedules Attachment A l 3.,_t~ 5-6. 7-I_; 16 May 1999 Monthly Financial Report OVERVIEW The Monthly Financial Report is intended to provide an overview of financial activity that has taken place in the reporting period. This report focuses mainly on activity incurred in the following operating funds: General, Street, Arterial Street, Utility Tax Projects, Solid Waste & Removal, Paths & Trail, Surface Water Management, Strategic Resets'e, Airport Strategic Reser~ e. Debt Service, and Dumas Bay Centre. The Summary of Sources and Uses (Attachment A) captures financial activity throt:gh May for ti~e xears 1994 through 1999. SIGNIFICANT EVENTS Municipal Court The municipal court is moving along. Five candidates for the Court Administrator ' .position were interviewed June I(Y, and the top two candidates have been selected for further review. The RFQ is currently posted in the media for the judge position. Audit Results The audit exit interview resulted in no findings and no management letter. There were three verbal comments or suggestions. The last five audits have all been of similar nature. }'2K Cotttingencv Planni/tg Public Works department is working with local agencies on YaK issues and is cuvrenth' assisting with creating a brochure which will be sent to all residents in Federal Way; Federal ";, School District, Fire Disr-,:_ Lakehaven and area utility compaq:_= are represented as well. The broct:c_--: will assist people in preparing not for Y2K problems that may arise. also prepare for natural disasters as earthquakes and so fe~__ Departments are asked to evaluate respective department and ~ services they provide to the public ~__: how that will be affected, if at Work is underway in the MIS div!s:. - to ensure city computera telephone_-__ pagers, etc. are Y2K compliant. new permit system is underway training beginning in mid-June. Pension Contribution Rate Last 5'ear. the State Actuar',' Director of the l)epartment Retirement S\'ste~l~S recommended CitF of Federal Way Mav 1999 MonthlF Financial Report reductions for both the PERS and LEOFF pension systems, to be effective September I, 1999. In a bit of a surprise move, the effective date has been moved up to July Employees should be receiving lbnnal notification soon from the Department of Retirement Systems. The effective date was changed to July 1~t in the 1999-2000 operating budget, signed by the Govemor on May 14.ch The rates are slightly higher than those reported last year, due to the earlier effective date. The new rates are as follows: PERS Plan 1: Current & new member rate fixed in statute at 6%. Current employer rate of 7.32% reduced to 4.41%. PERS Plan 2: Current member rate of 4.65% reduced to 1.85%. Current employer rate of 7.32% reduced to 4.41%. LEOFF Plan 1: Current and new member rate fixed in statute at 6%. Current employer rate and new employer rate are also fixed 'in statute at 6%. LEOFF Plan 2: Current member rate of 8.48°/3 reduced to 5.87%. Current employer rate of 5.09°/3 reduced to 3.52%. An administrative expense fee, currently set at .18 percent, is added to all employer contribution rates. That rate will increase to .19 percent for PERS contributions and .21 percent for LEOFF contributions, effective July Ist. The rates above do not include the fee. Capital Facilities Plan Second reading of the Capital Facilities allocation will occur at the June 1~ City Council Meeting. The following projects, were approved: Municipal court starmp costs ($300,000); Downtown Revitalization ($604,648); Sacajawea Sports Field ($165,000, with anticipated grants of $785,000); Wedgewood Park ($50,000); SR 99: South 312th Street - South 324th HOV Lanes ($1,000,000, with anticipated grants of $7,190,413); and Economic Development Coordinator ($75,000 for the year 2000). The budget adjustment will be reflected in the June Financial Report and is the result of the allocation of the undesignated fund balance from the budget year 1998 ($1,111,648); the excess real estate excise tax collected in 1998 ($670,000); and the state grant received by the City for the Knutzen Family Theatre ($413,000). Banking Services US Bank has been selected to provide the City's banking serVices. The contract is for a three-year period beginning June Ist, 1999. Red, Whites & Blues Festival This year's events will take place at Celebration Park with the staging of the fireworks at the plaza area of the ballfields. Dispatch Services The Public Safety Dispatch Services Committee has been evaluating four options: 1) Become a member of City of Valley Com; 2) Continue the current contract with Valley C.om; 3) Becom, a member of the Federal Way Fire Department's dispatch center South Com; and 4) Have Federal Way Fire join Valley Corn with the City of Federal Way. This topic will be forwarded to the Parks, Recreation/Human Services & Public Safety Committee meeting on June 28th for their review. SIU Division Recognition The Public Safety Department's SIU Division received a special award in California, in recognition for their Drug Enforcement. City Manager Search Jim Mercer ,f the Mercer Group completed interviews with the Department Directors and City Council. The next step is to put together a recruiting profile. Once the profile is complete and the City is in agreement, the recruitment will begin. GENERAL GOVERNMENTAL REVENUES General governmental revenue collections through May total $17,423,092, which is $2,060,195 or 13.4% above the year-to-date budget ($15,362,897). When compared to 1998, revenues have increased by $991,581 or 6.0%. Attachment A provides a comparison of year-to-date' revenues by major sources for 1999 with comparative figures for the past 5 years. Cit~ of Federal Wa~ May 1999 Monthly Financial Report REVENUE SUMMARY BY MAJOR REVENUE SOURCES Period Ending May 31. 1999 .. I!' :'~: ; :; ...... : ' YTD Actual$, :.~Y"rl} ~1~ ~,~~~ Adopted. Year40'Oate . . % Y TD . Overl(Ond.e.r) . ,~.:.[il~. ,.~'f~.~ ~-t~'~.'~ I Sudg~t Actuals Collected Budget YTD Bud~let Sales Tax 8.605.426 3.858.373 44 B% 3.584.543 273.830 76% 783.051 Hotel/Motel L~ging Tax 65.~ 0 0% na C(iminal Justice Sales Tax 1.~2.747 ~3.527 42 8% ~2.377 41.1~ 7.6% 125.~2 Gambling T~ ~.~ 5~.8~ 1050% 292.~ 242.226 82.8% 144.6~ Ut,l~ty Tax 4.633.769 2.3~.140 50.9% 2.165.882 192.258 8.9% 472.143 Real Estate Excise Tax 1.2~.~ 8~.202 674% 4~.893 372.3~ 85.2% 169.610 Fran~ise Fees 4~.255 220.578 44 6% 239.877 (19.2~) ~.0% Licenses & Permits 123.201 76.984 62 5% 87.473 (10.488) -12.0% 5.~3 Intergovernmental 4.576.430 2.132.~3 46 6% 1.894.698 238.165 12 6% 214.416 CD Building Pe~its & Fees 853.193 ~7.659 ~ 5%, ~1.2~ 2~.~3 ~.3% 161.1~ CD Pass Th~ Fees 33.402 na 33.402 ne 8.278 PW Permits & Fees 239.573 I03.310 431% 89.031 14.279 160% 12,147 PW Pass Th~ Fees 20.498 na 20.498 na 12.~0 S~ Fees 3.120.~2 1.452.882 466% 1.452.882 0.0% 1.~3.627 Refuse Fees 148.524 62.441 420% 61.885 5~ 0 9% 25.121 Admin Fees 168.478 70.2~ 41 7% 70.2~ 00% 11.619 Fines & Fode~s 714.~ ~.6~ 51 6% 2~.809 77.~ ~8% 61.~ R~eation Fees ~1.~3 215.321 429% 195.524 19.797 10.1% 28.~ ~u~en Theatre O~rations 59.0~ 17.055 28 9% 24.5~ (7.~ 1) ~.7% 7.~ Dumas Bay Centre O~rat~s 429.~ 193.076 ~ 9% 139.~5 ~.411 ~.2% 42.822 Public Safety 138.432 157.~ 1140% ~.695 101.149 178.4% 13.219 Interest Earnings 1.~0,139 ~9.482 45 1% 279.153 1~.329 ~.2% 95.1~ Mis~flan~us Revenue 139.765 45.~ 32.5% 45.4~ 0.0%~ 11.8~ Subtotal O~rat~ns 35.757.1~ 17.423.~2 48.7% 15.~2.897 2.~.195 13.4% 4.~.0~ [ntedund Transfers 5.383.289 00% 12'3 gther Financing Sour~s 1.411.612 1.~.919 98 1% 1.3~.919 55.553 Total Revenues 42.552.~7 18.8~.011 ~2% 16.747.816 2.~.195 4.138.591 ' S~s a~uats as % of year~ate ~get For example. ~% means a~ual revenues were haft of ~t was ~get~ f~ that ~ri~. COMPARISON O~: t999 OPERATING REVENUES - BUDGET TO ACTUAL $35.000.000 $30.000.000 $25.000.000 $20.000.0O0 $15.000.000 $10.000.000 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oc~ Nov Dec Sa/es Tax Sales tax received in May of $3,858,373 is $273,830 or 7.6°,0 above the year-to-date budget. Compared to 1998 year-to-date, sales tax increased $324,602 or 9.2%. Sales tax receixed in Ma,,' total S783,051 that is 5'76.4S1 or 10.8% above the adopted budget estimate. Compared to Max I~S. sales tax increased S127.655 or !o.3° o Retail sales continue to remain the largest source, accounting for 64.7% of all sales tax collections. Year-to-date retail sales tax collections are up S176.514 or 7.6°0 over 1998. attributable to an ox erall increase in retail actix ltv. Yo3r'-to-d2(e cor:stFuc[ion and cor~tr3ctin,g actix iix. k~ hich accounts for 8.2% of sales tax collections, is up $81,061 or 32.7% compared to 1998 activity. This increase is further reflected in the City's building permit trends. Year-to-date, sales tax collec-tions for tnanufacturing activity has increased $41,092 or 33.7°,8. This is due in part to a major manufacturing company repo~ing sales tax on a quarterly b~is Ci~ of Federal [FaF Ma), 1999 Monthl), Financial Report for part of 1998 versus monthly in 1999. Through May of 1998, the company reported 4th quarter 1997's activity (the company catches up by remitting !st & 2"'~ quarter 1998's activity in June 1998), whereas in 1999, the company reported sales tax activity for five reporting periods. The company has been remitting sales tax on a monthly basis since July 1998. The remaining variance has to do with increased activity, specifically in lumber products. The City's largest retail center, South 348th retail center, which generates over 16% of the City's sales tax has experienced a growth of $64,842 or 11.7% compared to 1998, due to increased activity. The SeaTac Mall continues to show a slight decline in taxable retail sales activity through the month of May. Major auto sales activity decreased by $8,558 or 5.3% compared to 1998 due to a major auto dealer relocating its business in 1998. Real Estate Excise Tax For the year-to-date comparison, real estate excise tax 'continues to exceed prior year's collections. Through May, revenues total $809,202, which is $372,309 above budgetary estimates ($436,893). For the current month, we received $64,949 or 62.1% more than the projected estimate ($104,661). Utility Tax Utility tax received through May total $2,358,140, which is $192,153 or 8.9% above the monthly budget estimate. Compared to 1998, utility tax receipts have increased $219,467 or 10.3%. Telephone revenues collected are $46,190 or 10.7% above budget. This is partially due to the receipt of S17,000 from a small telecommunications company for 19 months of back-taxes. Cellular taxes exceed the budgeta~' estimates bx $43,323 or 27.6%, which is consistent with the four prior months in 1999. Gambling Tar Gambling tax collections are up $242,226 or 82.8% over the budgetary estimate ($292,664). The increase is $413,698 when compared to 1998 largely due to increased activity at one major card room establishment and the increase in card room rates from 11% in 1998 to 20% in 1999. The year-to- date increase in revenue from this establishment due to the rate change amounts to $158,672 of additional card room revenue. State Shared Revenue State shared revenues are exceeding budgetary estimates by $279,316 or 11.5%. Criminal justice-high crime has collected $173,087 through May. This revenue is based on the Cities 1997 crime rate and determines distribution amounts for July and October 1998 and January and April 1999. We are not budgeted to receive ar~ high crime revenue in 1999, based on the 1998 crime rate statistics. Fines & Forfeitures Year-to-date Fines and forfeitures are exceeding budgetary projections by $77,800 or 26.8%. Revenues are below budget by $295 for the month of May. Building Permits and Plan Check Fees Building permit revenues were up $226,363 or 66.3% when compared to year-to-date budget, continuing the trend since the City's inception. This does not include revenues of $33,402 transferred from the deposit account for expedited and environmental review. Significant among the commercial permit activiD' is Capital One, who is constructing a new building off of 320th. and Careage Development, which is the construction of a nursing home. Community Developmen' ' expedited review deposits for bott, building and planning total $54,639 and recognized revenues are at $26,692. Environmental review deposits total $22,928 while revenues are currently at $6,710. ROW Permits attd Fees Overall Public Works permits and fees collected through May total $103,310, which is $14,279 or 16.0% over the adopted budget. Public works expedited review deposits total $61,409, while recognized revenues are at $20,498. Police services revenue collected through May .total $157,844. This amount inclhdes- Traffic School revenues of $28,150, Explorer program donations of $1,839, and Police Security services of $70,654. Also included is $46,518 of state seizure revenues which are designated for that specific program. The remaining balance of $10,683 is made up of miscellaneous revenues such a: .. weapons permits, copies anct fingerprinting. $33,781 in grant revenues were received for the first quarter, but are included in other financing sources. Traffic School, Explorer program and state seizure revenue is not currently included in the budget, but are usually added in the year-end budget adjustment. GENERAL GOVERNMENTAL' EXPENDITURES General governmental expenditures through May total $11,371,609 or 30.7% of the annual operating budget ($37,098,044). Operating expenditures are below the year-to-date budget ($ll,918,429) by $546,819 or 4.6%. x3,q~en compared to 1998, expenditures are up $767,923 or 7.2%. Cit~ of Federal WaF May 1999 MonthlF Financial Report EXPENDITURE SUMMARY BY DEPARTMENT Period Ending May 31, 1999 ! ':"~:,*' ' ,,~;'..' ' , ' ' ' .'.' ' . ' '. I YTDActuals YTDActuala ': ,"., · . I ,bi,~:~.,T:;:..','.~,.~'~;~:,~" .k ...Adopted · ..~..,Year.to. Data>j. % YTD . (Over}/Under As % of ~ k~."~,curl~nt~:,'.} . .':4~,,.~',~,.:' ,.. '..'... '..'.. Budget..-... ':."~!Actual$'~:,.-Expended Budget. Y'rD Budget YTD Budget*, ,Month'Actuals, C dy Counol 219.84 T 116 237 [;2 9% 124 ~'92 8,555 6 9% 3,058 City Manager 587,110 248.297 42.3% 242,914 (5,383) -2.2% 34,015 Municipal Court 10.930 na (10.930) na 2,182 Management Services 1,947,613 691,198 35.5% 686,474 (4,724) -0.7% 171,495 Civil Legal Services 542,356 260,714 48.1% 216,487 (44,227) -20.4% 29,809 Criminal Legal Services 1,210,809 416,721 344% 456,878 40,157 8.8'/, 105.305 Community Development 3.048,376 1,150,654 37.7% 1,287.588 136,934 10.6% 164,810 Public Safety 12,049,356 4.864,519 40.4% 5.043,939 179.420 3.6% 831,904 Jail Services 875.000 395,270 452% 384,528 (10,742) -2.8% 117.308 Parks & Recreation 3,065,364 1,113.023 36.3% 1,190.695 77.672 6.5% 253,730 Dumas Bay Centre Operations 467,436 190,578 40.8 % 175.104 (15.473) -8.8% 38,487 Knutzen Theatre Operations 159,030 40.311 25.3% 66,263 25.952 39.2% 7,659 Public Works Operations 3.444,273 1,123.992 32.6% 1.230,565 106,573 8.7% 233,049 PW Asphalt Oveday Program 2,018,311 23,226 1.2% 23,226 0.0% 4,672 Solid Waste & Recycling 299,727 75,132 25.1% 88,530 13.398 15.1% 14,113 Snow & Ice Removal 55,076 5,777 10.5% 26,436 20.659 78.1% 218 Hotel/Motel Lodging Tax 65,000 0.0% na Surface Water Management 1,749,884 644,929 36.9% 673,908 28,979 4.3% 162.394 Debt Service 5,293,482 102 0.0% 102 0.0~4 Subtotal Operations 37,098,044 11,371,609 30.7% 11,918,429 546.819 4.6% 2,174,207 Interfund Transfers 7.751,571 0.0%I naI Other Financing Uses 680,479 3,525,592 518.1% 3,525.592 na Total Expenditures 45.530,094 14,897,201 32.7% 15,444,021 546,819 3.5% 2,174.207 COMPARISON OF 1999 OPERATING EXPENDITURES - BUDGET TO ACTUAL $40,000,000 ~ $35,000,000 . $30,000,000 $25,000.000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $10,000,000 $5,000,0O0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Municipal Court costs for Ma',' total $10,930, which consists of the purchase and moving of used office furniture. Management Services expenditures total $691,198 which is $4.724 or 0.7% above the revised budget estimate ($686,474). Salaries and Benefits are currently at 45%, and the department is now full>' staff'ed. Also. intergovernmental charges. ~hich include budgeted election costs or' $70,000, have only expended $2,000 or 1.9% of the annual budget ($104,000). Commuttio' Development Operations has expended SI. 150.654 or 37.7% of its annual appropriation (S3,048,376). Through May. the,,' are below their budget bv S136,934 or 10.6% of the year-to-date budget (51,287,588). Only 30.Sea of the ser,.ices and charges budget (S671.938) have been expended. Parks Operations expenditures total $1,113,023 which is $77,672 or 6.5% below the year-to-date budget estimate ($1,190,695). This is 36.0% of its annual appropriation and is due to low expenditures in services and charges. which makes up 25% of their operating budget. Through May, temporary help totals $74,586 or 35.5% of its annual budget ($210,055). This is an increase in telnporary help ~vhen compared to last month, due to additional held needed for Celebration Park. Cit~ of Federal Wa~ Ma~ 1999 Monthl~ Financial Report Public Works Operations is belr}w the May budget estimate ($1,230,565) by $106,573 or 8.7%, and has expended $1,123,992 or 32.6% of its annual appropriation ($3,444,273). This is due to the delay of invoices for intergovernmental expenditures, such as King County traffic maintenance and WSDOT State highway maintenance. Through April we have paid out $27,467 or 5.2% of the annual budget ($531,544), SWM Operations are below projections by $28,979 or 4.3% of the May estimate of $673,908. Police Services have expended $4,864,5.19 through May, which is $179,420 below the budgetary estimate of $5,043,939. This is due in part to the delay of the Valley Communications invoices for April and May. Salaries & benefits, which are 67% of their total budget (excluding temporary help, overtime & termination pay), totaled $3,617,855. This is 41.7% of the annual budg~ ($8,681,503). Overtime pay totaL' $170,053, which is 68% of its annual budget ($250,000). This could be attributed to several full time positions that were vacant. Jail Service is above May budget estimates ($384,528) by $10,742 or 2.8%. The total expended of $395,270 does not include payments for April and May services. City of Federal Way May 1999 MonthlV Financial Report MAJOR REVENUE SOURCES 584 297 $ 603.980 849.037 870.318 579.220 580 171 522.576. 5~.911 654.2~ $ 644,~ $ 623.386 ~ $ 6~,862 $ ~7,688 S 111.432 ~ $ 43.744 I 66~ 882.234 883.2~ 902,478 949,276 94t.601 1 013 428 t 71.824: 573.687 577.0~, 582.547; 57S.5~ 601,682 6~3,460 ' 31,778: 5.3~ ~7~.546 ~.423 ' ~9~.702 ~ 682.~3 7~.382 ..... October 609,162 62t5.974 676.731 652,886 657,100 ' 761,561 714.775 November i 627.343 636.254 654:0~0 ' December i 594,528 61~,765 650.583 664.611 793,528 I 600,018 755,570 SALES TAX REVENUES May .1997 through May 1999 $1,050,000 $950,000 $750.000 $650.000 $550,000 Holiday Season SALES TAX COMPARISON by AREA Y'TD Through May ; : ! Change from 1998 ....... _G_m_~p ......... 197_3 _ 1994 1995 1996 : 1997 1998 1999 $ Change ':% Change ..... _T?-tal__S._a!es Tax.. i $3,120:939 $3:152,544. $3,33.~,67.4 S_3.,4__81,687.. $3,{?_0,jll.__.$_3,S33,.7__71.. $3,85~L373 :. S324,79.2_~ . _ 9.2_?~ S 348th Retail Block 381-'52 364,573 ~-59,326 476.568 521,096 555,051 619.893 64,842 117°A SeaTac Mall 53~ ~35 491,87~ E2C 592 467825 458,955 456,118 453,618 (2,500) -05~A Major Auto Sales 125 3~6 142973 137675 160,284 145,338 161,628 153,070 (8.558) -53% S312thtoS316thBlock 4Z-'_=- 40551 .:'2515 39,952 35130 36,180 38.627 2,447 68%I / Pavilion Center - _: ma na 56. 765 58 171 58,259 57,934 (325) -06%I I Hotels&Motels 12 2~:5 12 52~ t5 953 13114 16570 15,494 19.113 3619 23 4°/51 City of Federal l~VaF Mav 1999 Monthl~ Financial Report Retail Trade ! $ 375.227 i $ 378,482 Construction/Contract ! 38.611 56.974 Whole~alir~g ........ ;"- 3713,04 ~ 35,~63 T~a-~ sp~C- 0m m I~Ut ilit ~/ .... 3.5.261 ' 29,791 Manufacturing 28.969 26.313 6o~,~r~m~t- ' ~.078 ' 5.956 Fi~/~n~/R~i Estate: :5:283; 5.~63 $ 385.462 $ 409.695 $ 413.625 $ 420.280 $ 486.174 ~ $ 65.894 157% 56.661 ' 65.8i5 ' 61.1 ~G ' ~.5~ * ~5 2~8 ' 6.682 ' 97% 61.~9 ' 35.~8' 51.~1 ' 43.776' '- ~7.~-: - 33:~0- 7~;A 44:4i6; 171.769 ' 40.721 ' 49:6~: 46,~~ (~.241)'~5% 21.89~: 23.101 ' ' 26.~9 ' 26,e5~' ~.820 ~ 9.~1 ' ' 37.1~ 33,442' 38,~: ~:~ ' i5.~ '- ~6.~7~: ~8 - ~% 7,501 8,029 11,638 10.621 12.576 1.955 18 4% 5.8~ t 8,60~' 11,24~ ' 10,952-- - 13.125 T 2,173 ' - - 1~'.8~ Other ~ 4,458 8,661 7.611 7.435 6.007 8,893 8.697 (196) -2 2% ,' ~ .... ~ ' ;)' ,E~.~;'.""' ,,',")~ .' ",'- ' -~""% ';~ ~:" .. ~'~; ~ ,, ~Z~'~ :, , ' ' ' RetadTrade = $ 2,132.7~. S 2.139,4~J $ 2,133,8~ $ 2,24/,374 S 2.244~ $ 2,318,479, S 24~.~4 Se~i~s ~ ~,~ * 238.303: 276.482 ~ 2~.0~ 324.245 ~5.~= 3~.410 S 176,514 7 6°~ 19,022 5.7".4 ConstructiOn/Contract I 202,066 ! 205,690 276,258i 196.843; 227,207 247,625 i 328,686 81.061 32 7~,~ Wholesaling 170,070i 189.741 ' 246,9821 347,720 ~ 179.820 228,060 ' 227,373 (688) -0.3°.4 Transp/CommAJtillty 148,720! 159.670 156,101 ! 108,243 [ 147,890 144,161 155.160 10,999' 7.6°.4 Manufacturing I 121,404; 128.313 ~ 150,725 i 178,537, 172,848 121,958' 163,050 41,092, 33.7*.4 Government I 30,581 ~ 28,449 i 34,477 I 44,897 ', 39,251 52,898 ! 49,275 (3,623) -6.8°.4 Fin/Ins/RealEstate I 28,554 ~, 28.733, 29,840 ! 35.274 '. 40,587 44,933 ' 51,173, 6,240 13.9~ Other / 20,922 i 34.236, / 32,911 ~ 28.720 ~ 33,796 [ 40,268 I 34,253 (6,015) -14.9°~ ~S~188~493~9~2~ SALES TAX ACTIVITY BY SiC CODE Manufacturing 4.2% Trans/Com/Util 4.0% Wholesaling 5.9% Constr/Contract 8 5% YTD through May 1999 Fin/Ins/Real Government Estate 1.3% / 1.3% W' Other 0.9% Retail Trade 64.7% Services 92% City of Federal Way May 1999 Monthly Financial Report M~rc~ : _ _ _56'212 '. 72'702: 63:02`5: ~ 74:~1 7!'~! _ . 82,1'~6 ! 117,335_. .80,862 , !29d73! . April ~ 78.549 249.510 83,156 105.133 i 132.678 I 166.282 104,765 203.522 98.757 943~ M~ay ~ ..... ~,4,1~;J 102.473' 73,~?~ 1- 153.107~ 186,'187 i 189,86-0 ! 104,6~1 ' 169,610 ! ~;I.~49 ! - 62 1~/~ July 167,854 130,113 107,801 ! 133.081 [ 120,432 I 295.736 125,954 - ! 0.0°/~ ~ug~uust ! .... 163.092 '. 96'629 i. _79.2.58 ~_ _130~.765~! September 106,68~ 97.514 183,599; 123.913 I 181.490 , 137.949 105,825 - 0 O~{&b~; ? - 100.392 82,80~: 82,369 !- i80.37i i i51~3337 -504;439 91.969'; ' ' November 146.484 64,606 76,809 I 102.780 ! 216,381 i 143.877 93,419 ' - De~m--~?--~ .... 1-14.07§ ..... 65,105'- ]32.~17 1-- i-S-05~9--~,- --~,999~ ..... 132.44~ ......~50.3~; .......... EsCREValue 15 240,703,600 S 224,292,800r $ 199,937,000[ $ 275,765,000{ S 342,739,440I S 413,61¶,516 $ 240,000,0001 $ 161,840,456[$ 74,461,8471 n; $900,000 $800.000 $700,000 $600,000 $500.000 $400.000 $30O,000 $20O.000 $1oo,ooo $- REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX ACTIVITY Through May 'Y,":.',~F '?.' . .::~ .' ,"~ :"~: '?, i"" Cil~ of Federal Wag Mag 1999 Monthly Financial Report . . . . '.. .~ .'. ~'.~ $~j . ~,,,~ .,~;..., ,~, .: .... ~-,..~ ~ , ~_ ~ .... . · i~as ' ' 42]88 ~ 1~867 .... 3~.7~3 5i9.109 ', '-3~.~i ~ -~ ~6~ - ~ 'Garbage - ' 23.~2 ~ 70~82 ' ~2~.~01 3i~.~; ~2~42; ~76~ ] ~ !ca~ie ~]~9'; 10~5~ ~.~] - 46~]~ 191.967 { 203.694 : 11.726 : Ph~ ~ _ :~ ] ~,6~2] ~ 20~,9~5 ]_ _-~ ~4~ ~ 9~5,~ ; ..... ~1~ 477.643I 46.190 10.7% Storm ...................... Drainage - ~ 76,909 26,288 ~ 179.259 ;...~ 39.060 ,' 17,742 ~ (21,318) -54.6% Cellular 20.~3 ~ _ 74,~30__ ~ ~6:~ ;_ 387.416, 156,932 200.255] 43.323 27.6% P~gers & I~t~net 610 ~ 2,397 4,582 ~ ~ 1',4~ T ---~.~ ~ 4.037 ~ (667) -14.2% Table reflects reporting activity through/~onl January - I 125.150 ~ 431.810 435.403 I 435.403~i 457.104 Februa~ 4.121 I 118.633 460.440 463.259 ~ 463.259 ~ 479.716 March 35.730 ! 139.684 429.076 432.065 i 432.065 I 469.241 April 96.699 404.907 415.919 421.121 ! 421.121 t 488.846 May 95.723 431.710 401.428 414.034 ~ 414.034 I 463.233 June 75,865 320.663 373.909 393.113; - [ July 83.369 , 294.086 348,201 354.410: I August 76.681 318.905! 324,888, September 314,176 85,162~ 310,67~ 322.551 ! 329.0931 October :76.107 326.801 348.206 i 356.964 I November. 89.608 365.280 326,729 ', 346.297 December i 91,283 [ 401,119 i 351,629 I 363.123 $ 21,702 5.0% 16,457 3.6% 37.176 8.6% 67.725 16.1% 49,199 11.9% n/a ' i n/a n/a - n/a ; n/a n/a n/a Utility Tax Revenue Through May, 1999 Storm Drainage 0.75% Phone 20.26% Cellular 8.49% Pagers & Internet 0.17% Cable 8.64% Garbage 5.50% Gas 1 5.60% Electric 40.59% !l~ Electric if'l Garbage I 0 .City of Federal Way May 1999 Monthly Financial Report GAMBLING TAX B Y A C TIVlTY YTD Through May ""~"'"~:' ",::Acti~ity*".¢,' .:%¥....ii. $.... .. °/o... i.Z.. :$,....i' · %';' i.'~ "$.,r'~l:~artance:t~°'.varIance. Games 0.9% $ 1,406 1.1% $ 1,318 0.5% $ 2,425 $ 1,107' na Punchboards 0.8% 1,322 0.0%i 1.0% 5,308 5,308 . na Pulltabs 80.0% 130,789 90.4%. 109,542 27.4% $146,336 36,794 , 33.6% Cardrooms 18.3% 29,953 7.7%1 9,317 71.2% 380,802 371,485: 3987.3% Bingo 0.0% 41 0.8%t 1,014 0.0% 20 (995); -98.1% Total 100.0% $ 163,512 100.0%~ $121,192 100.0%! $ 534,890 $ 413,698 341.4% Table reflects reporting activity through April. GAMBLING TAX REVENUE 1997- 1999 · "" ' :.b : :~ ,. ~'.. .' .'. · t 999 ' ~..,.~:~.: '1999 Budget ~L~-b',~. . ... ,..,,~. ,~?,~,~, ~.',, ~, ,:~.,. ~ .,,.. . ~ . . ...... :,., .,.;,~; ~, t?"., 1997 ' i '!?.~;~" 1998 .~.:,, 'i?'Budget .,...": :Actual-*;-,,~ $:,Varlance~.~/o:Vadance~ January $31,616 $28,182 $51,135 ! $59,195 _ $8,060 .' 15.8% February 34,403 21,305 54,874{ 98,054 43,180 '78.7% March 30,346 23,182 65,483~ 104,139 38,656 59.0% '-,~,~ril~ ....... 36,-041 .... 29,498 -- ~-4~ ---~3~-,~ 66,0431 102.5% May 31,1061 19,025 56,745~ 143,032 86,287i 152.1% June .... 29,4211 20,121 26,9471 i 0.0%1 July 26,096 34,691 33,6061 ~ 0.0% August 17,016 36,336 35,687', ~ 0.0% September 18,454 36,915 27,174 i i 0.0% October 23,907 __ 50,005 32,3131 i 0.0% November 20,591 51,544 27,718! --~__ 0.0% December 19,766 48,147 33,491 [ t 0.0% 1999 Gambling Tax Revenue $160,000 $140,000 $120,000 $100,000 $80,000 $60,000 $40,000 S2O,OOO $o January February March April May '~Budget ~ [] Actual 1! Cit~ of Federal }FaF Ma~ 1999 Monthly Financial Report . , · .. J,r,:'e,.,, :c..,- '~- ,/ . .:;: ~;~'? ~ ~4~ '...': , ' 1993 - 1999 · .. .. : ..... .., "., . · ... ,. ,,' Motor~h.~le [~.~.~ . _ $ 587~274.; $ _ 635.528; $ 631.126 $ 5~.055 $ 441.3~9 $ 4/4~ $ 482 133 $ 510,~1 Cam~r Excise Tax 5,~ 6,~ ' 6.7~ - 6.628 ' 6.492; ' - 6,689 ' 6.~1 ' 6.825 ' L;~rofits Tax 128,2~6 ' 1~,373 ~ 1~.~ ' g7,958 ' 102,169: 115~124 11~,695 ' 10~,338 ' ' (2~5~)' -2 1% rim Just Low-Po~OCD 72,531 ' 315,492 ~ 167,728 182.930 116,039, 63,737 ~.~2~ ' ~4~; .... Equalization 315,276 381,033 ' 2~.463 2~.984 1~,054 185,~9 1~,~0 1~7,937 ~ Lo~-~3~ . ' 3~:614 ' 426,825' 440.~5 * 441.869' ~3,422 ' 537,818 ' ~2.3~7 ' 583,527' 41,15b 7 60~ Fue~ Tax .... 62~,~ ' - 670~ .... ~'9.9~" 6~.855 ' 685,573: ~g,922- ~0. i32 ' 6~7,036; Veh Li~Fees -- ' 237,652~ 2~B~7 ' - ~40~"- 2~,441 - -246,265' 251,417' - 295,38~ ' 2~,9~ ..... ~¢ ..... 2~% DUI - Cities I'qVeh Lic Fees · Fuel Tax I'lCdminal Justice Equalization · Liquor [] MVET $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $- STATE-SHARED REVENUES 1993-1999 ........ :!?---= ....................... ;i' "*: "! 12 City of Federal 14/ay May 1999 Monthly Financial Report FINES & FORFEITURES Budge1 I $569,871 I $599,48~ $613,226 $639,830 $680.000 $714,000 I 1994 I 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Change from Adopted Month I Actual } Actual Actual Actual Actual Budget Actual $ Variance % Variance Jan $35,198 $58,898 S50 ~42 $36.755 $60.696 $50540 $64.790 $14.251 282% FJ'B 49,:447~ 3~,042 ' 56,197' 38.609. 67.000 54.512 68.187 13 874' 25.1% -I~lar '' 44,493' ' 38,~-96' 47,205' 46.673. 8:4 4_32'. 5_9_.851: _ 87.418 27.567: _4~' 1°/~._ Apr 56,501 ' 54,415 51.752 51.192 57.881 63.806 86.409 22.603 35.4% May 51,202 49,764 54 538 52.978 73 670 62.101 61 806 -295 4~ 5% Jun 57,984 56,220 46811 50.903 65.060 63.881 Jul 41,965 69,336 48 68~ 53.016 81.666 61.299 Aug 65,794~ 54,319 63 550 65 748 63.201 71.691 Sep 48,268 53,235 35.218 56.801 72363 58.952 Nov i 46,068 ~ 50,281 33 504 45810 67.001 55.157 Dec i 44,828r 40,104 30.269 67.590 33.327 52.693 Total I $592,198 [ $607,932 $560,053 $622,452 $791,112 } $714,000 $368,609 ] $77,800 ! 26.8% % Change [ 7.9%f 2.7% -7.9% 11.1% i 27.1% -9.7°/. · IncJuded in Fines & Forfeitures are rem~iances Imm Dis~ct Courl for 'Shared Court Costs* and "Court Record Services'. · $400,000 $350,000 $300,000 $250.000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $0 FINES AND FORFEITURES YTD Through May $343,679 $?.26,00't 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 13 CitF of Federal H/ay May 1999 Monthly Financial Report 48.383 $ 26,3~ ~$ 59,934 $ ~.814$ 53,165 $ 77,~1 ~ ~,376 ~,823 8~.1~ 33.0S7 60.446 1~.383 43,937 72.7~ 3~.9~ ' 48,297 95.791 '45.879 ' 77,897 ' 148.530 70,633 January ! $ 33,708 $ 36.051 February ! 39,795 47,671 M_a.r _ch _ . , 61,117 52.296 April 61 936 63.273 May 61 353 53,636 June ~ 56.643 39.732 July .50.760 36428 August i 46.091 42.525 September 55870 67.0G2 October 59.489 November i 55.740 36.508 51.060 95.510 67.315 65,038- 50,280--: 55,171 60,598 69,015 65,217 57,030 106,758 60.208 64,655 50,474 144,686 71,299 60,072 56,879 130,374 58.683 37,509 61,053 92,585 74.057 101 203 27.146 36.7% 75,731 169,384 93,653 i 1237% 87.461 78,077 0.0% 71,521 - 0.0% 75,143 0.0% 38.~35 . 60.354~_ '~2.402 . 48.152. 122.107. 67,~393 .... - .... 0.0% 70.370 43.435 45.163 32.664 100,067 · 62,480 ~; 0.0% December 57.415 49.954 81,867 49,613 ' 48,716 72,243 69,822 - 0.0% Exp ~m May ~ 714,6~ 631,~8 ~ 6~,~g: 749,~3 I 931,~g ] ~7,511 ' 970,329: g~,2~ I ~ ~ R~v~ Ralio ~.1% 400%~ 312%~ 295%~ 41.6%; 29.5%; 352%' ~.3%~ ~ ~ ~D R~ve~ Ratio 394% 41.6%: 39.0% ~.0%~ 35.7%~ 37.8% ~; ~.9%~ na~ nal ~ I~Building Permits ~Plan Check Fees nZoning Fees [] Electrica Permits $300,000 $250.000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $- PERMIT/ZONING/PLAN CHECK FEES 1991-1999 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999-Adp 1999-A~ 14 .C#¥ of Federal [VaF Mag 1999 MonthlF Financial Report , Revenue ' [ Actual Jaqua,y $ 1.855 February 2.403 March 3,790 _Apr!l 1_8796 May 4.163 June 2,472 July t6.366 August 12.419 PERMITS/PLAN REVIEW/EXPEDITED REVIEW/~NSPEC TTON FEES '. ' ~ · 1993 - 1999 ';~'"" : · t9~ f997 Actual Actual 23.627 8.583 10,708 26 504 14.751 9.079 21.158 9.551 8.283 9.977 29.676 12.353 18.645 27.438 I :L':1994 '. ~995: Actual Actual $ 16.198 $ 22.397 10,580 6,797 8.826 11.568 25,439 '11 ·224 6.955' 181-991 39.839 7.131 8.374 9.726 19.584 9.339 16 1,58. $ 16,959; $ _19.293 $ 2,334 13.8'h 8,437 13,802 19,402 $ 5,600 40.6°/' 12,347 15.722 43,177 $ 27,455 174.6°/, 19,977 24,592 16,849 $ (7.743): 26.621 17,954 25.087 $ 7,133 39.7°/~ 26.339: 21,273 . 0.0o/' 21,002 19,635 34,634 25,914 0.0o/~ September _ 6.583 9,997 9.006 15.252 26180 42,540 19,191 0.05 October 35.280 ' (32,125)' 22.059' -' 14,04i ' 15.049' 32,348' "13 147 ..... 0.~o/~ November 7.947 11.036 27.799 13.524: 18019 33,531 20,759 0.0~ December 7.193 20,147 22,638 14.832 19.049. 32,460 22,623, - ~ 0.0% Monthly Average 9.914 12.07! 14,890 16,435 lh.:35 25,535, 19,298~ 24,762, 6,9551 Permits/Plan Review/Expedited Review/Inspection Fees Through May 120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999-1999- Adp Act lZoning/Subdiv Fees !FIpw Expedited Plan Review iI-]PW Inspection Fees l~lPlan Review Fees ROW Permits lq A'I'TACHMENT A CITY OF FEDERAL WAY SUMMARY OF SOURCES AND USES OPERATING FUNDS Through May 1994 - 1999 Actuals 1999 Revised Budget Actuals Variance I Through Through Favorable (Untavor; Sources/Uses 1994 1996 1996 1997 , 1998 Annual May May Dollars ($) I Percen, Beginning Fund Balance $12,181,738 $11,403,627 $10,331,641 $10,396,188 $16,128,~42 $17,264,368 $17,264,368 $17,264,368 $ 0.0% Operating Revenues Property Taxes 2,868,535 2,888,348 3,563,580 3,147,880 3,545,735 6.634,350 3,071,349 3,071,349 0 0 0% Sales Tax 3,152,544 3,337,674 3,481,686 3,410,111 3,533,771 8,605,426 3,584,543 3.858,373 273,830 76% Hotel/Motel Lodging Tax 65,000 n/a Criminal Justice Sales Tax 426,825 440,085 441,869 503,422 535,334 1,362,747 542,377 583,527 41,150 7 6% Intergovernmental 2,457.206 2,339,291 2,157,356 2,026,309 2,026,791 4,576,430 1,894,698 2,132.863 238,165 12.65 Real Estate Excise Tax 692,702 365,793 509,879 661,417 721,186 1,200.000 436,893 809,202 372,309 852% iOambling Taxes 123,268 161,175 133,005 163,512 121,192 509,600 292.664 534,890 242,226 82 8% Jtility Taxes 232,271 1,220,085 2,138,673 4.633,769 2.165.882 2.358,140 192,258 I 8 9% =ines & Forfeitures 238,841 234,415 260,334 226,207 343,679 714,000 290,809 368,609 77,800I, 26 8% iBuilding Permits/Fees-CD 252,927 215,255 220,766 253.217 261,664 853,193 341,296 567,659 226,363 663% ~ass Through Fees-CD 33,402 33,402 rca :~OW Permits/Fees-PVV 67,998 70,977 82,962 60,758 83,674 239.573 89,031 103,310 14,279 16 0% ~ass Through Fees-PW 20,498 20,498 rca .~censes 35,606 38,310 36,613 36,178 26,344 123,201 87,473 76,984 (10,489) -120% =ranchise Fees 181,099 186,359 191,738 222,980 340,864 494,255 239,877 220,578 (19,299) -8 Recreation Fees 175,912 153,053 167,344 171,134 186,570 501,343 195,524 215,321 19,797 101% Dumas Bay Centre 36.769 93,601 94,662 113,469 130,559 429,609 139 665 193,076 53,411 382% Knutzen Family Theatre 59,030 24,596 17,055 (7,541) -307% Interest Earnings 207,606 164,234 193,074 193,978 299,124 1,040,139 279,153 .. 469,482 190,329 68.2°,4 Admin Fee-SWM & Solid Waste 62,660 64,540 67,806 69,162 168.478 70,200 70,200 0 0% SWM Fees 806,686 768,187 1,029,681 1,412.747 1.264,248 3,120.302 1,452,882 1,452,882 0.0°,4 Refuse Collection Fees 62,155 62,070 60,648 60,407 61,159 148,524 61,885 62,441 556 0 9% Police Services 75,654 56,234 138,432 56,695 157,844 101,149 178.4% Other 242,324 168,930 216,132 213,337 685,548 139,765 45,406 45,406 0.0% Total Operating Revenues 12,029,003 J 11,760,417 13,138,141 I 14,240,607 t 16,431,611 ~6,767,166 15,362,897 17,423,092 2,060,198 I 13.4% Operating Expenditures City Council 102,876 97,504 97,156 105,252 109,489 219,841 124,792 116,237 8,555 t 69°,4 City Manager 187,685 148,462 190,657 247,186 252.7~9 587,110 242,914 248,297 (5,383)I Municipal Court-Start up 10,930 (10,930) 1 - ' Management Services 469,753 545,876 / 625,031 584,779 559,577 1,947.613 686,474 691,198 (4,724) Civil Legal Services 125,759 157,673 183,844 224,606 202,477 542,355 216,487 260,715 (44,228) -20- Criminal Legal Services 139.331 142,898 164,266 156,199 264.108 1,210,809 456,878 416,721 40,156 8.8% Comm. Dev*elopernent Services 1,494,342 1.534,440 1,114,739 1.112,553 1,091,518 3.048,376 1,287.588 1,150,654 136,934 10.6% Police Services 3,431,334 3,447,807 3,531,610 ' 3,975,496 4,574,307 12,049,356 5,043,939 4,864,519 179,420 36% Jail Services 299.484 227,381 281,452 325,147 345,510 875,000 384,528 395,270 (10,742) -28% Parks & Recreation 1,281.655 1,149,659 1,265,777 1,025,713 1,050,335 3,065,364 1,190,695 1,113,023 77,672 6.5% Public Works 829,163 ~ 841.962 1,052,087 1,083,968 1,225,840 3,444,273 1,230,565 1,123,992 106,573 8.7% City Overlay Program 234 127,067 43,373 93,522 2,018,311 23.226 23,226 0 0% Snow & Ice Removal (1) - I 3,067 38,551 50,537 28,825 55,076 26,436 5,777 20,660 78 1% Solid Waste 51.042 I 52.274 80,727 163,441 92,152 299,727 88,530 75,132 13,398 151% Hotel/Motel Lodging Tax _: I 65,000 Wa Surface Water Management 412,571 445,860 603,928 618,337 550,677 1,749,884 673,908 644,929 28,979 4.3% Debt Service 1,101 2,006 3,123 (9,245) 2,184 5,293,482 102 102 0 0.2% Dumas Bay Centre 78,586 107,425 128,546 162,344 160,425 467,436 175.104 190,578 (15,473) -88% <nutzen Family Theatre - 159,030 66,263 40,311 25,951 39,2% Total Operating Expenditures I 8,904,918 { 8,904,294 I 9,488,681 J 9,869,88~ I 10,603,686 37,098,044 11,918,429 I 11,371,609 { 646,819 } 4.6% Operating Revenues over/(under) - ' - -I, 1,857.210 6,093,596 1,384,919 1,384,919 ' I 0 0% ~:her Financing Sources ~[ i I I Other Financing Uses 2,030.178: 25203 I 25203 577,156 I 1,461,732 9,113,355 3,525,592 3,525,592 - I 00% Ending Fund Balance I [ ! ' Solid WasteI 111 ~'E4 15~ 5,35 213 050 ! 295 991 , 294.316 285,378 287,815 fda rca Snow & Ice i 191 274 133 239 I 73358 I 103.530 100,000 - : 100,530 Wa i Wa Arterial Street i 1,563 5-:'5 971 ~3 352100 I 470 902 I 477,375 I 1656952 i r'Ja ' Wa Ubhty Tax ! - 2,120,030 ' 2,847,359 - ! 3348,210 n/a n/a SWM I 2,016 324 1 732590 1.077.666 i 1,566.522 I 2.276,459 1.321.384 - ! 874,152 Wa i Wa Path & Trails I 29 139 39 284 5,3 210 ! ' 6.153; 12.555, 21,598 - ! 16,281 ,I rca ' rCa Strategic Reserve ~ 2.150 5E2 2 ~ 3-:' 545 2 053 477 ~ 2022 389 2025496 I 2,000,000 - 2.033 361 : rca rca Debt Service i, 1,657 $C~ 1 ..... 2-~.: acl 1 61 ¢ 909 i 2 9~5 805 ' 5283 482 ] 4r447.344 I : 6,335.578 ,L n]a Wa Dumas Bay Centre I 562 651 -~- S_:7 ' "5 131 83 742 13,286 I (0)/ 39,739: n/a n.¢~ Pohce [ I _~2' -:25 - ! 1.052 Z07 766.441 ; 669,334 [ 748150 ! Wa P3 ; '~C,' 9CC 3,S~3 000 , 300 000 ' 300.000 rJa Unreserved 5 123.~f_- 5 ~:~_:-£3 6255 ~15 5292554 3532257 1,416,451 I 5 414.409 , Wa rca Total Ending Fund Balance ! $13,275.645 $14.224..5-17 : $13.955.898 I $14,189.753 $17,235,237 i $13,418,8-48 ! $ 18,858.162 ! $21,166.178 ! $2.607,014 I MEETING DATE: July 6, 1999 ITEM# · CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT' Soro timist Flag Dis la .............................. : ............. P. .................................. P.....Y. ......................................................................................................... .......................................................... CATEGORY: BUDGET IMPACT: X CONSENT ORDINANCE BUSINESS HEARING FYI RESOLUTION STAFF REPORT PROCLAMATION STUDY SESSION OTHER Amount Budgeted: $ Expenditure Amt: $ Contingency Reqd: $ SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: In 1989, the Federal Way Soroptimists began a campaign to install 50 flag poles along Campus Drive in front of the Aquatics Center. The poles fly the American flag and one each of the 50 state flags. The Soroptimists raised the funds and completed their goal on June 14, 1990. The pOles are located within the right-of-way. The program's annual cost is $5,000. The costs involve electricity, purchase of 100 flags annually and replacement bulbs, as needed. Over the past five years, the Soroptimists have requested $2,500 in grant funds to cover the expenses from the City of Federal Way and from King County. These two $2,500 grants have been awarded each year. The Soroptimists would like to transfer the ownership of the flag poles to the City. Council Committee reviewed their proposal on January 11, 1999. At that meeting, Council asked staff to work with the Soroptimists to look at the possibility of the City and King County sharing in the cost of owning and maintaining the flag poles and the flag program. Staff spoke with King County Parks and they are willing to enter into an interlocal agreement with the City to share the maintenance. The Soroptimist organization would transfer the ownership to the City for $1. In addition, Soroptimist is willing to continue coordination of the annual ............................................................................................................................................................................................... ................. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: On June 28, 1999, the Parks, Recreation, Human Services and Public Safety Council Committee passed a motion directing the City Manager to execute a Purchase and Sale Agreement between the City of Federal Way and Federal Way Soroptimist for the ownership of the 50 flag poles located on the City's right-of-way on Campus Drive for $1, and draft an interlocal agreement between King County and the City of Federal Way for the shared maintenance of the ............................................................................................................................................................................................ ........................... APPROVED FOR INCLUSION IN COUNCIL PACKET: , (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION COUNCIL BILL # 1st Reading Enactment Reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # I:\COVERCC-5/14/96 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL PARKS, RECREATION, HUMAN SERVICES & PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE 5E Date: From: Subject: June 23, 1999 Jennifer Schroder, Director Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Soroptimist Flag Display Background: In 1989, the Federal Way Soropimists began a campaign to install 50 flagpoles along Campus Drive in front of the Aquatic Center. The poles fly the American flag and one each of the 50 state flags. All 50 states are represented. The Soroptimist raised the funds and completed their goal on June 14, 1990. Every year since the dedication of the display in 1990, the Soroptimists organize and conduct the Flag Day ceremony. As part of the ceremony, new American flags and new state flags are raised. The poles are located within the right-of-way. The Soroptimists made application to King County for a Special Use Permit in September of 1989. The permit was executed in February 1990. The City passed resolution 90-15 that stated the Council's intent to honor the right-of-way use permit issued by King County to Soroptimist International of Federal Way. The program's annual cost is approximately $5,000. The costs involve electricity, purchase ofl00 flags annually (50 Americarff50 state) and on an as-needed basis, replacement bulbs. Over the last five years, the Soroptimists have requested $2,500 in grant funds to cover the expenses for this program from the City of Federal Way and from King County. These two $2,500 grants have been awarded each year. Proposal: The Federal Way Soroptimists would like to transfer the ownership of the flags pole to the City of Federal Way. Council Committee reviewed the Soroptimist proposal on January 11, 1999. At that meeting, Councilaskedstaffto work with the Federal Way Soroptimists to look at the possibility of the City and King County sharing in the cost of owning and maintaining the flag poles and the flag program. Staff Report: Stafftalked with King County Parks on the history of the flags and informed the County of the Soroptimist's interest to see the ownership of the flags transferred to the City. King County Parks, recognizing the added benefit to their facility in having the flag display continued and maintained, is willing to enter into an interlocal agreement to share the maintenance with the City of Federal Way. The Soroptimist orgainzation would transfer the ownership of the poles to the City of Federal Way for $1. In addition, Soroptimist is willing to continue coordination of the annual Flag Day ceremony. Committee Recommendation: Motion to full Council to direct the City Manager to execute a Purchase and Sale Agreement between the City of Federal Way and Federal Way Soroptimist for the ownership of the 50 flag poles located on the City's right- of-way on Campus Drive for $1, and draft an interlocal agreement betxveen King County and the City of Federal Way for the shared maintenance of the flag pole display. I ApPRovAL, OF COMMITTEE REPORT: _,~. N I'Committee Chair Committee Member ~2ommittee ~en~er ~ , CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA ITEM CATEGORY: BUDGET IMPACT: X CONSENT ORDINANCE BUSINESS HEARING FYI RESOLUTION STAFF REPORT PROCLAMATION STUDY SESSION OTHER Amount Budgeted: $ Expenditure Amt: $ Contingency Reqd: $ SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: For the past several years, the Parks Department has operated the Blueberry Farm as open space property. The usual operations included irrigating the plants in the spring and summer, clearing brush and blackberry vines, minor weeding and mowing. At harvest time, one seasonal staff person has been assigned to the park to sell berries. Staff costs to operate the farm total $9,343, with revenue of $3,400, leaving a negative balance of $5,943. Staff have found it impossible to generate enough revenue to cover the cost of basic operations. This season, staff recommends the Blueberry Farm be treated like all other open space properties within the city and be open to the public on an unrestricted basis. Park Operations would continue to support volunteers through Ed Swan. All other maintenance operations support except safety-related work would be discontinued. This recommendation CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: On June 28, 1999, the Parks, Recreation, Human Services and Public Safety Council Committee passed a motion authorizing staff to discontinue farm operations and maintain the Blueberry Farm at the same level of service as other open space ... p.r...o.p...e...n..!?...s... ...................................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................. (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION COUNCIL BILL # 1st Reading Enactment Reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # I:\COVERCC-5/14/96 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL PARKS, RECREATION, HUMAN SERVICES & PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE Date: From: Subject: June 23, 1999 David Wilbrecht, Deputy Director Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department Blueberry Farm Operation Background: For the past several years, the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department has operated the Blueberry Farm as open space property purchased by the City. The usual operations included irrigating the plants in the spring and summer, clearing brush and blackberry vines from blueberry bushes, minor weeding, and mowing. At harvest time, one seasonal staff has been assigned to the park to sell berries. The following is a summary of the annual operating costs and revenue for the property in 1998: Expenses: Staff Costs $3,355 (233 hours) Revenue: $3,400 Supplies and Materials: $ 700 Difference: ($5,943) Irrigation charges $3,288 Recovery Ratio: 36% Irrigation repairs: $2,000 To. tah $9,343 After reviewing the costs and benefits of operating the farm for the past two years, Park Operations has implemented changes in an attempt improve the recovery rate and reduce expenses. We have found it impossible to generate enough revenue to cover the cost of basic operations. In 1997, the City paid for all expenses to maintain the property and split the revenue with a contractor. The contractor did not make enough money to break even and refused future contracts. In 1998, we went back to hiring a seasonal employee to sell blueberries. As shown above, the subsidy to operate the farm is $5,943. Staff Recommendation: This season, the Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services Department recommends that the Blueberry Farm be treated like all other open space properties within the city and be open to the public on an unrestricted basis. Park Operations would continue to support volunteers through Mr. Swan. All other maintenance operations support except safety-related work would be discontinued. This recommendation would reduce the cost of managing the property from $9,343 to approximately $2,000 annually. Committee Recommendation: Staff requests a recommendation of approval to City Council on the meeting scheduled for July 6, 1999, to: Authorize staff to discontinue farm operations and maintain the Blueberry Farm at the same level of service as other open space properties. APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE REPORT: ] C6mmittee Chair /,/C~°mmittee/Member Committee Member CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT: CDBG and HOME Agreements, 2000-2002 CATEGORY: BUDGET IMPACT: N/A X CONSENT ORDINANCE BUSINESS HEARING FYI RESOLUTION STAFF REPORT PROCLAMATION STUDY SESSION OTHER Amount Budgeted: $ Expenditure Amt: $ Contingency Reqd: $ ATTACHMENTS: A memo to the Parks, Recreation, Human Services, and Public Safety (PRHSPS) Committee dated June 22, 1999. This includes copies of both agreements under consideration and a cover letter that will be signed by the City Manager. SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: In 1994, at the direction of City Council, the City joined the King County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnership Act (HOME) Consortia. The CDBG and HOME programs are federal grants provided by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The grants fund housing and community development projects and programs that primarily benefit low- and moderate-income residents. Nearly all cities in King County participate in one or both Consortia. Participation in the Consortia is established through three year agreements between the City and King County. The current agreements will expire at the end of 1999. To continue participation in the Consortia, the City Council must authorize the City Manger to enter into a joint agreement for use of CDBG funds and an interlocal cooperation agreement for use of HOME funds-- both agreements for the years 2000 to 2002. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: At the regular meeting of the Parks, Recreation, Human Services, and Public Safety (PRHSPS) Committee on June 28, 1999, the committee voted 2-0 to forward the following recommendation to the City Council -- The Committee recommends continued participation in the King County CDBG and HOME Consortia and authorizes the City Manager to enter into three-year agreements with King County for the years 2000 to 2002. CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: lk~-l-l, ori-te Ct4,t ~a~,t~5~ q-~ ~ × ¢c~ke ................................................................................................................. ..................................................................................... . APPROVED FOR INCLUSION IN COUNCIL PACKET: /~~~~'"'__ (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION COUNCIL BILL # 1st Reading Enactment Reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # I~em 5A CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL PARKS, RECREATION, HUMAN SERVICES, AND PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE Date: June 22, 1999 From: Camron Parker, CDBG Coordinator Subject: CDBG and HOME Agreements, 2000-2002 Background Enclosed with this memo are two agreements which renew the City's participation in the King County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment Partnership Act (HOME) Consortia. The agreements will be effective between the years 2000 and 2002. Also included is a cover letter that will be signed by the City Manager should the City Council authorize continued participation in the King County CDBG Consortium. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires these agreements for cities to be able to participate in regional King County CDBG and HOME Consortia. Nearly all suburban cities participate in one or both Consortia. Bellevue and Auburn participate only in the HOME Consortium; they administer their own CDBG entitlements. Like Bellevue and Auburn, the City of Federal Way is entitled to administer its own CDBG program. In 1994, at the direction of City Council, the City joined the King County CDBG Consortium and has jointly administered CDBG funds with the Consortium since that time. The King County Housing and Community Development Division administers both grants. For CDBG, the larger member cities share in the administration by receiving a proportional amount of grant funds on a pass-through system. The HOME grant is administered regionally as it is not a large enough amount to warrant a pass-through system. The County uses approximately ten percent of both grants for administrative costs. This amount is reserved by the County prior to distributing the CDBG pass-through amounts. Changes from Prior Three-Year Agreements These agreements are substantially similar to past three-year agreements. They retain the pass- through method of sharing CDBG funds with the larger suburban cities, and provide for the continued allocation of HOME funds on a regional basis. The County will continue its role as direct liaison to HUD and Mil manage all annual CDBG capital projects for non-profit grant recipients. The City will continue to operate an annual CDBG allocation process and will PRPSHS -- CDBG Pass-through Page 2 of 3 manage all annual CDBG public service contracts and capital projects that are directly implemented by the City. The agreements contain four important modifications: First, the City's "joint agreement" for use of CDBG funds is slightly different than the "interlocal cooperation agreements" used by other participating cities. The joint agreement applies to cities that qualify to receive a CDBG entitlement grant directly from HUD. The City of Federal Way has been a HUD designated entitlement community since incorporation. The joint agreement specifies that the City will be allocated the larger of either (a) a Pass-through calculated through the King County Consortium's formula, or (b) the entitlement amount calculated through the HUD formula (less the City's pro rata share of the Consortium's administrative set-aside). Additionally, the joint agreement will allow the City a new level of flexibility regarding the Housing Stability Program. This is a homelessness prevention program which provides one-time loans or grants to individuals who face homelessness due to an unexpected financial crisis. It is funded with 25 percent of the Consortium's public service CDBG funds (fifteen percent of the total urban county entitlement may be allocated to public service programs). The 25 percent is removed before the calculations are made for the public service pass-through amounts. Under the previous agreement, the City of Federal Way's financial participation in this program was assumed. Under the new agreement, the City will have the option of withholding its pro rata share and allocating these funds to a different eligible public service activity. An additional new requirement in the agreement requires the Housing Stability Program to provide an annual report to all CDBG Consortium members. Second, the CDBG and HOME agreements allow the King County Executive to appoint a citizen from an unincorporated area as a representative to the Joint Recommendations Committee (JRC), which is the Consortium's interjurisdictional policy recommendation body. Previously, only King County department directors (or designees) and Suburban City Association appointees could sit on the JRC. While unincorporated area residents benefit from Consortium projects and programs, there was previously no direct representation for these County residents on the JRC. Third, the new CDBG agreements contain some provisions that are important to various cities. One provision allows smaller Pass-through cities to continue to receive a Pass-through even if they fall below the Consortium-adopted $50,000 threshold in future years (Issaquah, for example, is close to the threshold and risks falling below it if Congress reduces the entitlement). Other provisions clarify and add specific time lines to administrative responsibilities of the County to the participating cities. Finally, the CDBG and HOME agreements now provide for an automatic renewal at the end of three years. Under the renewal policy, participation in the Consortia will be automatic every three years unless the City decides to opt out of the Consortia or propose amendments to the agreement. Previously, the agreements terminated after the three year period and had to be re- negotiated by all Consortium participants (approximately 30 cities and the county). While the 6/22/99 \\CFW CH\USER\CD\CAMRONPLAGNDAITM\99PRHSPS\PRHS6- I.D PRPSHS -- CDBG Pass-through Page 3 of 3 administrative details have yet to be established, it is likely that participating cities will certify that they wish to remain in the Consortium every three years. Staff Recommendation For 1999, the City of Federal Way received more CDBG funds through participation in the Consortium with less City stafftime necessary to operate a separate CDBG program. Additionally, to resurrect the City's own CDBG program, HUD will require extensive one and five year housing and community development planning processes that may take up to 18 months to complete. The City would not be eligible to receive CDBG funds until the required planning processes were complete. Additionally, the City would also have to increase the CDBG staffing level to assume grant management duties currently conducted by the County. For these reasons, Human Services staff recommend continued participation in the King County CDBG and HOME Consortia. Committee Recommendation ,/The Committee recommends continued participation in the King County CDBG and HOME Consortia and authorizes the City Manager to enter into three-year agreements with King County for the years 2000 to 2002. The Committee forwards this recommendation to the full City Council for consideration at the July 6, 1999 meeting. The Committee recommends discontinuing participation in the King County CDBG and HOME Consortia recognizing that the City is not entitled to receive a HOME grant, and recognizing that the City would not be eligible to receive CDBG funds until such time as all HUD required housing and community development planning processes are complete and approved by HUD. The Committee forwards this recommendation to the full City Council for consideration at the July 6, 1999 meeting. 3. The Committee forwards to the full City Council a recommendation of its choice for consideration at the July 6, 1999 meeting. APPROVAL OF COMMITrEE REPORT: 7~ommittee Chair Committee Member Committee Mefi~ber 6/22/99 \\CFW CI-BUSER\CD\CAMRONP\AGNDAITM\99PRHSPS\PRHS6- I.D COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT JOINT AGREEMENT DRAFT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by and between King County and the City of , said parties to the Agreement each being a unit of general local government in the State of Washington. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the federal government through adoption and administration of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended (the "Act"), will make Community Development Block Grant ("CDBG"), funds available to both the County and city in the form of entitlement grants; and WHEREAS, the area encompassed by unincorporated King County and any participating cities is designated by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") as an urban county for the purpose of receiving CDBG funds; and WHEREAS, the Act directs HUD to distribute to each urban county the annual appropriation of CDBG funds based on the population characteristics of the urban county; and WHEREAS, the Act allows joint agreements, whereby entitlement cities may join the urban county, and allows the urban county to distribute CDBG funds to such cities as participating jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the CDBG Regulations require the acceptance of the consolidated housing and community development plan ("Consolidated H&CD Plan") by participating jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, King County will undertake CDBG-funded activities in participating incorporated jurisdictions as specified in the Consolidated H&CD Plan by granting funds to those jurisdictions to carry out such activities; and WHEREAS, King County is responsible to the federal government for all activities undertaken with CDBG funds and will ensure that all CDBG assurances and certifications King County is required to submit to HUD with the Annual Action Plan will be met; and WHEREAS, King County and the participating jurisdictions are committed to targeting CDBG funds to ensure benefit to low- and moderate-income persons as defined by HUD; and WHEREAS, King County and its participating jurisdictions recognize that the needs of low- and moderate-income persons may cross jurisdictional boundaries and can therefore be considered regional needs; and 06/04/99 I WHEREAS, King County and the participating jurisdictions must submit an Annual Action Plan to HUD which is a requirement to receive CDBG funds; and WHEREAS, the purpose of this Joint Agreement, which is entered into pursuant to and in accordance with the State Interlocal Cooperation Act, RCW Chap. 39.34, is for the City to join the urban county consortium, ("Consortium"), for planning the distribution and administration of CDBG and other federal funds received on behalf of the Consortium from HUD, and for execution of activities in accordance with and under authority of the Act; NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN CONSIDERATION OF THE CONTAINED HEREIN, IT IS AGREED THAT: THE FOREGOING MUTUAL PROMISES GENERAL AGREEMENT King County and each participating jurisdiction agree to cooperate to undertake, or assist in undertaking, activities which further the development of viable urban communities, including the provision of decent housing and a suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities, principally for persons of Iow and moderate income, through community renewal and lower income housing assistance activities, specifically urban renewal and publicly assisted housing, funded from annual CDBG funds from federal Fiscal Years' 2000, 2001, and 2002 appropriations, from recaptured funds allo- cated in those years, and from any program income generated from the expenditure of such funds. II. GENERAL DISTRIBUTION OF FUNDS The distribution within the County of CDBG Funds under Title I of the Act shall be governed by the following provisions, exclusive of the Cities of Auburn, Bellevue, and Seattle. Ao The amount needed for administration of the Consortium's CDBG and other federal programs which benefit the Consortium shall be reserved by the County. This amount, hereinafter referred to as the administrative setaside, is contingent upon review by the Joint Recommendations Committee ("the Committee"), as provided in Section VIII.C.I., and approval by the Metropolitan King County Council, as provided in Section XIII.B. In addition to the administrative setaside referred to in Section II (A), each year 25% of the public service funds available, not to exceed $300,000, will be subtracted from the entitlement and reserved for the Housing Stability Program, a public service activity in support of the affordable housing requirements under the implementation of the state Growth Management Act (RCW Chapter 36.70A). Th~ public service setaside will be administered by the County with input from a working group of the 06/04/99 2 participating cities and county staff. This public service setaside will. be subject to the same percentage of decrease as the annual public service funds if there are any reductions during the year. In addition, any city participating in this Joint Agreement will have the option of withholding their pro rata share of the Housing Stability Program funds and allocating them to a different eligible public service activity if the City so chooses. Of the grant amount remaining after the setasides referred to in Sections II.A. and II.B. ("the Adjusted Grant Amount"), the city participating in this Joint Agreement will be eligible to receive a direct pass-through share, provided that: The City's pass-through share will be the larger of a share of the Adjusted Grant Amount based upon the CDBG Consortium's formula (the City's share of the Consortium's total low- and moderate-income persons, as defined by HUD), or the City's HUD-specified entitlement grant amount less the City's pro rata share of the Consortium's administrative setaside, and at the City's option (se,e II.B. above) less the City's pro rata share of the Housing Stability Program; 2. The City participates in developing the Consortium's Consolidated H&CD Plan by identifying its non-housing community development needs; o The city agrees to abide by Consortium schedules and requirements to receive a pass-through of CDBG funds. The responsibilities of these pass- through jurisdictions are defined in Section X. Participating cities may elect not to receive a direct pass-through but may. compete for County and Small Cities Funds, as defined in Section II.D., below. Do The funds remaining in the Adjusted Grant Amount after the distribution of the pass- through funds referred to in Section II.C. shall be referred to as the County and Small Cities Fund, and shall be allocated on a competitive basis to projects serving the cities not qualifying to receive or not electing to receive a pass-through, and/or projects serving the unincorporated areas of the County. mo If the monies assigned to a project during the period of this Agreement exceed the actual cost of the project, or if the project is later reduced or canceled, then the excess monies or recaptured funds, will be recaptured by the County and will be redistributed as follows: Administrative setaside funds, as defined in Section II.A. and public service setaside as defined in Section II.B. which are recaptured shall be returned to the Consortium and be distributed to the Pass-through Cities and County and Small Cities Funds based on their percentage of the Consortium's low- and moderate- income persons, as defined by HUD. 2. Funds recaptured from a project funded through a city's pass-through fund, as defined in Section II (C), shall be returned to the City's pass-throu_ gh fund, unless 06/04/99 3 Fo Go the City no longer qualifies for a pass-through as provided in Section II.C. 1., in which case the funds shall be returned to the County and Small Cities Fund. o Funds recaptured from a project funded through the County and Small Cities Fund, as defined in Section II.D., shall be returned to the County and Small Cities Fund. Unallocated or recaptured funds from 1987 and prior years (e.g., unallocated or recaptured "Population", "Needs" or "Joint" funds) shall be returned to the Consortium and be distributed to the Pass-through Cities and the County and Small Cities Funds based on their percentage of the Consortium's low- and moderate- income persons, as defined by HUD. Funds received by a jurisdiction or CDBG subrecipient generated from the use of CDBG funds, hereinafter referred to as program income, shall be returned to the fund which generated the program income as follows, unless an exception is specifically recommended by the Committee and approved by the Metropolitan King County Council: That portion of the program income which is interest or fee income generated through Community Development Interim Loan (CDIL) and Section 108 loan guarantee projects (as provided in Section 108 of the Act), both of which use all or a portion of the Consortium's total available CDBG funds, shall be returned to the Consortium. The funds shall be used for the direct costs (e.g., staff, attorney, and bank fees, advertising costs, contract' compliance costs), necessary for the marketing, negotiation, and implementation of the interim loan and 108 loan activities, and for other Consortium-wide or subregional capital projects or programs, including other Consortium-wide economic development projects or programs. Use of the funds shall be recommended by the Committee each year after review by an inter-jurisdictional staff group. Program income generated from a project (including housing repair) funded through a city's pass-through fund, as defined in Section II.C., shall be returned to the City's pass-through fund, unless the City no longer 9ualifies for a pass- through as provided in Section II.C.I., in which case the program income shall be_returned to the County and Small Cities Fund. o Program income generated from a project (including housing repair) funded through the County and Small Cities Fund, as defined in Section II.D., shall be returned to the County and Small Cities Fund. Program income generated from projects funded in 1987 (except for housing repair) and prior years shall be returned to the Consortium and be distributed to the Pass-through Cities and the County and Small Cities Funds according to their share of the Consortium's low- and moderate-income persons, as defined by HUD. -~_ 06/04/99 4 III. USE OF FUNDS: GENERAL PROVISIONS A. The County and each of the Pass-through Cities shall specify activities and projects which it will undertake with the funds described in Section II. above. Bo The County and each of the Pass-through Cities shall ensure that CDBG funds are targeted to activities which can document predominant (51%) benefit to low- and moderate-income people and that the overall program meets or exceeds HUD's requirements for the percentage of funds spent to benefit low- and moderate-income persons in King County. Pass-through Cities may exchange their CDBG funds with other Pass-through Cities for general revenue funds. The use of general revenue funds obtained by a Pass- through City in this manner shall be consistent with the general intent of the community development program, but shall not be considered CDBG program income. D. The County and each of the Pass-through Cities shall conduct the appropriate citizen participation activities as required by HUD regulations. Approval of projects must be secured through formal grant applications (proposals) to King County; approval of activities shall be secured when the annual program is approved or amended. Fo General administrative costs incurred by Pass-through Cities shall be paid for out of the pass-through or from local funds. Costs incurred in administering specific projects may be included in project costs. IV. USE OF ADMINISTRATION FUNDS mo A Pass-through City may reserve a portion of its entitlement share to cover administrative costs of its local CDBG Program or to fund planning projects, however, this amount must be reserved by spring of_each year and will be based upon the City's proportion of low- and moderate-income persons, as defined by HUD. B. In addition to the responsibilities outlined in Section X. Pass-through Cities may use additional Pass-through funds to cover part of their administrative costs if.' Planning ceiling (the maximum amount allowed by HUD for planning and administration activities which cannot exceed 20% of the annual entitlement plus program income) is available; 2. The City runs a competitive process for the distribution of the CDBG funds; and 06/04/99 5 Co Do o City staff participate in Consortium-wide planning processes such as development of the Consolidated H&CD Plan and the HOME Consortium Working Group. Requests from Pass-through Cities to use the balance of planning ceiling, if available, to cover additional administrative costs will take priority over requests for planning projects. Pass-through City staff who are supported with administrative funds would also be expected to assist in preparing and/or presenting information to the Committee. Ve USE OF PUBLIC SERVICE FUNDS A Pass-through City may reserve a portion of its entitlement share to cover public service activities; however, the amount must be reserved by spring of each year and will be based upon the City's proportion of low- and moderate-income persons, as defined by HUD. VI. PROGRAM INCOME A. The participating jurisdiction must inform King County of any income generated by the expenditure of CDBG funds received by the participating jurisdiction. B. Any such program income is subject to requirements set forth in Section II.G. of this Agreement. C. Any program income the participating jurisdiction is authorized to retain may only be used for eligible activities in accordance with all applicable CDBG requirements. King County has the responsibility for monitoring and reporting to-HUD on the use of any such program income and thereby requires appropriate record keeping and reporting by the participating jurisdiction as stated in the signed certification to receive "Pass-through City" status and in each city's contract to receive CDBG planning and administration funds. In the event of close-out or change in status of the participating jurisdiction any program income that is on hand or received subsequent to the close-out or change in status shall be paid to King County Consortium. VII. REAL PROPERTY mo Participating jurisdictions owning community facilities acquired or improved in ~vhole or in part with CDBG funds must comply with change of use restrictions as required by HUD and the policies adopted by the Committee as found in the Consolidated H&CD Plan. O6/O4/99 6 The participating jurisdiction must notify King County prior to any modification or change in the use of real property acquired or improved in whole or in part with CDBG funds. This includes any modification or change in use from that planned at the time of the acquisition or improvement, including disposition. Co The jurisdiction shall reimburse King County in an amount equal to the current fair market value (less any portion thereof attributable to expenditures of non-CDBG funds) of property acquired or improved with CDBG funds that is sold or transferred for a use which does not qualify under the CDBG regulations. Do Program income generated from the disposition or transfer of property prior to or subsequent to the close-out, change of status, or termination of the cooperation agreement between the County and the participating jurisdiction shall be subject to the requirements set forth in Section II.G. and Section VI. VIII. JOINT RECOMMENDATIONS COMMITTEE A Joint Recommendations Committee shall be established. mo Composition. The Committee shall be composed of four County representatives and five Cities representatives. The four County representatives may be Department Directors or their designees, and/or citizen representatives from unincorporated communities. County representatives shall be .specified in writing and should, where possible, be the same person consistently from meeting to meeting. The five partici- pating city representatives and their alternates will include city planning directors or comparable level staff, or elected officials. Two city representatives and their alternates will be from the north/east region of the County and two city representatives and their alternates will be from the south region of the County. An additional revolving position on this Committee shall be rotated between the HOME- only cities of Auburn and Bellevue. The revolving position will be non-voting, except on issues related to the King County HOME Consortium and other federal housing-related funds (excluding CDBG). Bo Appointments. The King County Executive shall appoint the four County representatives (no more than one representative for each unincorporated community or Department). The Suburban Cities Association will select eight different jurisdictions, four to serve as members and four as alternates, who in turn, will assign representatives to this Committee. Terms of office shall be for two years. Priority for one of the positions will be for a small city representative. The revolving HOME position will be appointed annually by the respective jurisdiction. Members of the Committee shall serve at the pleasure of their respective appointing authorities. The chairperson and vice-chairperson of the Committee shall be chosen from an~ong the members of the Committee by a majority vote of the members ~r a term of one 06/04/99 7 year beginning the first meeting of the calendar year. Attendance of 'five members will constitute a quorum. C. Powers and Duties. The Committee shall be empowered to: Review and recommend to the King County Executive all policy matters on the Consortium's CDBG and HOME Program including the amount of administrative setaside, priorities governing the use of the public services setaside, and projects or programs to be funded with the program income from community development interim loans and Section t08 loan guarantees (as allowed in Section 108 of the Act). 2. Review, recommend, and endorse the Consolidated H&CD Plan required by HUD. 3. Review plan and program disagreements between the County and participating jurisdictions and offer recommendations to the King County Executive. Review and recommend sanctions to be imposed on cities for failure to meet responsibilities as contained in Section X of this Agreement. Any recommended sanctions will ensure that the City's low- and moderate-income residents continue to benefit from CDBG funds. Sanctions will be imposed to prevent the King County Consortium from losing a share of its entitlement due to participating Cities' inability to meet federal requirements. 5. Review and recommend projects for funding under the Section 108 loan guarantee program (as allowed in Section 108 of the Act). Review and recommend projects for funding from the remainder of any new Pass-through City's funds if that new Pass-through City chooses to take only a partial pass-through as provided in Section II.C.4. above. IX. RESPONSIBILITIES AND DUTIES OF THE KING COUNTY HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM STAFF Those King County Housing and Community Development Program Staff positions which are funded through the administrative setaside, hereinafter referred to as the Staff, serve as staff to all Consortium partners and the Committee and provides liaison between the Consortium and HUD. A. Responsibilities to the Joint Recommendations Committee. The Staff shall: Solicit and present to the Committee all applicable federal and County policy guidelines, special conditions, and formal requirements related to the preparation of the Consolidated H&CD Plan, and related to administration~vf the programs under these plans. 06/04/99 8 Prepare and present written materials required by HUD and the Metropolitan King County Council as components of the Consolidated H&CD Plan to be prepared pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to: collection and analysis of data; identification of problems, needs and their locations; development of long and short term objectives; consideration of alternative strategies; and preparation of the administrative budget. o Prepare and present to the Committee policy evaluation reports or recommendations, and any other material deemed necessary by the Committee to help the Committee fulfill its powers and duties. Collaborate with city staff working groups and present to the Committee specific sanctions to be imposed on cities which fail to meet their responsibilities as contained in Section X and as contained in specific annual agreements. B. Responsibilities to Jurisdictions Which are Parties to This Agreement. The County will develop strategic plans which will identify housing and community development needs and objectives to address high priority needs in the balance of the County in accordance with the primary goals and requirements of the Act. The Consolidated H&CD Plan, including the housing and community development objectives will meet the HUD requirement for a Community Development Plan. The objectives and any local program criteria outlined within the Consolidated H&CD Plan will be consistent with local comprehensive plans being developed under the Growth Management Act. The Staff shall: Prepare and present to the King County Executive and Council material necessary for the approval of the County and Small Cities portion of the annual program. 2. Present to the Metropolitan King County Council the Consortium's annual program for adoption. o Distribute to participating jurisdictions., prior to any Joint Recommendations Committee decision based upon it, information concerning proposals having implications for Consortium-wide funding as provided in Section II.G.1. above. The County will incorporate jurisdictions' feedback in materials forwarded to the Joint Recommendations Committee or Metropolitan King County Council. Provide regular written reports outlining the outcomes and costs of the Consortium wide Housing Stability and economic development programs such that this information is available for participating jurisdictions' review and comment prior to the Joint Recommendations Committee's decisions on the programs' budgets for the following year, and provide quarterly~tatus reports to 06/04/99 9 the Pass-through Cities on those housing repair programs and capital projects which the County is administering on behalf of the Pass-through Cities. Administer the Consortium's CDBG Program: · help to identify needs in communities; · provide assistance in interpreting HUD regulations; · provide technical assistance to cities as necessary to enable them to meet their responsibilities as partners to the Agreement; · assist in the development of viable CDBG proposals; · review all proposals for CDBG funding; · inform participating jurisdictions in a timely way of the amount of capital dollars available for distribution regionally and the requirements regarding eligibility for them. · develop contracts for funded projects in a timely fashion; public (human) services programs have a high priority and will receive authorization to proceed within 15 working days of the beginning of the program year if all relevant information needed to prepare the contract has been submitted; · monitor subrecipient and city-funded projects; · monitor and enforce compliance with the federal wage and relocation requirements;, · reimburse all eligible costs; · prepare and submit required documents and reports to HUD; and · provide oversight of the CDBG Consortium to ensure compliance with all federal requirements. Upon request by a Pass-through City, staff will develop, administer, and implement a city's CDBG-funded contract. Additionally, multi- jurisdictional projects funded by King County and/or one or more cities will be developed and implemented by Staff. King County shall determine, with the advice of representatives from small cities, the use of the County and Small Cities Funds in a manner consistent with the Consolidated H&CD Plan including its local program criteria. Xo RESPONSIBILITIES AND POWERS OF PASS-THROUGH CITIES In order to receive a direct share of the entitlement, Pass-through Cities participating in this Agreement shall have the following responsibilities and powers: 06/04/99 10 mo Co Do Eo Fo H° Pass-through City Councils may adopt local program criteria which, will address community development and housing needs in coordination with the Consortium's timeline for consolidated planning effort and which will be consistent with federal requirements, Consortium-wide policies and local comprehensive plans being developed under the Growth Management Act. Notify the County of the citizen participation activities undertaken by local jurisdic- tions as well as any changes made by the jurisdiction to funded CDBG activities in a timely manner as referenced under Section III(D). Each Pass-through City shall exercise local discretion in determining the use of its pass-through funds in a manner that (1) is consistent with the Consolidated H&CD Plan, (2) recognizes the federal requirement at 24 CFR Part 570.2 that a minimum of 70% of the funds be spent on activities benefiting primarily low and moderate income persons, and (3) is in accordance with the Consortium's schedule for submission to HUD. City legislative bodies shall approve or disapprove via motion or resolution all CDBG activities, locations, and budgets submitted by Pass-ttrrough City staff. Notice of these actions are to be forwarded to the County in a timely manner. Pass-through City staff shall review all project proposals for consistency with federal threshold requirements and Consortium-wide policies prior to submission to the County, and ensure ¢iat all relevant information necessary to prepare a contract is submitted to the County in a timely manner. Pass-through City staff shall assist in the development of the Consortium-wide Consolidated H&CD Plan which includes housing and other community development needs, resources, objectives, and adopted projects. Pass-through City staff shall implement CDBG-funded projects within the program year and submit both vouchers and required reports to the County in a complete and timely manner. Pass-through City staff shall participate in other Consortium-wide planning activities such as HOME policy development and monitoring the Housing Stability Program. Pass-through City staff shall collaborate with County staff working group and present to the Committee specific sanctions to be imposed on cities which fail to meet their responsibilities as contained in this section and as contained in specific annual agreements. Each Pass-through City shall examine its role in recognizing and addressing regional or Consortium-wide needs and may participate in a coordinated funding approach with other jurisdictions and the County to serve their residents. 06/04/99 II Xle RESPONSIBILITIES OF OTHER CONSORTIUM CITIES Other Consortium cities must apply for funds through the annual County and Small Cities application process. The Small Cities shall: A. Coordinate with County Staff in identifying community development needs and local program criteria for addressing them. Prepare applications for CDBG funds to address local needs. Obtain city council authorization for proposed projects. Carry out funded projects in a timely manner. Bo RESPONSIBILITIES OF ALL PARTICIPATING JURISDICTIONS Ao Bo Co Do Each participating jurisdiction shall fulfill to the County's satisfaction all relevant requirements of federal laws and regulations which apply to King County as applicant, including assurances and certifications described in Section XIV(D). Each participating jurisdiction or cooperating unit of general local government has adopted and is enforcing: 1. A policy prohibiting the use of excessive force by. law enforcement agencies within its jurisdiction against any individuals engaged in non-violent civil rights demonstrations; and A policy enforcing applicable State and local laws against physically barring entrance to or exit from a facility or location which is the subject of non-violent civil rights demonstrations within jurisdictions. Pursuant to 24 CFR 570.501(b), all participating units of local government are subject to the same requirements applicable to subrecipients, excluding the County's Minority and Women Business Enterprises requirements. The applicable requirements include, but are not limited to, a written agreement with the County which complies with 24 CFR 570.503 and includes provisions pertaining to the following items: statement of work; records and reports; program income; uniform administrative items; other program requirements; conditions for religious organizations; suspension and termination; and reversion of assets. All participating units of local government understand that they may not apply for grants under the federal Small Cities or State CDBG' Programs which receive separate entitlements from HUD during the period of participation in this Agreement. Consortium cities which do not receive a direct pass-through of CDBG funds may apply for grants under the County and Small Cities Fund. ~_ 06/04/99 12 All units of local government participating in the CDBG urban county through this agreement understand that they are also part of the urban county for the HOME program, and may participate in a HOME program only through the urban county. XIII. RESPONSIBILITIES AND POWERS OF KING COUNTY ON BEHALF OF THE CONSORTIUM King County shall have the following responsibilities and powers: mo The Metropolitan King County Council shall have authority and responsibility for all policy matters, including the Consolidated H&CD Plan, upon review and recom- mendation by the Committee. Bo The Metropolitan King County Council shall have authority and responsibility for all fund allocation matters, including the.approval of the annual administrative setaside and the approval and adoption of the Consortium's annual CDBG Program. The King County Executive shall have the authority and responsibility to approve requested changes to the adopted annual CDBG Program in the following circumstances: The requested change is to a Pass-through City's portion of the adopted annual program, and the change is requested by the legislative body of the Pass-through City; or ° The requested change is in the County and Small Cities portion of the adopted annual program, and it is limited to a change of project scope or change of project implementor in a specific project, and it is requested by the subrecipient, and the change is made in consultation with the Councilmember in whose district the project is located. Do The King County Executive, as administrator of this CDBG Program, shall have authority and responsibility for all administrative requirements for which the County is responsible to the federal government. E. The King County Executive shall have authority and responsibility for all fund control and disbursements. Fo Notwithstanding any other provision contained in this Agreement, the County as the applicant for CDBG funds has responsibility for and assumes all obligations as the applicant in the execution of this CDBG Program, including final responsibility for selecting activities and annually submitting Action Plans with HUD. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be construed as an abdication of those responsi- bilities and obligations. 06/04/99 13 XIV. GENERAL TERMS mo This Agreement shall extend through the 2000, 2001, and 2002 program years, and will remain in effect until the CDBG funds and program income received with respect to activities carried out during the three-year period are expended and the funded activities completed. This agreement will be automatically renewed for participation in successive three-year qualification periods, unless the County or the City provides written notice that it wishes to amend or elects not to participate in the new qualification period by the date set forth by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development in subsequent Urban County Qualification Notices. King County, as the official applicant, shall have the authority and responsibility to ensure that any property acquired or assisted with CDBG funds is disposed of or used in accordance with federal regulations. Pursuant to 24 CFR Part 570.307(d)(2), during the period of qualification no included unit of general local government may terminate or withdraw from the agreement while it remains in effect. C. It is understood that by signing this Agreement the jurisdictions shall agree to comply with the policies and implementation of the Consolidated H&CD Plan. Do Parties to this compliance with the Housing and VI of the Civil Agreement must take all required actions necessary to assure King County's certification required by Section 104(b) of Title I of Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, including Title Rights Act of 1964, (Title III of the Civil Rights Act), the Fair Housing Act as amended, Section 109 of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, and other applicable laws. mo No CDBG funds shall be expended for activities in, or in support of any participating city that does not affirmatively further fair housing within its own jurisdiction or that impedes the County's actions to comply with its fair housing certification. Fo It is recognized that amendment of the provisions of this Agreement may become necessary, and such amendment shall take place when all parties have executed a written addendum to this Agreement. The City and the County agree to adopt any amendments to the agreement incorporating changes necessary to meet the requirements for cooperation agreements set forth in an Urban County Qualification Notice applicable for a subsequent three-year qualification period, and to submit such amendment to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. Failure to adopt such amendment will void the automatic renewal of such qualification period. Go Calculations for determining the number of low- and moderate-income persons residing in the County and cities shall be based upon official HUD-_approved 1990 Census data, and on the official annual estimates of populations of cities, towns and 06/04/99 14 Ko communities published by the State of Washington Office of Program Planning and Fiscal Management. Participating jurisdictions shall be considered to be those jurisdictions which have signed this Agreement. Jurisdictions undertaking activities and/or projects with CDBG funds distributed under this Agreement retain full civil and criminal liability as though these funds were locally generated. King County retains environmental review responsibility for purposes of fulfilling requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, under which King County may require the local incorporated jurisdiction or contractor to furnish data, information, and assistance for King County's review and assessment in determining whether King County must prepare an Environmental Impact Statement. Jurisdictions retain responsibility in fulfilling the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act under which King County has review responsibility only. CITY OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Signature-of Chief Executive Officer for Ron Sims, County Executive Name and Title (printed) Date: Date: 06/04/99 15 HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT DRAFT THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between King County, an urban county pursuant to 24 CFR Subpart 92.101 and Subpart 570.3, hereinafter referred to as the "County," and the City of hereinafter referred to as the "City," said parties to the Agreement each being a unit of general local government of the State of Washington. RECITALS WHEREAS, a unit of general local government that is included in an urban county may be part of a HOME consortium only through the urban county; and WHEREAS, a metropolitan city or an urban county may be part of a consortium; and WHEREAS, the City and King County agree that it is mutually desirable and beneficial to enter into a consortium arrangement pursuant to and authorized by 24 CFR Part 92 and 42 USC {} 12746 for purposes of the HOME Investment Partnerships Program, hereinafter referred to as "HOME Program"; # NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN CONSIDERATION OF THE CONTAINED HEREIN, IT IS AGREED THAT: THE FOREGOING MUTUAL PROMISES This Agreement is made pursuant to the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, as amended, 42 USC {} 12701 et. seq. (the "Act") and RCW 39.34, the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act. 2. The City and the County agree to cooperate to undertake or assist in undertaking HOME Program housing assistance activities which are eligible under 24 CFR Part 92. o The County is hereby authorized to act as the representative member on behalf of the Consortium for the purposes of the HOME Program. The County agrees to assume overall responsibility for ensuring that the Consortium's HOME Program is carried out in compliance with federal requirements and the housing objectives of the City and the County as adopted in the Consolidated Housing and Community Development Plan (Consolidated H&CD Plan). 06/04/99 I The City agrees to cooperate fully with the County in the development and preparation of the Consolidated H&CD Plan, and to prepare and provide those elements specifically pertaining to the City. This Agreement shall remain in full force and effect for the period necessary to plan and carry out all activities that will be funded from HOME funds awarded for the 2000, 2001, and 2002 federal fiscal years, the three-year qualification period that coincides with the Agreement for the Distribution and Administration of Community Development Block Grant, or until the County's designation as a participating HOME jurisdiction or an urban county is rescinded by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, whichever is shorter. This agreement will be automatically renewed for participation in successive three-year qualification periods, unless the County or the City provides written notice it wishes to amend or elects not to participate in the new qualification period. Such written notice shall be given by the date set forth in an Urban County Qualification Notice applicable to subsequent three-year qualification periods and provided by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. The City and the County agree to adopt any amendments to the agreement incorporating changes necessary to meet the requirements for cooperation agreements set forth in an Urban County Qualification Notice applicable for a subsequent three-year qualification period, and to submit such amendment to the United States Department of Housing and Urbah Development. Failure to ad, opt such amendment will void the automatic renewal of such qualification period. 6. During the term of this Agreement, neither the County nor the City may withdraw from participation from their respective obligations under this Agreement. By executing the HOME Agreement, the City understands that it may not participate in a HOME consortium except through the urban county, regardless of whether the urban county receives a HOME formula allocation. o This Agreement shall be executed in three counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, by the chief executive officers of the County and the City, pursuant to the authority granted them by their respective goveming bodies. One of the signed counterparts, accompanied by copies of the authorizing resolutions from the County and the City, shall be filed by the County with the Region X office of HUD. A copy shall be filed with the Secretary of State and the Clerk of the King County Council, the County Auditor, and the City pursuant to RCW 39.34.040. 9. The County and the City both hereby agree to affirmatively further fair housing. 06/04/99 2 10. Joint Recommendations Committee Composition. The Committee shall be composed of four County representatives and five Cities representatives. The four County representatives may be Department Directors or their designees, and/or citizen representatives of unincorporated communities. County representatives shall be specified in writing and should, where possible, be the same person consistently from meeting to meeting. Five participating city representatives and their alternates will include city planning directors or comparable level staff, or elected officials. Two city representatives and their alternates will be from the north/east region of the County and two city representatives and their alternates will be from the south region of the County. An additional revolving position on this Committee shall be rotated between the HOME-only Cities of Auburn and Bellevue. The revolving position will be non-voting, except on issues related to the King County HOME Consortium and other federal housing-related funds (excluding Community Development Block Grant). 11. Appointments. The King County Executive shall appoint the County representatives. The Suburban Cities Association will select eight different jurisdictions, four to serve as members and four as alternates, which in turn, will assign representatives to this Committee. Terms of office shall be for two years. Priority for one of the positions will be for a small city representative. The revolving HOME position will be appointed annually by the respective jurisdiction. Members of the Committee shall serve at the pleasure of their respective appointing authorities. 12. The Joint Recommendations Committee will adopt HOME program policies, consistent with the Consolidated H&CD Plan, developed by the City and County staff working group. The Joint .Recommendations Committee will approve funding decisions. All funding decisions must be in accord with adopted policies. Once the policies are adopted, the City, as a representative member of the Consortium, shall also have the right to comment on any program changes prior to their implementation by the County. 13. The chairperson and vice-chairperson of the Joint Recommendations Committee shall be chosen from among the members of the Committee by a majority vote of the members for a term of one year beginning the first meeting of the calendar year. Attendance of five members will constitute a quorum. 14. The City shall participate jointly with the County in the development of the Consortium's HOME Program by participating in development of a HOME Program strategy sufficient to accommodate both the collective and individual housing objectives contained within local comprehensive plans or other adopted plans of both the City and the County. 15. Federal HOME funds, allocated to the Consortium, shall be used to fund housing assistance activities that are the subject of this Agreement. The City and the County shall cooperate in 06/04/99 3 the establishment of budgets for separate HOME activities. The County intends to enter into contractual agreements with any city, nonprofit organization, or other entity that it selects to implement HOME activities. The County's administrative costs will be paid from the HOME grant, after review and approval by the Joint Recommendations Committee. 16. This agreement applies to the Consortium's acceptance of other federal housing-related funds which may be allocated by formula to the Consortium. Allocation decisions for these funds will be subject to policies and procedures developed by the City and County staff working group and adopted by the Joint Recommendations Committee. This Agreement is legally binding and valid upon signature of all parties. CITY OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON Signature of Chief Executive Officer for Ron Sims, County Executive Name and Title (printed) Date: Date: 06/04/99 4 July 7, 1999 John Peters, Director US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Washington State Office Office of Community Planning and Development 909 First Avenue, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98104-1000 Dear Mr. Peters: Since 1994, the City of Federal Way, a metropolitan city with a population of more than 50,000, has chosen to participate in the King County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Consortium. The City's current joint agreement with the County Consortium ends this year, and must be renewed for the years 2000 to 2002. It is my understanding that HUD requires all metropolitan cities to notify HUD and King County of their chosen status for the next three-year period, 2000-2002. Metropolitan cities have the following options: 1) accept designation as a metropolitan city eligible to receive entitlement status; 2) defer designation as a metropolitan city and participate in the urban county; or 3) accept or maintain designation as a metropolitan city and have a joint agreement with the urban county. The City of Federal Way chooses the third option, which is to maintain the City's entailment status and administer its CDBG funds through a joint agreement with the King County urban county consortium. This status is consistent with how the City has operated for the past six years. It is my understanding that once the City signs the joint agreement with King County for 2000-2002, that the City must remain in this status for the full agreement period. The City Council authorized this action at their regular meeting on July 6, 1999. Sincerely, Kenneth Nyberg City Manager cc: Linda Peterson, Program Manager, King County Housing and Community Development Program CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT: Twin Lakes/Brigadoon Neighborhood Traffic Safety Task Force Recommendations CATEGORY: BUDGET IMPACT: X CONSENT ORDINANCE BUSINESS HEARING FYI RESOLUTION STAFF REPORT PROCLAMATION STUDY SESSION OTHER Amount Budgeted: $ Expenditure Amt: $ Contingency Reqd: $ ATTACHMENTS: Memorandum to the Parks, Recreation, Public Safety, hnd Human Services Committee dated June 2, 1999 SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: The Twin Lakes/Brigadoon Task Force was formed in 1998 by the City Council to respond to concerns expressed about the increased rate of speed hump installation. The Task Force included neighborhood residents, Police, Fire, City, and School District Transportation representatives. Over the last several months, many evening meetings were held by the Task Force as well as two open houses. Members adopted the following goal statement and recommendations below: Goal Statement Develop a master plan to improve traffic safety in the Twin Lakes/Brigadoon area that can be implemented with broad neighborhood support, addresses the needs of service vehicles, is fiscally responsible, and is consistent with present policies or provides new standards to be considered for submittal to City Council for adoption. Recommendations: 1. Consider the installation of traffic calming devices at the following locations: a. 35th Ave SW between SW 339th P1 & SW 338th St Chicane b. 35th Ave SW at SW 328th St Traffic Circle c. 27th Ave SW at SW 332® P1 Traffic Circle d. 28th Ave SW at SW 327'h St All Way Stop e. 27th Ave SW between 322® St & SW 322® PI Speed Humps f. 39th P1 SW near SW 326th St Speed Humps 2. Generalize current speed hump installation/removal criteria to be applicable to other traffic calming devices including traffic circles, chicanes, and others requested by neighborhood groups and approved by City Council. These devices are illustrated in the attached figures. The ...................................... .............................................................................................................................. a. Set a maximum budget of $10,000 per year per neighborhood for installation of traffic calming devices. If the cost of the proposed devices exceeds this budget, a neighborhood must form an LID to fund the excess amount. Otherwise, the City may fund the excess amount in the following year on a first-come first-serve basis. bo To address concerns raised by Federal Way Fire Department staff regarding the impacts of calming devices on emergency response vehicles, a representative from the Fire Department will be invited to neighborhood meetings to discuss the impacts of proposed devices with the requesting groups. c. Ballots not returned from residents or property owners on the installation/removal of proposed devices should not be counted as YES or NO votes. Previously, only returned ballots in favor of the proposals were counted as YES votes and deliverable, unreturned ballots were counted as NO votes. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: At the June 14, 1999 meeting of the Parks, Recreation, Public Safety, and Human Services Committee, the Committee recommended approval of the following: 1. Adopt the traffic calming installation/removal criteria recommended by the Task Force; 2. Authorize staff to conduct traffic studies at the above locations where calming devices were CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: ~I' P rom Co s,,~.~*e A~PPROVED'FOR INCLUSION IN COUNCIL PACKET: (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION k:\council\agdbills\ 1999\ntstaskf. wpd COUNCIL BILL it 1st Reading Enactment Reading ORDINANCE it RESOLUTION it Item 5t CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CITY COUNCIL PARKS, RECREATION, PUBLIC SAFETY, AND HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Date: From: Subject: June 2, 1999 Rick Perez, Traffic Engineer ~ Twin Lakes/Brigadoon Neighborhood Traffic Safety Task Force Recommendations Background: The Twin Lakes/Brigadoon Task Force was formed in response to concerns about the increased rate of speed hump installation. The Task Force adopted the following goal statement: Develop a master plan to improve traffic safety in the Twin Lakes/Brigadoon area that can be implemented with broad neighborhood support, addresses the needs of service vehicles, is fiscally responsible, and is consistent with present policies or provides new standards to be considered for submittal to City Council for adoption. Starting October 22, 1998, several bi-weekly evening meetings were held and attended by Task Force members representing the neighborhood and stafffi'om the City's Departments of Public Works and Public Safety, as well as Federal Way Fire Department and Federal Way School District. The meetings were also open to the general public. The Task Force recommendations included the following: 1. Consider the installation of traffic calming devices at the following locations: a. 35* Ave SW between SW 339* P1 & SW 338* St Chicane b. 35* Ave SW at SW 328* St Traffic Circle c. 27* Ave SW at SW 332na PI Traffic Circle d. 28* Ave SW at SW 327* St All Way Stop e. 27* Ave SW between 322~ St & SW 322nd PI Speed Humps f. 39* PI SW near SW 326* St Speed Humps Two Open Houses were held on March 3 & 18, 1999 to solicit comments on the above recommendations, most of which were positive. 2 Generalize current speed hump installation/removal criteria to be applicable to other traffic calming devices including traffic circles, chicanes, and others requested by neighborhood groups and approved by City Council. These devices are illustrated in the attached figures. The following revisions were recommended: Set a maximum budget of$10,000 per year per neighborhood for installation oftraffc calming devices. If the cost of the proposed devices exceeds this budget, a neighborhood must form an LID to fund the excess amount. Otherwise, the City may fund the excess amount in the following year on a first-come first-serve basis. To address concerns raised by Federal Way Fire Department staff regarding the impacts ofcalmin8 devices on emergency response vehicles, a representative from the Fire Department will be invited to neighborhood meetings to discuss the impacts of proposed devices with the requesting groups. Ballots not returned from residents or property owners on the installation/removal of proposed devices should not be counted as YES or NO votes. Previously, only returned ballots in favor of the proposals were counted as YES votes and deliverable, unreturned ballots were counted as NO votes. Attached are the details of the proposed criteria changes. Committee Recommendation: Staff requests a recommendation of approval to City Council on the meeting scheduled for July 6, 1999, to: Adopt the traffic calming installation/removal criteria recommended by the Task Force, .exce, pt-fi~ item 2-c above resarding ballot responses, where staffis requesting direction from the Committee on the Task Force recommendation. Authorize staffto conduct traffic studies at the above locations where calming devices were recommended by the Task Force to determine whether they meet installation criteria. i APPROVAL OF COMMITTEE REPORT: !Committee Chair / .Committee Member K:~PRHSPS\T/~gKREC.WPD SPEED REDUCTION DEVICES VOLUME REDUCTION DEVICES Speed Humps Diagonal Diverters Tr~c Circles ~ ~: Semi Dlver~er~ ' Chicanes Median Barrier~ Entrance Treatments Choke Points il CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT: 1999 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE CATEGORY: BUDGET IMPACT: CONSENT ORDINANCE BUSINESS X HEARING FYI RESOLUTION STAFF REPORT PROCLAMATION STUDY SESSION OTHER Amount Budgeted: $ Expenditure Amt: $ Contingency Reqd: $ ATTACHMENTS: June 28, 1999, Memorandum to City Council with the following five exhibits: 1) June 1, 1999, Staff Report to the Land Use/Transportation Committee; 2) Composite Map of Site Specific Requests (Revised); 3) June 16, 1999, Correspondence from Peter Orser of the Quadrant Corporation; 4) Map of Site Specific Request #8 .J..°...h...n....S.c..h...n..e..!.d.e..r..· ........................................................................................................... SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: A formal process for updating the comprehensive plan and development regulations was adopted in March 1999. This process sets up a yearly deadline of September 30 to submit application(s) for a.mendments. For the 1999 calendar year only, there was also an April 30 deadline for submittal of applications. Pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-523, after the deadline for accepting applications, the City Council shall hold a public hearing and select those docketed amendment requests it wishes to consider for adoption. On June 7, 1999, the LUTC reviewed the nine site specific requests for changes to the comprehensive plan designations and zoning based on a staff report and recommendations (Exhibit I) and forwarded their recommendations to the full council for action. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The LUTC recommended that Site Specific Requests # 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 be analyzed further by staff and that Site Specific Requests #2 and 9 not go forward for CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: ~??r~,~ E~,~,',toc-e~ f¢co~,a~,~4t a,- · APPROVED FOR INCLUSION IN COUNCIL PACKET: ~~.~.~./.lTl 7f-'------~ (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION COUNCIL BILL # ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM June 28, 1999 To: FROM: SUBJECT: Mayor and City Council Members Stephen Clifton, AICP, Director of Community Development Services Margaret H. Clark, AICP, Senior Planner ~X.c~ 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update BACKGROUND A formal process for updating the comprehensive plan and development regulations was adopted in March 1999. This process sets up a yearly deadline of September 30 to submit application(s) for amendments. For the 1999 calendar year only, there was also an April 30 deadline for submittal of applications. Pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-523, after the deadline for accepting applications, the City Council shall hold a public hearing and select those docketed amendment requests it wishes staff to review further prior to forwarding a recommendation to the planning commission for a public hearing. It is the city's practice that all city business be presented to a Council Committee, in this case the Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC), prior to Council deliberation. On June 7, 1999, the LUTC reviewed the nine site specific requests for changes to the comprehensive plan designations and zoning based on a staff report and recommendations (Exhibit 1) and forwarded the recommendations contained in Section II of this staff report to the full council for action. Following the LUTC meeting, notice was published in the Federal Way Mirror and posted on ali public notice boards utilized by the city; all property owners within 300 feet of the site were notified by mail, and the sites were posted. II LAND USE/TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION The requests are shown on Exhibit 2. The original exhibit (Exhibit A ofl) has been revised to reflect the new boundaries of Site Specific Request #8, and also includes the approximate location of the north/south road.~ ~Since the June 7, 1999 LUTC meeting, Peter Orser of the Weyerhaeuser Company has contacted staff and requested that the parcel adjacent to Pacific Highway be deleted from the request, in order for it to retain its Community Business designation. -I- This section (Section II) includes a summary of each request, followed by the staff recommendation on whether it should go forward for further analysis and the LUTC's recommendation to the Council on whether the Council should further consider it for adoption. In addition, changes made since LUTC's review, and any telephone or written comments received prior to completion of the staff report have been included. Please refer to the staff report (Exhibit/) for staff analysis of each request relative to the eight selection criteria. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #1 Parcel: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: Recommendation: L UTC Recommendation: Changes Since L UTC Met: Public Comments Received: 255817-0010. South of S 305th Place and east of Pacific Highway (Exhibit B ofl). 11,717 square feet (0.27 acres). Zaran Sayre. Same. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Multifamily and RM 1800 (one unit per 1,800 square feet) to Community Business and BC zoning. That the request go forward for further analysis. Concur with staff None None SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #2 Parcel: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: Recommendation: L UTC Recommendation: 122103-9030. North of SW 320th Street and west of 21st Ave (Exhibit C ofl). 1.6 acres. Richard Costanzo representing Village Properties. Happy Valley Land Co. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Office Park and Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business and BN zoning. The applicant also proposes to dedicate approximately two acres located south of SW 320th Street and west of 21st Ave to the city for a park. That the request go forward for further analysis. That the request not go forward for further analysis based on additional traffic associated with neighborhood business uses at this location and potential adverse impact on the downtown. Changes Since L UTC Met: None Public Comments Received: None -2- SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST//3 (This request has since been changed. Please refer to comments under Changes Since L UTC Met. ) Parcels: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: Recommendation: L UTC Recommendation: Changes Since L UTC Met: Public Comments Received: 551560-0005, 551560-0010, 551560-0015, 551560-0020, 551560-0025, 551560-0026, 551560-0030,551560-0035, & 551560-0091. North of S 320th Street and east of I-5 (Exhibit D of 1). 20.19 acres. Peter Orser representing the Quadrant Corporation The Weyerhaeuser Company. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Multifamily and RM 3600 (one unit per 3,600 square feet) to Business Park and BP zoning. That the request go forward for further analysis. That the request go forward for further analysis. As part of this analysis, staff was directed to recommend appropriate land use designation for this property in light of its location at the gateway of the city. A potential designation discussed included Office Park. A June 16, 1999, letter was submitted by Peter Orser representing the Quadrant Corporation (Exhibit 3). Based on input from the LUTC and review of their intended use, Mr. Orser is requesting an Office Park designation and zoning for this property. One telephone call was received from a gentleman who inquired whether there would be an increase in traffic associated with Office Park Uses. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST//4 Parcel: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: Recommendation: L UTC Recommendation: 921152-0590. West of the Hoyt Road SW and SW 340th Street intersection (Exhibit E ofl). 32,547 square feet (0.75 acres). Sally Ramos. Mr. Velasco. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Single Family High Density and RS 9.6 (one unit per 9,600 square feet) to Neighborhood Business and BN zoning. That the request go forward for further analysis based on a proposal for a physician's clinic under a development agreement. That the request go forward for further analysis. Additionally, examine the potential of an Office Park land use designation and development agreement. -3- Changes Since LUTC Met: Public Comments Received: None Telephone calls were received form two neighbors living offthe easement which connects SW 388th Street and the subject property. Both neighbors were concerned about potential adverse impacts on their property values. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #5 Parcel: Location: Size .' Proponent: Owner: Request: Staff Recommendation: L UTC Recommendation: Changes Since L UTC Met: Public Comments Received: 202104-9070. South of S 336th Street and west of Pacific Highway S (Exhibit F ofl). 16.75 acres. Leonard C. Schaadt, representing Campus Gateway Associates. Campus Gateway Associates. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park and BP zoning to Community Business and BC zoning. In order to be consistent, if the Council determines that the request go forward for further analysis, staff recommends looking at all properties between South 336th and the existing Community Business zone to the south. That the request go forward for further analysis. None One telephone call was received from a resident of the Garden Court Condominiums located on S 336~ east of Pacific Highway South. This resident was interested in what would be allowed in a Community Business zone versus a Business Park zone. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #6 Parcel: Location: Proponent: Owner: Request: Recommendation: 202104-9001. West of Pacific Highway S, between S 336th Street and the intersection of 16th Ave S and Pacific Highway S (Exhibit G ofl). 8. 9 acres. Mr. Merlino. Same. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park and BP zoning to Community Business and BC zoning. (This parcel is located directly south of the Campus Gateway Associates parcel.) In order to be consistent, if the Council determines that the request go forward for further analysis, staff recommends looking at all properties between South 336th and the existing Community Business zone to the south. -4- LUTC Recommendation: Changes Since L UTC Met: Public Comments Received: That the request go forward for further analysis. None One telephone call was received from a resident of the Garden Court Condominiums located on S 336~h east of Pacific Highway South. This resident was interested in what would be allowed in a Community Business zone versus a Business Park zone. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #7 Parcel: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: Staff Recommendation: L UTC Recommendation: Changes Since L UTC Met: Public Comments Received: 202104-9051. West of the intersection of 16th Ave S and Pacific Highway S (Exhibit Ho fl). 8.28 acres. Mr. Gilroy. Bob Wright. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park and BP zoning to Community Business and BC zoning. In order to be consistent, if the Council determines that the request go forward for further analysis, staff recommends looking at all properties between South 336th and the existing Community Business zone to the south. That the request go forward for further analysis. None One telephone call was received from a resident of the Garden Court Condominiums located on S 336th east of Pacific Highway South. This resident was interested in what would be allowed in a Community Business zone versus a Business Park zone. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #8 (This request has since been changed. Please refer to comments under Changes Since L UTC Met. ) Parcels: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: 212104-9003, 212194-9004, 212104-9016, 212104-9026, 212104-9051, 212104-9063, 212104-9064, 212104-9065, 212104-9066, 212104-9067, 212104-9083, & 212104-9084. South of S 336th Street and east of Pacific Highway S (Exhibit Iofl). 51.68 acres. Peter Orser representing the representing the Quadrant Corporation The Weyerhaeuser Company. -5- Request: Recommendation: LUTC Recommendation: Changes Since LUTC Met: Public Comments Received' Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park and BP zoning to Multifamily and RM 3600 zoning (one unit per 3,600 square feet) and to delete the north/south road required in the comprehensive plan. That the request go forward for further analysis. That the request go forward for further analysis. As part of this analysis, staff was directed to consider recommending churches as an allowable use in the Business Park zone in lieu of changing the comprehensive plan designation to Multifamily. Peter Orser representing the representing the Quadrant Corporation has contacted staff and requested that Parcel No. 212104-9026 adjacent to Pacific Highway be deleted from the request, in order for it to retain its Community Business designation. This would result in the acreage of the site being decreased to 49.98 acres from 51.68 acres. Please refer to Exhibit 4 for the revised site configuration. Two telephone calls were received. Both parties were concerned about existing traffic on S 3364 Street and felt that the proposed north/south road should not be deleted because its construction would improve the traffic patterns in the area. One of these callers wanted to see the site developed so that S 336th could be widened. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST 09 Parcels: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: Recommendation: L UTC' Recommendation: Changes Since L UTC Met: 292104-9080 & 292104-9021. West of Pacific Highway S at about 361st Place. 22.5 acres. Mr Kwon, Goldmax, Inc. Same. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Single Family Low Density and SE - Suburban Estates (one unit per five acres) to Single Family Medium Density and RS 35.0 (one unit per 35,000 square feet) (Exhibit d of l). That this request not be considered further, based on environmental concerns. However, in order to be consistent, if the Council determines that the request should go forward for further analysis, staff recommends looking at all properties north to South 356th. That the request not go forward for further analysis based on environmental concerns. None -6- Public Comments Received: One June 23, 1999, letter was received from John Schneider, a neighbor to the west (Exhibit 5). Mr. Schneider is concerned about development of the site based on the presence of on-site wetlands and a stream. One telephone call was also received from another neighbor to the west of the site who was concerned about potential impacts to the Hylebos wetlands and significant trees. A telephone call was also received from Mr. Barovic, a property owner to the north, who was concerned that his property had not been included with this request. III COUNCIL ACTION Pursuant to FWCC, Section 22-523(D), based on its review of requests according to the criteria in Section IV of Exhibit 1 -June 1, 1999, Staff Report, the City Council shall determine which requests shall be further considered for adoption, and shall forward those requests to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendation. The Council's decision to consider a proposed amendment shall not constitute a decision or recommendation that the proposed amendment should be adopted, nor does it preclude later Council action to add or delete an amendment for consideration. IV NEXT STEPS IN THE PROCESS The next steps in the comprehensive plan update process will be preapplications for those projects selected for further analysis by the Council. Following the preapplication stage, an environmental determination will be issued pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). This will be followed by public hearings in front of the Planning Commission. Following the completion of the public hearings by the Planning Commission, their recommendation will be forwarded to the LUTC, then City Council for final action. A tentative schedule is included in Section III of Exhibit 1 -June 1, 1999, Staff Report. IV LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1 Exhibit 2 Exhibit 3 Exhibit 4 Exhibit 5 June 1, 1999, Staff Report to the LUTC Composite Map of Site Specific Requests (Revised) June 16, 1999, Correspondence from Peter Orser of the Quadrant Corporation Site Specific Request #8 (Revised) June 23, 1999, Correspondence from John Schneider I ,9~)CMPAMN~070699 CC/June 20. 1909 -7- CITY OF FEDERAL WAY MEMORANDUM June 1, 1999 To: FROM: SUBJECT: Land Use/Transportation Committee (LUTC) Stephen Clifton, AICP, Director of Community Development Services Margaret H. Clark, AICP, Senior Planner ~ 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update BACKGROUND A formal process for updating the comprehensive plan and development regulations was adopted in March 1999. This process sets up a yearly deadline of September 30 to submit application for amendments. For the 1999 calendar year only, there was also an April 30 deadline for submittal of applications. Pursuant to Federal Way City Code (FWCC) Section 22-523, after the deadline for accepting applications, the City Council shall hold a public hearing and select those docketed amendment requests it wishes to consider for adoption. It is the city's practice that all city business be presented to a Council Committee, in this case the Land Use/ Transportation Committee, prior to Council deliberation. Changes and updates to the comprehensive plan can be divided into updates to chapters and requests for changes to comprehensive plan designations and zoning for specific parcels. A. Updates to Chapters Chapters of the comprehensive plan are proposed to be updated based on input from the following city departments and outside agencies to reflect changed conditions since the last update which was effective December 23, 1998. City Departments and Divisions (i) Surface Water Management (SWM) Division (ii) Parks, Recreation, and Cultural Services (PARCS) Department (iii) Traffic Division (iv) Human Services Division (v) Public Safety Department EXHIB T_I PAGE__L Outside .Agencies or Individuals (i) Economic Development Executive (ii) Federal Way School District (iii) Lakehaven Utility District (iv) Federal Way Fire Department (v) TCI (vi) Puget Sound Energy (PSE) All proposed changes are housekeeping in nature and propose no new policies or substantive changes. B. Site-Specific Comprehensive Plan Changes (Exhibit A - Composite Map) The city received the following site specific requests: Request from Zaran Sayre to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 11,717 square feet (0.27 acres) located south of South 305th Place and east of Pacific Highway from Multifamily and RM 1800 (one unit per 1,800 square feet) to Community Business and BC zoning (Exhibit B). Request from Village Properties to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 1.6 acres located north of SW 320th Street and west of 21 st Avenue SW from Office Park and Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business and BN zoning (Exhibit C). Request from the Weyerhaeuser Company to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 20.19 acres located north of South 320th Street and east of I-5 from Multifamily and RM 3600 (one unit per 3,600 square feet) to Business Park and BP zoning (Exhibit D). Request from Mr. Velasco to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 0.75 acres located southwest of Hoyt Road SW and north of SW 340th Street from Single Family High Density and RS 9.6 (one unit per 9,600 square feet) to Neighborhood Business and BN zoning (Exhibit E). ° Request from Campus Gateway Associates to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 16.75 acres located south of South 336th Street and west of Pacific Highway South from Business Park and BP zoning to Community Business and BC zoning (Exhibit F). o Request from Mr. Merlino to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 8.9 acres located between South 336th Street and the intersection of 16th Avenue South and Pacific Highway South, west of Pacific Highway South from Business Park and BP zoning to Community Business and BC zoning (Exhibit G). Page 2 of 26 EXHIB;¥ PAG -/0 F .4. (This parcel is located directly south of the Campus Gateway Associates parcel.) Request from Mr. Gilroy to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 8.28 acres located west of the intersection of 16th Avenue South and Pacific Highway South from Business Park and BP zoning to Community Business and BC zoning (Exhibit Iq). Request from the Weyerhaeuser Company to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 51.68 acres located south of South 336th Street and east of Pacific Highway South from Business Park and BP zoning to Multifamily and RM 3600 zoning (one unit per 3,600 square feet) (Exhibit 1). Request from Goldmax Inc. to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning of 22.5 acres located west of Pacific Highway South at about 361 st Place from Single Family Low Density and SE - Suburban Estates (one unit per five acres) to Single Family Medium Density and RS 35.0 (one unit.per 35,000 square feet) (Exhibit d). II REASON FOR COUNCIL ACTION Pursuant to FWCC Article IX, Process VI Review, the City Council is required to review all requests concurrently. Further, prior to adoption, the Council is required to hold a public hearing at which time it selects those amendment requests it wishes to consider for adoption based on specific criteria outlined in Section IV of this staff report. III PROCEDURAL SUMMARY April 30, 1999 June 7, 1999 July 6, 1999 (Tentative) July 22, 1999 (Tentative) July 28, 1999 (Tentative) September 15, October 6, & Oct 20, 1999 (Tentative) Deadline for Applications LUTC Meeting - A summary of all requests will be presented to the LUTC for determination of which requests should be considered during the upcoming amendment process. City Council Public Hearing - The Council shall select the comprehensive plan amendments to be addressed during the upcoming cycle. Preapplications on Site Specific Requests SEPA Determination Issued (15 Day Comment and 14 Day Appeal Period Ends on August 26) Public Hearing by Planning Commission Page 3 of 26 PAGE_. _OF a& November I & November 15, 1999 December 7, 1999 LUTC Meeting City Council Adopts Comprehensive Plan IV DECISIONAL CRITERIA The following criteria shall be used in selecting the comprehensive plan amendments to be addressed during the upcoming cycle: Whether the same area or issue was studied during the last amendment process and conditions in the immediate vicinity have significantly changed so as to make the reqUested change within the public interest. 2. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. 3. Whether the proposed amendment meets existing state and local laws, including the Growth Management Act. 4. In the case of text amendments or other amendments to goals or policies, whether the .request benefits the city as a whole versus a selected group. If the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, it shall be further evaluated according to the following criteria: 1. Whether the proposed amendment can be inco .rporated into planned or active projects. Amount of analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on the request. If a large scale study is required, a request may have to be delayed until the following year due to work loads, staffing levels, etc. 3. Volume of requests received. A large volume of requests may necessitate that some requests be reviewed in a subsequent year. 4. Order of requests received. Based on its review of requests according to the above criteria, the Council shall determine which requests shall be further considered for adoption, and shall forward those requests to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendation. Page 4 of 26 V STAFF RECOMMENDATION SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #1 Parcel: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: 255817-0010. South of S 305th Place and east of Pacific Highway (Exhibit B). 11,717 square feet (0.27 acres). Zaran Sayre. Same. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Multifamily and RM 1800 (one unit per 1,800 square feet) to Community Business and BC zoning. DECI$1ONA£ CRITERIA Criterion No 1 Whether the same area or issue was studied during the last amendment process and conditions in the immediate vicinity have significantly changed so as to make the requested change within the public interest. Staff Response This area was not studied during the last amendment process. Criterion No 2 Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. Staff Response At the time that the city incorporated, this site was zoned RM 900 (Multifamily/one unit per 900 square feet) by King County. The City of Federal Way adopted RM 1800 (Multifamily/ one unit per 1,800 square feet) zoning for the site which was the closest to King County's zoning. However, the site has been developed as a real estate office since 1965. Designating the site as Community Business will not conflict with any polices within the comprehensive plan and due to its area (0.27 acres), a change from multifamily to business should have a minimal effect on the city's land capacity. Page II-17 of the 1998 Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) states that, "The Community Business Designation generally runs along both sides of SR-99 from South 272nd to South 348th." This site falls within that area. Criterion No 3 Whether the proposed amendment meets existing state and local laws, including the Growth Management Act. Page 5 of 26 EXHIBIT I PA G E__$__ 0 Staff Response . The proposal does not conflict with any existing state or local laws, including the Growth Management Act. The area is already developed with all existing services, and the change would be from one urban designation to another. Criterion No 4 In the case of text amendments or other amendments to goals or policies, whether the request benefits the city as a whole versus a selected group. Staff Response This criterion does not apply to this request, since it is a site specific request. If the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, it shall be further evaluated according to the following criteria: Criterion No 5 Whether the proposed amendment can be incorporated into planned or active projects Staff Response The proposed request can be incorporated into this year's comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 6 Amount of analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on the request. If a large scale study is required, a request may have to be delayed until the following year due to work loads, staffing levels, etc. Staff Response The analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on this request can be done as part of the work required for the comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 7 Volume of requests received. A large volume of requests may necessitate that some requests be reviewed in a subsequent year Staff Response Nine requests for site specific comprehensive plan amendments have been received. Criterion No 8 Order of requests received Staff Response This was the ninth request received. EXHIB T__ PAGE_ _OF Page 6 of 26 Staff Recommendation: That the request go forward for further analysis. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #2 Parcel: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: 122103-9030. North of SW 320th Street and west of 21 st Ave (Exhibit C). 1.6 acres. Richard Costanzo representing Village Properties. Happy Valley Land Co. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Office Park and Professional Office (PO) to Neighborhood Business and BN zoning. The applicant also proposes to dedicate approximately two acres located south of SW 320th Street and west of 21st Ave to the city for a park. DECISIONAL CRITERIA Criterion No 1 Whether the same area or issue was studied during the last amendment process and conditions in the immediate vicinity have significantly changed so as to make the requested change within the public interest. Staff Response This area was not studied during the last amendment process. It was, however, studied during the 1995 amendment request. At that time, Evergreen Development Company requested a land use designation that would allow a small neighborhood scale retail development. The City Council denied the request based on the lack of need for additional neighborhood business. Conditions in the immediate vicinity have not significantly changed in the last five years. Criterion No 2 Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. Staff Response Page II-1 of the FWCP describes a land use concept for Federal Way, which includes provision of community and commercial services to residential neighborhoods and promotion of conveniently scaled shopping for residential neighborhoods. At the time that the 1995 comprehensive plan was adopted, there were nearly a dozen various sized nodes of Neighborhood Business located throughout the city. An economic analysis done at that time determined that every new resident can support 15 square feet of new commercial use. At that time, it was determined that existing sites provided sufficient capacity to accommodate existing and future demand for Neighborhood Business Space. Based on the State Office of Page 7 of 26 PAGE Financial Management, the population of the Federal Way has grown from 74,290 to 76,820 between April 1, 1995, and April 1, 1998, a 3.4 percent increase. However, information on existing square footage of commercial use will not be available until a new capacity analysis is mn later in the comprehensive update process. The applicant has submitted a letter explaining why he believes the request conforms to the vision of the comprehensive plan (Exhibit K). Criterion No 3 Whether the proposed amendment meets existing state and local laws, including the Growth Management Act. Staff Response The proposal does not conflict with any existing state or local laws, including the Growth Management Act. The area is already developed with all existing services and the change would be from one urban designation to another. Criterion No 4 In the case of text amendments or other amendments to goals or policies, whether the request benefits the city as a whole versus a selected group. Staff Response This criterion does not apply to this, since this is a site specific request. If the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, it shall be further evaluated according to the following criteria: It is not clear whether the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, however, the remainder of the criteria will still be addressed. Criterion No 5 Whether the proposed amendment can be incorporated into planned or active projects. Staff Response The proposed request can be incorporated into this year's comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 6 Amount of analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on the request. If a large scale study is required, a request may have to be delayed until the following year due to work loads, staffing levels, etc. Staff Response The analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on this request can be done as part of the work required for the comprehensive plan update. Page 8 of 26 EXHiBiT I PAGE__ OF Criterion No 7 Volume of requests received. A large volume of requests may necessitate that some requests be reviewed in a subsequent year. Staff Response Nine requests for site specific comprehensive plan amendments have been received. Criterion No 8 Order of requests received. Staff Response This was the seventh request received. Staff Recommendation: That the request go forward for further analysis. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #3 Parcels: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: 551560-0005, 551560-0010, 551560-0015, 551560-0020, 551560-0025, 551560-0026, 551560-0030,551560-0035, 8,: 551560-0091. North of S 320th Street and east of I-5 (Exhibit D). 20.19 acres. Peter Orser representing the Weyerhaeuser Company. The Weyerhaeuser Company. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Multifamily and RM 3600 (one unit per 3,600 square feet) to Business Park and BP zoning. DECISIONAL CRITERIA Criterion No 1 Whether the same area or issue was studied during the last amendment process and conditions in the immediate vicinity have significantly changed so as to make the requested change within the public interest. Staff Response This area was annexed to the City of Federal Way in January 1999, and received a comprehensive plan designation of Multifamily and zoning of RM 3600 (one unit per 3,600 square feet) as part of the last comprehensive plan update (effective December 23, 1998). The applicant's reason for the request, as stated in the application (Exhibit £), is that the on and off-site infrastructure improvements required to improve the site require improvements well beyond the capability of the use. Additionally, the presence of Capital One in the East Page 9 of 26 EXHIBd __.1 PAG Campus has materially changed the dynamics of the East Campus area. Criterion No 2 Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. Staff Response FWCP Policy LUP states that employment and business opportunities must be prov[ded by allocating adequate land for commercial, office, and business park opportunities. Prior to annexation, this site was zoned for a mixture of office and multifamily under King County. Upon annexation to the city, it was given a zoning designation of RM 3600 (one unit per 3,600 square feet) with a development agreement which limited the site to 81 units. Existing Business Park zones are located west of I-5 and between South 336th Street and SW 359th Street. Further, although there is an Office Park 1 zone located to the south of South 320th Street, designating the requested site Business Park will encourage potential new uses such as light manufacturing and warehouse/distribution into an area which is predominantly single family at the moment. The city will be doing a capacity analysis as part of this comprehensive plan update. Until this analysis is completed, it is not possible to say with certainty whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. Criterion No 3 Whether the proposed amendment meets existing state and local laws, including the Growth Management Act. Staff Response Based on limited analysis, the proposal does not conflict with any existing state or local laws. Compliance with the Growth Management Act in part will depend on the analysis of the capacity analysis which will determine if housing and employment targets can still be met after changes in comprehensive plan designation and zoning. Criterion No 4 In the case of text amendments or other amendments to goals or policies, whether the request benefits the city as a whole versus a selected group. Staff Response This criterion does not apply to this request, since it is a site specific request. If the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, it shall be further evaluated according to the following criteria: It is not clear whether the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, however, the remainder of the criteria will still be addressed. Page 10 of 26 EXHtB ..J PAG E.le_ Criterion No 5 . Whether the proposed amendment can be incorporated into planned or active projects. Staff Response The proposed request can be incorporated into this year's comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 6 Amount of analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on the request. If a large scale study is required, a request may have to be delayed until the following year due to work loads, staffing levels, etc. Staff Response The analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on this request can be done as part of the work required for the comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 7 Volume of requests received. A large volume of requests may necessitate that some requests be reviewed in a subsequent year Staff Response Nine requests for site specific comprehensive plan amendments have been received. Criterion No 8 Order of requests received. Staff Response This was the third request received. Staff Recommendation: That the request go forward for further analysis. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #4 Parcel: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: 921152-059O. West of the Hoyt Road SW and SW 340th Street intersection (Exhibit E). 32,547 square feet (0.75 acres). Sally Ramos. Mr. Velasco. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Single Family High Density and RS 9.6 (one unit per 9,600 square feet) to Neighborhood Business and BN zoning. Page 11 of 26 t PAG E_II_ OF_ e_ DECISIONAL CRITERIA Criterion No 1 Whether the same area or issue was studied during the last amendment process and conditions in the immediate vicinity have significantly changed so as to make the requested change within the public interest. Staff Response This area was not studied during the last amendment process. It was, however, studied during the 1995 comprehensive amendment process. At that time, the applicant, Sally Ramos, requested a change in comprehensive plan designation from Residential to Neighborhood Business. The Council denied the request on the basis that approving the request would be contrary to FWCP Policy LU-48, which states that new commercial development shall be limited to existing commercial areas. In addition, the Land Use Chapter states that the comprehensive plan recognizes the importance of firmly fixed boundaries to prevent commercial intrusion into adjacent neighborhoods. Based on language on the face of the underlying plat, Wedgewood West III, access to this parcel is via a tract which connects this parcel to SW 388th Street, the cul de sac to the northwest. The language on the face of the plat further states that if the lot is developed for non-residential purposes, then permission to access unto Hoyt Road must be obtained from the Public Works Department. No change in zoning in the immediate vicinity has occurred since 1995. However, a gas station (Hoyt Road Chevron) has been recently constructed on the southwestern comer of this intersection. Criterion No 2: Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan Staff Response: The proposed amendment is not consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan as discussed above. However, the site is unique in that it abuts two roads, of which Hoyt Road is a minor arterial. Therefore, it may not be suitable for development as a residence. Criterion No 3: Whether the proposed amendment meets existing state and local laws, including the Growth Management Act. Staff Response: Based on a limited analysis, the proposed amendment does not conflict with any state or local laws or the Growth Management Act. Criterion No 4 In the case of text amendments or other amendments to goals or policies, whether the Page 12 of 26 EXHIBIT t RAG request benefits the city as a whole versus a selected group. Staff Response This criterion does not apply to this request, since it is a site specific request. If the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, it shall be further evaluated according to the following criteria: Although the request does not meet criteria 1 and 2 above, the remainder of the criteria will still be addressed, since the Council may want to consider it for further review due to its unique location. The applicant has indicated that they are interested in building a physician's clinic on the site. Careful crafting of a development agreement may allow such a use while providing adequate buffering of the adjacent residences. Whether the site can accommodate a clinic while providing adequate buffering, and the issue of access unto Hoyt Road, would be more fully explored through a preapplication conference which is the next step after the Council has completed this selection process. Criterion No 5 Whether the proposed amendment can be incorporated into planned or active projects Staff Response If the Council approves a change in designation based on a development agreement, this could be incorporated into this comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 6 Amount of analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on the request. If a large scale study is required, a request may have to be delayed until the following year due to work loads, staffing levels, etc. Staff Response The analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on this request can be done as part of the work required for the comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 7 Volume of requests received. A large volume of requests may necessitate that some requests be reviewed in a subsequent year Staff Response Nine requests for site specific comprehensive plan amendments have been received. Criterion No 8 Order of requests received. PAGE 0 Page 13 of 26 Staff Response . This was the second request received. Staff Recommendation: That the request go forward for further analysis based on a proposal for a physician's clinic under a development agreement. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST Parcel: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: 202104-9070. South of S 336th Street and west of Pacific Highway S (Exhibit F). 16.75 acres. Leonard C. Schaadt, representing Campus Gateway Associates. Campus Gateway Associates. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park and BP zoning to Community Business and BC zoning. DECISIONAL CRITERIA Criterion No 1 Whether the same area or issue was studied during the last amendment process and conditions in the immediate vicinity have significantly changed so as to make the requested change within the public interest. Staff Response This area was not studied during the last amendment process. It was, however, studied during the 1995 amendment request. At that time, Campus Gateway Associates requested a change in the comprehensive plan designation from Industrial/Office Park to Community Business of a much larger area (26 acres total); it also included the parcel immediately to the west. The Council denied this request on the basis that a Business Park designation would be consistent with then existing comprehensive plan designation and uses in that area and would avoid the potential for nonconforming uses along 9th Avenue. The present request does not extend all the way to 9th Avenue. Criterion No 2 Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. Staff Response None of the Business Park zoned property has developed within this area. This is one of three parcels totaling 33.93 acres requesting a change from Business Park to Community Business. The other sites are Site Specific Request #6 - Merlino, immediately to the south and Site Specific Request No. 7 - Gilroy (the Wright property), two parcels away to the Page 14 of 26 EXHIBIT,, t PAG E_.L 0 F_. L south. Designating the site as Community Business should not conflict with any polices within the comprehensive plan. Page II-17 of the FWCP states that, "The Community Business Designation generally runs along both sides of SR-99 from South 272nd to South 348th." This site falls within that area. There is existing Community Business designations to the north across South 336th and to the east across Pacific Highway South. The city will be doing a capacity analysis as part of this comprehensive plan update. Until this analysis is completed, it is not possible to say with certainty whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. Criterion No 3 Whether the proposed amendment meets existing state and local laws, including the Growth Management' Act. Staff Response Based on limited analysis, the proposal does not conflict with any existing state or local laws. Compliance with the Growth Management Act in part will depend on the analysis of the capacity analysis which will determine if employment targets can still be met after changes in comprehensive plan designation and zoning. Criterion No 4 In the case of text amendments or other amendments to goals or policies, whether the request benefits the city as a whole versus a selected group. Staff Response This criterion does not apply to this request, since it is a site specific request. If the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, it shall be further evaluated according to the following criteria: It is not clear whether the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, however, the remainder of the criteria will still be addressed. Criterion No 5 Whether the proposed amendment can be incorporated into planned or active projects. Staff Response The proposed request can be incorporated into this year's comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 6 Amount of analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on the request. If a large scale study is required, a request may have to be delayed until the following year due to work loads, staffing levels, etc. Page 15 of 26 ! PAG 0 Staff Response . The analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on this request can be done as part of the work required for the comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 7 Volume of requests received. A large volume of requests may necessitate that some requests be reviewed in a subsequent year. Staff Response Nine requests for site specific comprehensive plan amendments have been received. Criterion No 8 Order of requests received. Staff Response This was the fifth request received. Staff Recommendation: In order to be consistent, if the Council determines that the request go forward for further analysis, staff recommends looking at all properties between South 336th and the existing Community Business zone to the south. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST/t6 Parcel: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: 202104-9001. West of Pacific Highway S, between S 336th Street and the intersection of 16th Ave S and Pacific Highway S (Exhibit G). 8.9 acres. Mr. Merlino. Same. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park and BP zoning to Community Business and BC zoning. (This parcel is located directly south of the Campus Gateway Associates parcel.) DECISIONAL CRITERIA Criterion No 1 Whether the same area or issue was studied during the last amendment process and conditions in the immediate vicinity have significantly changed so as to make the requested change within the public interest. Page 16 of 26 Staff Response This area was not studied during the last amendment process. It was, however, studied during the 1995 amendment request. At that time, the request was a change in land use designation for approximately 16 acres. This included Mr. Merlino's property and the property to the south. A designation of Community Business was requested for that portion of the site between the north-south flowing Hylebos stream and Pacific Highway South, with a Business Park designation for the remaining property west of the stream. Since then, the city has constructed a regional detention pond on easements on the westerly portion of these parcels. The Council denied this request on the basis that the comprehensive plan strives to focus Community Business in existing areas along the SR 99 corridor and in the South 348th Street area. Furthermore, designating additional areas as Community Business might redirect the focus of economic growth from the City Center Core and Frame. Criterion No 2 Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. Staff Response Designating the site as Community Business should not conflict with any polices within the comprehensive plan. Page II-17 of the FWCP states that, "The Community Business Designation generally runs along both sides of SR-99 from South 272nd to South 348th." Thissite falls within that area. There is existing Community Business designations further to the north across South 336th, to the south of the Wright property (the Gilroy site), and to the east across Pacific Highway South. As discussed under Site Specific Request #5, there are three separate requests within this general vicinity for changes in the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park to Community Business, totaling approximately 33.93 acres. The city will be doing a capacity analysis as part of this comprehensive plan update. Until this analysis is completed, it is not possible to say with certainty whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. Criterion No 3 Whether the proposed amendment meets existing state and local laws, including the Growth Management Act. Staff Response Based on limited analysis, the proposal does not conflict with any existing state or local laws. Compliance with the Growth Management Act in part will depend on the analysis of the capacity analysis which will determine if employment targets can still be met after changes in comprehensive plan designation and zoning. Page 17 of 26 Criterion No 4 . In the case of text amendments or other amendments to goals or policies, whether the request benefits the city as a whole versus a selected group. Staff Response This criterion does not apply to this request, since it is a site specific request. If the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, it shall be further evaluated according to the following criteria: It is not clear whether the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, however, the remainder of the criteria will still be addressed. Criterion No 5 Whether the proposed amendment can be incorporated into planned or active projects. Staff Response The proposed request can be incorporated into this year's comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 6 Amount of analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on the request. If a large scale study is required, a request may have to be delayed until the following year due to work loads, staffing levels, etc. Staff Response The analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on this request can be done as part of the work required for the comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 7 Volume of requests received. A large volume of requests may necessitate that some requests be reviewed in a subsequent year Staff Response Nine requests for site specific comprehensive plan amendments have been received. Criterion No 8 Order of requests received. Staff Response This was the sixth request received. PAG E_I_ O - Page 18 of 26 Staff Recommendation: In order to be consistent, if the Council determines that the request should go forward for further analysis,, staff recommends looking at all properties between South 336th and the existing Community Business zone to the south. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST/47 Parcel: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: 202104-9051. West of the intersection of 16th Ave S and Pacific Highway S (Exhibit H). 8.28 acres. Mr. Gilroy. Bob Wright. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park and BP zoning to Community Business and BC zoning. DECISIONAL CRITERIA Criterion No 1 Whether the same area or issue was studied during the last amendment process and conditions in the immediate vicinity have significantly changed so as to make the requested change within the public interest. Staff Response This area was not studied during the last amendment process. It was, however, studied during the 1995 amendment request. At that time, the request was a change in land use designation from Manufacturing Park to a designation that would allow commercial/retail uses. The Business Park designation was a new designation adopted in 1995 which substantially encompassed the uses found in the Manufacturing Park. Since then, the city has constructed a regional detention pond on an easement on the westerly portion of this parcel. The Council denied this request on the basis that preserving Business Park designated property is vital to providing employment and business opportunities in Federal Way by allocating adequate land for commercial, office, and business park development (LUP27). Criterion No 2 Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. Staff Response Designating the site as Community Business should not conflict with any polices within the comprehensive plan. Page II-17 of the FWCP states that, "The Community Business Designation generally runs along both sides ofSR-99 from'b'~uth 272nd to South 348th." Page 19 of 26 EXHi V I This site falls wi. thin that area. There is existing Community Business designations further to the north across South 336th, immediately to the south and to the east across Pacific Highway South. As stated above, there are three separate requests within this general vicinity for changes in the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park to Community Business, totaling approximately 33.93 acres. The city will be doing a capacity analysis as part of this comprehensive plan update. Until this analysis is completed, it is not possible to say with certainty whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. Criterion No 3 Whether the proposed amendment meets existing state and local laws, including the Growth Management Act. Staff Response Based on limited analysis, the proposal does not conflict with any existing state or local laws. Compliance with the Growth Management Act in part will depend on the analysis of the capacity analysis which will determine if employment targets can still be met after changes in comprehensive plan designation and zoning. Criterion No 4 In the case of text amendments or other amendments to goals or policies, whether the request benefits the city as a whole versus a selected group. Staff Response This criterion does not apply to this request, since it is a site specific request. If the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, it shall be further evaluated according to the following criteria: It is not clear whether the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, however, the remainder of the criteria will still be addressed. Criterion No 5 Whether the proposed amendment can be incorporated into planned or active projects. Staff Response The proposed request can be incorporated into this year's comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 6 Amount of analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on the request. If a large scale study is required, a request may have to be delayed until the following year due to work loads, staffing levels, etc. Page 20 of 26 Staff Response . The analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on this request can be done as part of the work required for the comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 7 Volume of requests received. A large volume of requests may necessitate that some requests be reviewed in a subsequent year. Staff Response Nine requests for site specific comprehensive plan amendments have been received. Criterion No 8 Orde~ of requests received. Staff Response This was the eight request received. Staff Recommendation: In order to be consistent, if the Council determines that the request should go forward for further analysis, staff recommends looking at all properties between South 336th and the existing Community Business zone to the south. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #8 Parcels: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: 212104-9003, 212194-9004, 212104-9016, 212104-9026, 212104-9051, 212104-9063, 212104-9064, 212104-9065, 212104-9066, 212104-9067, 212104-9083, & 212104-9084. South orS 336th Street and east of Pacific Highway S (Exhibit 1). 51.68 acres. Peter Orser representing the Weyerhaeuser Company. The Weyerhaeuser Company. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Business Park and BP zoning to Multifamily and RM 3600 zoning (one unit per 3,600 square feet) and to delete the north/south road required in the comprehensive plan. DECISIONAL CRITERIA Criterion No 1 Whether the same area or issue was studied during the last amendment process and conditions in the immediate vicinity have significantly changed so as to make the requested change within the public interest. Dage2, of 26 PAG E_2/_ Staff Response . This area was not studied during the last amendment process. Criterion No 2 Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. Staff Response The request to change the land use designation of 51.8 acres from Business Park will have an impact on the number of potential jobs and may be in conflict with FWCP LUP26, which calls for employment and business opportunities by allocating adequate land for commercial, office, and business park development. The impact on residential capacity will depend on whether the site will be constructed as residential multifamily or whether it will be developed for other uses allowed in the RM 3600 zone. Per Exhibit M, the Weyerhaeuser Company has been approached by Faith Christian Church to acquire the property so that the church might develop a K-12 school, recreational fields and church facility in a campus-like setting. In the event, the church does not proceed with their plans, the Weyerhaeuser Company proposes to develop the site with a mix of housing, including, single family, attached townhouses, and stacked multifamily. The proposal to delete the north/south road does not conform to Map III-7, Planned Street Sections of the Comprehensive Plan, which shows the north/south road as being two lanes with parking on both sides. Criterion No 3 Whether the proposed amendment meets existing state and local laws, including the Growth Management Act. Staff Response Based on limited analysis, the proposal does not conflict with any existing state or local laws. Compliance with the Growth Management Act in part will depend on the analysis of the capacity analysis which will determine if employment targets can still be met after changes in comprehensive plan designation and zoning. Criterion No 4 In the case of text amendments or other amendments to goals or policies, whether the request benefits the city as a whole versus a selected group. Staff Response This criterion does not apply to this request, since it is a site specific request. If the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, it shall be further evaluated according to the following criteria: It is not clear whether the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, however, the remainder of the criteria will still be addressed. I Criterion No 5 . Whether the proposed amendment can be incorporated into planned or active projects. Staff Response The proposed request can be incorporated into this year's comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 6 Amount of analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on the request. If a large scale study is required, a request may have to be delayed until the following year due to work loads, staffing levels, etc. Staff Response The analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on this request can be done as part of the work required for the comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 7 Volume of requests received. A large volume of requests may necessitate that some requests be reviewed in a subsequent year Staff Response Nine requests for site specific comprehensive plan amendments have been received. Criterion No 8 Order of requests received. Staff Response This was the fourth request received. Staff Recommendation: That the request go forward for further analysis. SITE SPECIFIC REQUEST #9 Parcels: Location: Size: Proponent: Owner: Request: 292104-9080 & 292104-9021. West of Pacific Highway S at about 361st Place. 22.5 acres. Mr Kwon, Goldmax, Inc. Same. Request to change the comprehensive plan designation and zoning from Single Family Low Density and SE - Suburban Estates (one unit per five acres) to Single Family Medium Density and RS 35.0 (one unit per 35,000 square feet) (Exhibit J). Page 23 of 26 PAG DECISIONAL CRITERIA Criterion No 1 Whether the same area or issue was studied during the last amendment process and conditions in the immediate vicinity have significantly changed so as to make the requested change within the public interest. Staff Response This area was not studied during the last amendment process. However, there was a request by Mr. Barovic for a change in land use designation and zoning for 14.21 acres located one parcel away to the north from Single Family Low Density (Suburban Estates - 1 unit per 5 acres)_to Single Family High Density (RS 5.0 -- 1 unit per 5,000 sq. fi.). The planning commission recommended a change to Single Family Medium Density (RS 35.0 -- 1 unit per 35,000 sq. ft.) for this property, however, the City Council denied a change to any higher density based on environmental reasons. Criterion No 2 Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. Staff Response A branch of the Hylebos Creek flows in a southerly direction approximately through the middle of this site. In addition, there appears to be portions of wetlands on the northern and southern boundaries of the property. One of the goals of the comprehensive plan, NEP22 states that the city may regulate private development and public actions to protect water quality and to ensure adequate in-stream flow to protect fisheries, wildlife habitat, and recreation resources. When the land use designations were adopted, the city gave appropriate consideration to environmentally sensitive areas by designating them as medium density and low density land use. The request to increase the density of this parcel may not be consistent with the comprehensive plan. Furthermore, as mentioned under Criterion No. 1, during the 1998 comprehensive plan amendment process, a request to increase the density of 14.21 acres located one parcel away to the north of this site was denied by the City Council based on environmental reasons. Criterion No 3 Whether the proposed amendment meets existing state and local laws, including the Growth Management Act. Staff Response Based on limited analysis, the proposal does not conflict with any existing state or local laws. However, if increasing density results in adverse impacts on critical areas, the amendment would not be in compliance with the Growth Management Act. Page 24 of 26 EXH" .I., PAG E., OF Criterion No 4 In the case of text amendments or other amendments to goals or policies, whether the request benefits the city as a whole versus a selected group. Staff Response This criterion does not apply to this request, since it is a site specific request. If the request meets the criteria set forth in 1-4 above, it shall be further evaluated according to the following criteria: The request does not appear to meet Criterion #2 above, however, the remainder of the criteria will still be addressed. Criterion No 5 Whether the proposed amendment can be incorporated into planned or active projects. Staff Response The proposed request can be incorporated into this year's comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 6 Amount of analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on the request. If a large scale study is required, a request may have to be delayed until the following year due to work loads, staffing levels, etc. Staff Response The analysis necessary to reach a recommendation on this request can be done as part of the work required for the comprehensive plan update. Criterion No 7 Volume of requests received. A large volume of requests may necessitate that some requests be reviewed in a subsequent year Staff Response Nine requests for site specific comprehensive plan amendments have been received. Criterion No 8 Order of requests received. Staff Response This was the first request received. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that this request not be considered further, based on environmental concerns. However, in order to be consistent, if the F~age 25 of 26 PAG E2_8. Council determines that the request should go forward for further analysis, staff recommends looking at all properties north to South 356th. VI SUMMARY If approved, Requests No.'s 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 would result in approximately 65.42 acres being converted from Business Park to other uses and the addition of 33.93 acres of Community Business designated land. As part of this comprehensive plan update, the City will be running a new capacity analysis which will help in determining how these requests, if approved, would affect residential and employment targets as well as the overall vision of the comprehensive plan. VII COUNCIL ACTION Pursuant to FWCC Section 22-523(D), based on its review of requests according to the criteria in Section IV of this staff report, the City Council shall determine which requests shall be further considered for adoption, and shall forward those requests to the Planning Commission for its review and recommendation. The Council's decision to consider a proposed amendment shall not constitute a decision or recommendation that the proposed amendment should be adopted, nor does it preclude later Council action to add or delete an amendment for consideration. VII LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C Exhibit D Exhibit E Exhibit F Exhibit G Exhibit H Exhibit I Exhibit J Exhibit K Exhibit L Exhibit M Composite Map of Site Specific Requests Site Specific Request #1 Site Specific Request #2 Site Specific Request #3 Site Specific Request #4 Site Specific Request #5 Site Specific Request #6 Site Specific Request #7 Site Specific Request #8 Site Specific Request #9 April 26, 1999, Correspondence from Village Properties NW Support for Site Specific Request #3 Support for Site Specific Request #8 1:\99CMPAMN~060799LT g/June 3, 1999 Page 26 of 26 EX~:,~ ~ A 'I OR ~- 0 0 ~',Z o')z ~ < ~- <, ~ ~ ~ EXHIIB~~ C ~z 8 PAGE OF 0 0 0 la_ z w (/.) -r- rrZO ,T,,, O_ u.! 0 r0 i~ccW cr) On EXHIB~__~-.~ PAGE__J.t OF t AVE. $. I. IJ 0 N °~ 0 I.LI rD m m ~8 ~- 0 0 fl. 0 N 0 'S '3AV 0 N \ '$ 'A/~AH Ol-llOVd o E - j '::]AY H191. Z ,,, o '~ PAGE ~,~ wOco ~ 0 ~rrW ~ Oo ~,,°~ ~"'= 'S '3AV H19 I. 0 E 'F:: ~ 0 ~.o U.I rD LL! VILLAGE PROPERTIES NW EXHiBI;: .... F GE___L OF April 26, 1999, City of Federal Way Mr. Stephen Clifton, Director Community Development Services 33530 First Way South Federal Way, WA 98003 RE: Comprehensive Plan Amendment Tax Parcel # 122103~9030-03 Dear Mr. Clifton, On behalf of the property owners, Happy Valley Land Co. LLC, we as the applicants are requesting a comprehensive plan land-use map amendment and rezone on the above-mentioned property in order to allow the development ora neighborhood business. We believe this change is consistent with the city of federal Way's comprehensive plans, polio's and goals. 1 The property is currently designated Professional Office park and has not been developed. With the abundance of office zoning in the City, it is understandable why this property has never developed and is better suited for a retail convenience use. The lack of convenient retail services in the area for residents to the west has caused more traffic congestion east and south of this location, due to the distances these customers must travel for their services. This request includes an amendment to the comprehensive plan land use map from Professional Office Park to Neighborhood Business, and a rezone from Professional Office CPO) to Business Neighborhood (BN). As a part of this Comprehensive Plan Modification, we are proposing to contribute 2 acres of land on the south side of 320th and 21st SW to the community for a park. This contribution of land across the street is conditioned upon our ability to develop the subject site for our retail use. This amendment will not result in development that will adversely affect the Public Health, Safety and general Welfare. Under the Comp Plan Land Use Section II 2.1 LUP PG 1, provisions of community and commercial services are to be placed conveniently and residentially scaled for residential neighborhoods. As the closest commercial services are either at 320th and Hwy 99 an already congested arterial or at 348th and 21 st, neither of which are within walking distances or convenient to the thousands of residents living in Brown Point, Twin L4kes or the surrounding [-~ECE{VED BY i~gY 3 ]99,9 EXH F,- K PAG neighborhoods. This small commercial development will actually shorten trips be providing convenient services within close proximity to where they live. LUP 2.2 H PG 4 stresses the importance of parks and open space, which reduce environmental impacts such as noise and air pollution, providing for passive and active recreation as well as preserving the beauty of the City. The granting of almost 2 acres of land for a residential park will provide the community the benefits mentioned under LUP 2.2. Additionally, this proposal will lessen the impact on Federal Way's general fund through this land becoming available without cost for use as a park. Section H Capacity analysis LUP 2.4 PG 10 indicates vacant square footage for Business Park, Corporate Park and Office to be over 288 Acres and only 13.6 Acres available for Neighborhood Businesi. As growth continues to add more people to the marketplace, congestion will only increase. This development will reduce congestion by diverting and shortening trips before people must drive to the 2 major urban commercial cores at SW 320~ & HWY 99 or SW 336a & 21~t Ave SW. Urban Design And Form Section 2.5 Policies LUP 7 is met with this proposal as it provides public infrastructure with private development and minimizes costs. Under Section II 2.7 PG 12 & 13 Citywide Polices LUPS' 9, 10 and 13 are met since this proposal will allow for reduction of congestion as the community grows in the next 20 years, provides a distinctive neighborhood retail area while providing park and recreational opportunities. Section 112.8 LUP 26 PG 15 indicates provision for allocation of adequate land for commercial, ~office, and business park development. As mentioned in table 11-1 PG 10, the ratio of commerE[al land available (13.6 acres), versus business, corporate and office (288 acres) leaves a large void in the ability of the balancing of adequate larid uses dispersed conveniently throughout the community. The stated definition of Neighborhood Business in the Comprehensive Plan II PG 17 is to proVide convenient goods and services at a pedestrian and neighborhood scale close to adjacent residential uses. In Section II, the goal of LUG 7 PG 18 is to provide neighborhood and community scale retail centers for the City's neighborhoods. We believe this proposal will provide the 320t~ and 21~t SW neighborhood with convenient neighborhood services for both pedestrians, bicycles and shorten trip times and congestion for motorists. The growth of the population has caused justification to create this neighborhood scale retail development as. addressed in the Dec 98 revised Neighborhood Business overview section. The Recreation Element section PG 24 provides for preservation and expansion of all recreational opportunities through programs of acquisition, development, and various means of less-than-fee acquisition. Our granting of 2 acres to the City for parks meets that goal. Transportation Section m PG 5-The Existing Conditions Section states that nearly 75% of Federal Way travel is focused on the residence, either as the point of origin or destination. The Western Residential Area consists of over half of all residential dwellings in the study area. As this section states, there are too few streets and more need for more east/west corridors. 320t~ and 348t~ are the principal east/west arterial streets, since they connect into 1-5 and handle today's 77,000 evening peak hour trips, which are expected to increase tO nearly 116,000 trips by / PAG 2015. This development will lessen the time, while reducing traffic in more congested commercial markets such as HW 99 and SW 320t~as well as 336t~ & 21~t Ave SW. Reducing traffic in congested areas cost the city over $14 million per year as stated in the street deficiency section III-PG 5. Among major summary of needs outlined in the Vision 2020 llI ?G 9, Federal Way will have to find other ways to relieve east/west congestion. Traffic volume on 320m has increased at an annual rate of 5.8% and carries approximately 55,000 cars per day llI PG 12. Placing these neighborhood services close to residential neighborhoods' is the way to reduce trips and congestion. Economic Development Sections Regional role for Federal Way includes adding more businesse~ relative to the number of new housing units IV PG 2, and ensuring that neighborhood scale retail development keeps pace with population growth IV PG 2. The goal of Federal Way is not to wait for market forces to create the future, but wi!l act to shape and accelerate the evolving market trends in the direction of its vision. This Comp Plan Modification will accomplish the City's goals several ways. The enhancement of the communities' quality of life by reducing congestion, adding parks with features such as trees and flowers, increasing time for families to be together by shortening neighborhood shopping trips while providing needed services close to the communities they will serve, would make this a winning proposal for the City, the development and ultimately its people. I can be reached on my direct line, which is 206-679-4447 or my office 425-643-9977. We thank you for your consideration of this proposal. S' ere ~', ,"1 ~;;/9 ~/ Mr. Richard L'. Costanzo /~?" Applicant /~ 3. Support for the Amendment PAGE__LOF I In the process of completing a binding site plan Land Use Application for 81 detached units in a multi-family zone, it became apparent that the on and off-site infrastructure improvements required to improve the site were not financially feasible. The location of the site and the configuration of the site require investments in infrastructure mandated by the comprehensive plan well beyond. the financial capability of the use. Since changing these requirements in the comprehensive plan is not likely, it is appropriate to change the use to BP, which is capable of affording these improvements and is consistent with surrounding land use. From a comprehensive planning perspective, we believe this change of use meets all the conceptual goals outlined by the City when the site was originally annexed, namely: · Complimentary uses: The Quadrant Business Park is directly to the south and the unannexed parcel to the west is currently zoned for office use. · Connectivity: 32nd Avenue and Weyerhaeuser Way can be improved to the north to meet future expansion plans for connectivity. · Sense of Entry: A uniform and high quality entry to the City can be accomplished. · Improvements to 320~: This street can now be fully widened to the proposed 7 lane configuration. Additionally, · The presence of Capital One materially changes the dynamics of this area. Additional demand will be created by this large user and the existing demand that was displaced by Capital One's large space requirement can now be fulfilled. An additional note: This application does not include the infamous lot 17 (adjacent to the east) owned by John Elley, but under option by Quadrant. not currently a part of the City, but an annexation petition will be submitted shortly. It is our intent that this parcel would be designated BP or will upon annexation to the City. In this way, the entire parcel receives a consistent comprehensive plan designation. It is 3. Support for the Amendment EXt iL PAGE_./_uv Amendment 1: Change use from BP to RM We have been approached by Faith Christian Church to acquire the property so they might develop a K-12 school, recreational fields and church facility. This use is allowable in an RM 3600 zone. The Church is a "World Vision" class facility, which we believe will be an outstanding addition to the City and the Weyerhaeuser Corporate Headquarters. We have reviewed the traffic patterns of such a proposal and find their "off-peak" nature to be very complimentary to the existing road patterns. Further, we believe the size of the site allows a campus setting that coupled with superior building design will be an asset to the City. Once accepted for review, we will be prepared to provide site plans and a traffic analysis to demonstrate these points. We have proposed RM 3600 as the underlying zoning first because a Church/school is an allowable use under this zone. Additionally, the Church has made a commitment to purchase the site, however, many issues remain and while the probability is high they will carry through, it is only prudent that we put underlying zoning in place that is appropriate to the area in the event they do not proceed. In the event the Church does not proceed, we would propose a mixed housing community under the RM 3600 zoning. We are planning on three housing types: typical single family lots in the 5000 to 7200 square foot range; attached townhomes with 3-5 units-per building and stacked multifamily housing in the 20-25 units to the acre range. We would locate the multifamily housing as a 15 acre parcel closest to the freeway. We have a very preliminary site plan which we can share as we move to the next level of review. In summary, we are proposing school/Church use under an RM 3600 zoning with a back up plan of a mixed housing program if the Church does not proceed. Some additional point to consider:. · We have added considerable BP property to the-City in the last several years and'are proposing an additional 20 acres be added in this years round. These additions more than offset any potential losses. · The property to the North is higher density residential and very compatible with both the proposed uses. · The BP property to the South is also an appropriate adjacent use with proper site planning and buffering. · The traffic patterns are best under a Church scenario, but good under residential. In either case, large trucks associated with a business park use as was originally proposed, would not be impacting the road network. PAG 0 Amendment 2: Delete North/South Road We believe the location of this site and its proposed change to residential zoning suggest a different set of circumstances that no longer require the road connection. · The site will have two connections, one to Highway 99 and one to 356th Street allowing for adequate ingress/egress. · The entrance to the site will be located across from the North/South road (20"' Ave. S.) and provide to connectivity to this future arterial system. · The BP land to the south will generate traffic not appropriate to the residential zoning proposal for the property of the residential use North of the property. · The viability and usability of the site are compromised by a road which will essentially bisect the parcel. · The traffic levels inherent in the residential zoning do not warrant such a connection. MS lsl4; E)~-~. i',~- !'~~'~ .L PAGE__I_OF_L__ 'L QUADRANT HOMES The Smart Choice Quadrant Plaza, Ste 500 NESth at 112th PO Box 130 Bellevue WA 98009 Tel (425) 455 2900 Fax (425) 646 8363 June 16,1999 Margaret Clark City of Federal Way 33530 first Way South Federal Way, WA 98003 Dear Margaret, RE: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGE 320rH STREET SITE Our initial request for a comprehensive plan change for our 320th Street site was for BP with BP zoning. Based on input from the LUTC committee and a review of our intended use, it appears OP with OP zoning would be more appropriate for the site and the Federal Way/Weyerhaeuser shared vision for the area. Please consider this a formal request to modify from' BP to OP.' Thank You, THE QUADRANT CORPORATION Peter M. Orser Senior Vice President RECEIVED ~O~IJNFFY OEVE JUN 1 ? ]999 PAGE__L/ J LLI Z ~z n-ZO ~o~ wo..~ n ~Z ~o_~ i.u C) ~) EXH~ '- PAG E.__J_ U ~_J---- June 23, 1999 City of Federal Way Department of Community Development Services 33530 First Way South Federal Way, WA. 98003 Subject: 1999 Comprehensive Plan Update Notice of Public Hearing John Schneider 36008 3rd Ave. S. Federal Way, WA. 98003 Per the notice mailed out, I am submitting comment on item nine to be heard at the City Council Meeting on July 6, 1999. The subject property of 22.5 acres located west of Pacific Highway South at about 361~t Place contains a creek, or stream, and related wetlands to Hylebos. This branch of Hylebos creek, or stream, is a recovering salmon spawning grounds and is sensitive to any development in its vicinity. I'm not opposed to a partial rezoning of the subject property excepting for a buffer area and exclusion of zoning or development of property within 500 or 1000 feet of the creek/stream Also, I propose special conditions of development and use of the subject property to take into account the im~ediate proximity of Hylebos should development proceed. Please consider consulting with experts on the creek/stream, and wetlands condition before proceeding with the potential subdivision of the subject property. ./ RECEIVED BY OOMM[INfT'V DEVELOPMENT JUN 2 5 1999 EXHIB .. PAGE._.!_/OF CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA ITEM CATEGORY: BUDGET IMPACT: CONSENT ORDINANCE X BUSINESS HEARING FYI RESOLUTION STAFF REPORT PROCLAMATION STUDY SESSION OTHER Amount Budgeted: $ Expenditure Amt: $ Contingency Reqd: $ ATTACHMENTS: None SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: At a special meeting on July 7, 1999, the City Council of Whole interviewed applicants to fill the one (1) vacancy on the Ethics Board. The appointment will be confirmed at the regular meeting on July 6, 1999. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: City Council of Whole recommends confirmation of the appointee to fill the appropriate vacancy on the Ethics Board. CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: To confirm the necessary board appointment, and to direct the City Clerk to arrange for introduction and presentation of the certificate of appointment for the newly appointed boardmember at the July 20 regular meeting. ............................................................................................................................................................ :-~......~.:~.~...55~.~:~ ........... APPROVED FOR INCLUSION IN COUNCIL PACKET: COUNCIL ACTION: (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) APPROVED DENIED TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION COUNCIL BILL # ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # CCCOVER-5/24/94 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA ITEM CATEGORY: BUDGET IMPACT: CONSENT ORDINANCE X BUSINESS HEARING FYI RESOLUTION STAFF REPORT PROCLAMATION STUDY SESSION OTHER Amount Budgeted: $ Expenditure Amt: $ Contingency Reqd: $ ATTACHMENTS: None SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: At a special meeting on July 7, 1999, the City Council of Whole interviewed applicants to fill the three (3) vacancies and two (2) alternate positions on the Diversity Commission. The appointments will be confirmed at the regular meeting on July 6, 1999. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: City Council of Whole recommends confirmation of appointees to fill the appropriate vacancies on the Diversity Commission. CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: To confirm the necessary commission appointments, and to direct the City Clerk to arrange for introduction and presentation of certificates of appointment for the newly appointed commissioners at the July 20 regular meeting. APPROVED FOR INCLUSION IN COUNCIL PACKET: COUNCIL ACTION: (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) APPROVED DENIED TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION COUNCIL BILL # ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # CCCOVER-5~4/~ MEETING DATE: July 6, 1999 ITEM# CITY OF FEDERAL WAY City Council AGENDA ITEM SUBJECT: Courtyard Village Development Agreement CATEGORY: BUDGET IMPACT: CONSENT X ORDINANCE BUSINESS HEARING FYI RESOLUTION STAFF REPORT PROCLAMATION STUDY SESSION OTHER Amount Budgeted: $ Expenditure Amt: $ Contingency Reqd: $ ATTACHMENTS: 1) Memorandum submitted to the June 2, 1999 Planning Commission Public Hearing; 2) Draft Ordinance approving and authorizing the City Manager to execute the Development Agreement; ....................................................... ............. ................................................................................................................ SUMMARY/BACKGROUND: The Development Agreement was drafted in response to the decision of the City Council in December, 1998. Mr. Lawrence H. Draper had asked the City to delete the planned 341st Place from the transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan, as it would bisect the proposed Courtyard Village development, a senior housing project. The City Council agreed to delete 341st Place on the condition that, as part of the project - and in addition to those conditions that may be administratively imposed as permit conditions - Mr. Draper enter into a development agreement providing for the improvement of 19th Avenue SW, from the south boundary of Parcel A (Tax Lot 6), along the east boundary of Parcel B (Tax Lot 54), to SW 344th Street, and improvement of 344tn Street west to connect with the portion of 344th that the Washington State Department of Transportation is to install as part of its construction of the Federal Way Park and Ride No. 2. Staff prepared the Agreement in response to the Council's direction and has obtained Mr. Draper's concurrence with it. The extent of the required improvements, timing of construction, dedication of improvements as well as other specific conditions are contained in the attached proposed Development Agreement. In accordance with RCW 36.70B. 176-210, a Public Hearing was held on June 2nd with the Planning Commission to obtain public comment prior to any Council action. Following the Public Hearing, the Planning Commission suggested several minor revisions involving clarification as to the parties to the Agreement. The suggested revisions have been incorporated into the attached Draft Development Agreement. CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The draft agreement was forwarded directly to the July 6th City Council meeting for consideration, due to the cancellation of the June 21st Land Use and Transportation Committee meeting. As a result, there is no committee recommendation. CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDATION: Move Ordinance to second reading on July 20, 1999. (BELOW TO BE COMPLETED BY CITY CLERK'S OFFICE) COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED TABLED/DEFERRED/NO ACTION k:\council\agdbills\ 1999\courtyd.dev COUNCIL BILL # 1st Reading Enactment Reading ORDINANCE # RESOLUTION # ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH LAWRENCE H. DRAPER AND YEN, CHEN, CHANG AND ASSOCIATES. DRAFT WHEREAS, Yen, Chen, Chang and Associates ("Chen"), a Washington general partnership, is the owner of two parcels of undeveloped real property, Parcel A (also known as Tax Lot 6) and Parcel B (also known as Tax Lot 54), located adjacent to 341 st Place and 19th Avenue SW; and WHEREAS, Lawrence H. Draper ("Draper") has entered into a contract to purchase Parcel A (Tax Lot 6) from Chen, and wishes to develop a senior housing complex known as Courtyard Village on Parcel A and potentially Parcel B; and WHEREAS, as of 1998, the Transportation Element of the City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan contained a map of adopted functional classifications of existing and planned streets and highways within the City; and WHEREAS, the map included SW 341st Place as a planned street; and WHEREAS, 341 st Place South, as shown in the Transportation Element of the City's 1995 Comprehensive Plan, would bisect Courtyard Village as proposed; and WHEREAS, during the City's 1998 annual review of its Comprehensive Plan, Draper requested that the City delete 341 st Place from the Transportation Element, to facilitate development of Courtyard Village; and ORD # , PAGE I DRAFT WHEREAS, in Ordinance No. 98-330, the Council agreed to delete SW 341st Street from the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, on the condition that as part of the project and in addition administrative permit conditions, Draper enter into a development agreement providing for improvement of 19th Avenue SW from the south boundary of Parcel A (Tax Lot 6), along the east boundary of Parcel B (Tax Lot 54) to SW 344 ~h Street, and from the intersection of 19th Avenue SW west along 344~' to its connection with the portion of 344th that the Washington Department of Transportation ("WSDOT") is to install as part of its construction of the Federal Way Park-'n-Ride No. 2; and WHEREAS, the City has authority under RCW 36.70B.170-.210 to enter into a development agreement to delineate the development standards goveming development and use of property; and WHEREAS, Cher~ and Draper have indicated their willingness to enter into a development agreement in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, to fulfill the condition set by the Council for its deletion of 341 s` Place from the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70B.200, a public hearing on the proposed development agreement in Exhibit A was held by the Federal Way Planning Commission on June 2, 1999; and WHEREAS, the City Council considered the proposed development agreement at its regularly scheduled meetings on July 6, 1999 and July 20, 1999; and NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: ORD it , PAGE 2 DRAFT Section 1. Findings. The City Council hereby finds that: A. The proposed development agreement requires Draper to construct, at no cost to the City, the extension of 19th Avenue SW to its connection with SW 344th Street, and to extend SW 344th Street to its connection with that portion of SW 344th Street being constructed by the WSDOT in conjunction with Federal Way Park 'n Ride No. 2. B. The construction requirements, in conjunction with the WSDOT development, will provide a through connection between 21 st Avenue SW and SW 336th Street. This will provide better and safer through-traffic connections and access than would improving SW 341 st Place, which does not directly align with any street to the west of 21st Avenue SW. C. The proposed development agreement will not be detrimental to existing or potential surrounding land uses as defined by the Comprehensive Plan, because the Courtyard Village development will be subject to existing Federal Way City Code provisions concerning drainage, landscaping, parking, traffic, height, noise, and future use. These provisions protect the existing and potential surrounding land uses from any potential adverse impacts from the underlying use, and the road connection that will be made by virtue of the development agreement protects potential surrounding land uses from any adverse traffic impacts from Courtyard Village while also providing an additional means of ingress and egress and an alternative travel route that avoids the often- congested intersection of SW 336t~ and 21st Avenue SW. D. In light of the Findings in subsections 1 .A - 1.C above, the proposed development agreement bears a substantial relation to the public health, safety, and general welfare of the City. Section 2. Conclusions of Law. Based on the Findings of Fact set forth in Section 1 above, the development agreement is consistent with the criteria set forth in RCW 36.70B. 170. ORD # , PAGE 3 URAFT Section 3. Development Agreement. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute the development agreement attached as Exhibit A hereto, and to take all further and necessary action required by the development agreement. The City Council's authorization herein is conditioned upon Chen's and Draper's agreement to and execution of the Development · Agreement, in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, within thirty (30) days of the date of this Ordinance. Failure of Chen and Draper to so execute the Development Agreement shall render the authorization given in this section null and void without further action by the City of Federal Way or its City Council. 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 th~ ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Section 5. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days from and after: (I) Draper's and Chen's execution of the Development Agreement in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A; and (2) passage and publication of this ordinance, as provided by law. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Federal Way this day of July, 1999. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY ORD # , PAGE 4 MAYOR, RON GINTZ DRAFT ATTEST: CITY CLERK, N. CHRISTINE GREEN, CMC APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY ATTORNEY, LONDI K. LINDELL FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:. PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. K:\ordina\ctydvill.dev ORD # , PAGE 5 DRAFT After recording, return to: Federal Way City Attorney's Office 33530 1st Way S. Federal Way, WA 98003 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, AND LARRY DRAPER This Agreement, made and entered into this day of __, 1999, by and between Yen, Chen, Chang and Associates ("Chen"), a Washington general partnership and Lawrence H. Draper ("Draper"), on the one hand, and the City of Federal Way, Washington, a municipal corporation ("City"), on the other (collectively "the parties"). RECITALS A. Chen is the owne{ of two parcels of undeveloped real property, Parcel A (also known as-Tax Lot 6) and Parcel B (also known as Tax Lot 54). Parcels A and B are referred to collectively herein as "the Property," and are located in the City of Federal Way, adjacent to 341st Place and 19th Avenue SW. The parcels are legally described in Exhibit "A" and depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein. B. Draper has entered into a contract to purchase Parcel A (Tax Lot 6), and wishes to develop a senior housing complex on it. Draper proposed to build the senior housing in two phases: Phase I on Parcel A (Tax Lot 6), and Phase II on Parcel B (Tax Lot 54). The project is proposed to be named Courtyard Village. 34Vt Place South, as shown in the Transportation Element of the City's 1995 Comprehensive Plan, would bisect the planned project. C. During the City's 1998 annual review of its Comprehensive Plan, Draper requested that the City delete 34Pt Place from the Transportation Element, to facilitate development of Courtyard Village. D. The Council agreed, on the condition that, as part of the project and in addition to those conditions that may be administratively imposed as permit conditions, Draper enter into a development agreement providing for improvement of 19~ Avenue SW from the south boundary of Parcel A (Tax Lot 6), along the east boundary of Parcel B (Tax Lot 54) to SW 344~ Street, and improvement of 344th west to connect with the portion of 344th that the Washington Department of Transportation ("WSDOT") is to install as part of its construction of the Federal Way Park-'n- Ride No. 2. Development Agreement City of Federal Way and Draper - Courtyard Village project / South 344th Street Page 2 E. Chen and Draper wish to enter into a development agreement with the City, to fulfill the condition set by the Council for its deletion of 341st Place from the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. F. The City has authority under RCW 36.70B. 170-.210 to enter into a development agreement to delineate the development standards governing development and use of property. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the City's deletion of 341st Place from the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the parties agree as follows: 1. Development of Property. Draper and Chen covenant and agree that, as part of the development of Parcel A (Tax Lot 6), Draper or any other party developing the Property will engineer, design, construct and improve 19~ Avenue SW, commencing at the south boundary of Parcel A (Tax Lot 6) and extending along the east boundary of Parcel B (Tax Lot 54) south to SW 344~h Street. Draper and Chen also covenant and agree that, as part of its development of the Property, Draper or any other party developing the Property will engineer, design, construct and improve SW 344t~ west to connect with the portion of SW 344t~ that WSDOT is to install as part of its construction of the Federal Way Park-'n-Ride No. 2. The location of the streets to be constructed and improved are shown on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. Following completion of construction and required maintenance to the City's satisfaction, as evidenced by the City's acceptance, Draper and Chen shall dedicate said streets to the City as public rights of way. The timing and scope of the improvements and dedication required herein, as well as other requirements governing the improvements, are set forth in Paragraphs 2 - 7 below. 2. Extent of Improvements Required. Draper and Chen covenant and agree that the 19th Avenue SW and SW 344~h Street will be improved as follows: 2.1. 19th Avenue SW will be improved in accordance with the'standards for a minor collector, as set forth in Chapter 3 of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, Roadway Cross Section S, Figure III-3, except that on the east side of the street, Draper need not construct or install a planter strip, street lights, street trees or sidewalk. 2.2. SW 344th Street will be improved in accordance with the standards for a Principal Collector, as set forth in Chapter 3 of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan, Roadway Cross Section K, Figure III-3, except that on the south side of the street, Draper need not construct or install a planter strip, street lights, street trees or sidewalk. 2.3. Improvements to both 19th Avenue SW and SW 344th Street shall include all utilities, including surface water drainage, sanitary sewer, water, lighting, power, telephone, and cable television, in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Way City Code. ' AFT Development Agreement City of Federal Way and Draper - Courtyard Village project / South 344th Street Page 3 3. Timing of Construction and Dedication of Improvements. 3.1. Draper and Chen covenant and agree that, regardless of the date of commencement of construction of Courtyard Village (subject to Paragraph 8.6 below), Draper or any other party developing the Property will commence construction of the improvements described herein no later than July 1, 2001 and will complete construction to the City's satisfaction no later than September 30, 2001. 3.2 Draper and Chen covenant and agree that Draper or any other party developing the Property shall obtain all necessary permits and approvals from the City of Federal Way prior to commencement of construction. 3.3. Draper and Chen covenant and agree that, following completion of construction and satisfactory maintenance of the street (as determined by the City in its sole discretion) for two years, Draper and Chert will within 30 days of the City's demand deliver a statutory warranty deed, in a form in accordance with Federal Way City Code requirements and acceptable to the City Attorney. The deed shall dedicate the segments of the 19th Avenue SW and SW 344m Street rights-of-way specified herein to the City for public travel and utilities. The rights-of-way dedicated shall meet the standards for minor and principal collectors Roadway Cross Sections S and K, respectively, as applicable. 4. Bonding of Improvements. Draper and Chen covenant and agree that Draper or any other party developing the Property will provide performance and maintenance bonds to insure his performance herein and maintenance of the improvements once constructed. The bonds shall be in a form acceptable to the City Attorney and in accordance with the requirements of the Federal Way City Code, including but not limited to Sections 22-146 - 22-175. Draper or any other party developing the Property shall provide the bonds meeting the requirements of this Paragraph prior to the City's issuance of a building permit for Courtyard Village or other development of Parcel A (Tax Lot 6). 5. Latercomers' Agreement The City agrees that Draper may seek City Council approval of a Latecomers' Agreement, to enable Draper to seek reimbursement for the costs of the improvements described herein from other property owners who develop in the future adjacent to 19th Avenue SW or SW 344th Street and are not required to construct street improvements because the improvements they would be required to install have already been constructed by Draper. City Council review and approval of any such Latecomers' Agreement shall be pursuant to FWCC 20-206 et seq. Development Agreement City of Federal Way and Draper - Courtyard Village project / South 344~ Street Page 4 6. Property Acquisition The City further agrees that, to the extent allowed by applicable law, it will exercise its power of eminent domain to acquire right-of-way necessary for construction of the improvements described above; PROVIDED, however, that it will do so only under the following conditions: 6.1 That Draper is unable to practicably acquire the property for fair market value, as demonstrated by a written offer and rejection of or expiration of that offer and an MAI appraisal acceptable to the City indicating that the rejected or expired offer was equal to or greater than the fair market value of the subject property; and 6.2 That Dra~per pay the cost of the property acquired and all of the City's costs, including staff and consultant time, attorneys' and appraisers' fees, and all other costs incurred in exercise of the City's power of eminent domain hereunder. 7. Environmentally Sensitive Areas In the event that the route contemplated for the extension of 19th Avenue SW and SW 344~ Street encroaches upon any environmentally sensitive areas as defmed by the FWCC, the City agrees that it will cooperate with Draper in identifying alternate routes and/or roadway configurations for the improvements required herein. 8. General Provisions. 8.1. Binding on Successors; Covenant to Run With Land. This Agreement is intended to protect the value of the Property, as well as the public health, safety, and welfare of the City of Federal Way, and the benefits and burdens inuring to Draper and Chen, and to the City, from this Agreement shall run with the land and shall be binding upon Draper and Chen and their heirs, successors, and assigns, and upon the City of Federal Way. 8.2. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Venue for any action to enforce the terms of this Agreement shall be in King County Superior Court. 8.3 Recording. This Agreement shall be recorded against the Property. 8.4. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Development Agreement City of Federal Way and Draper - Courtyard Village project / South 344'h Street Page 5 8.5 Authority. The City, Draper, and Chen each represent and warrant to the other that it has the respective power and authority, and is duly authorized, to execute and deliver this Agreement and that the persons signing on their behalf are duly authorized to do so. Chen and Draper further represent and warrant that they are the fee owners and contract purchasers, respectively, of Parcel A (Tax Lot 6) and Tax Lot 54, that they have authority to agree to the covenants contained herein, and that there are no other persons, entities, or parties with any ownership interests in the Property. 8.6 Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall remain in full force and effect unless amended or terminated by the mutual agreement of the parties; provided, however, that this Agreement shall be void if City does not grant approval for development on Parcel A (Tax Lot 6) by July 1, 2001. If this Agreement becomes void pursuant to this Paragraph, Draper and Chen agree that 341st Place shall be reinstated as part of Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element without need for further City Council action, and that any development on the Property (either Parcel A or B) approved after July 1, 2001 will include construction of all road improvements required by the FWCC for 341st Place, at no cost to the City. 8.7 Amendment. Thig Agreement may be modified only by a written instrument duly executed by all parties; provided, however, notwithstanding any provisions of this Agreement to the contrary, the City of Federal Way may, without the agreement of Draper or Chert, adopt and impose upon the Property restrictions and development regulations different than those set forth herein, if required by a serious threat to public health and safety. 8.8 set forth. Exhibits A -B attached hereto are incorporated herein by this reference as if fully 8.9 Headings. The headings in this Agreement are inserted for reference only and shall not be construed to expand, limit or otherwise modify the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 8.10 Integration; Scope of Agreement. This Agreement and its exhibits represent the entire agreement of the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, which is the deletion of 34Pt Place from the Transportation Element of the City of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan. There are no other agreements, oral or written, except as expressly set forth herein. This Agreement does not set forth all conditions applicable to the development of the Property; additional conditions may be imposed as part of any permit issued by the City, as required by the Federal Way City Code as determined by the discretion of the Directors of the Departments of Community Development Services and/or Public Works. 8.11 Indemnification. Draper and Chen release and agree to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and all of its elected and appointed officials, and its employees and agents, from all liability, claims, appeals, and costs, including the costs of defense of any claim or appeal, arising in connection with this Agreement, the deletion of 341st Place from the City's Development Agreement City of Federal Way and Draper - Courtyard Village project / South 344th Street Page 6 Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element, and/or the City's review, approval, conditional approval, or denial of any permits or approvals requested or necessary for development of the Property, except to the extent any liability, claim, appeal or cost results from the sole negligence of the City or its officers, agents, or employees in performing this Agreement. 8.12 Enforcement. In the event Draper or Chen fails to satisfy any of their obligations under this Agreement, the City shall have the right to enforce this Agreement at both law and equity, including but not limited to enforcing this Agreement under the enforcement provisions of the Federal Way City Code in effect at the time of any breach. Damages are not an adequate remedy for breach. In addition, Draper's or Chen's failure to satisfy any of his obligations in this Agreement shall constitute a breach of contract and shall be grounds for termination of this Agreement by the City. 8.13 Police Power. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to diminish, restrict or limit the police powers of the City granted by the Washington State Constitution or by general law. This Agreement is an exercise of the City's police powers and the authority granted under RCW 36.70B. 170-.210. 8.14 Effective Date. This Agreement shall be effective on the effective date of the City's Ordinance approving this Agreement, and the execution of this Agreement by duly authorized representatives of each party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have hereunto placed their hand and seals on the day and year indicated. CITY OF FEDERAL WAY BY: Kenneth E. Nyberg City Manager Approved as to Form for City of Federal Way: Date: City Attorney, Londi K. Lindell ATTEST: This __ day of ,1999. N. Christine Green, CMC Federal Way City Clerk Development Agreement City of Federal Way and Draper - Courtyard Village project / South 3444 Street Page 7 LAWRENCE H. DRAPER By: Its: D ate: Approved as to form for Lawrence H. Draper by: DRAFT YEN, CHEN, CHANG AND ASSOCIATES By: ' Its: D ate: Approved as to form for Yen, Chen, Chang and Associates by: K:\pubwork\ctydvill.628 06-28-99 Development Agreement City of Federal Way and Draper - Courtyard Village project / South 344tn Street Page 8 STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) SS. COUNTY OF KING ) On this day, personally appeared before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, Kenneth E. Nyberg/Philip D. Keightley (strike one), to me known to be the City Manager/Deputy City Manager (strike one) of the City of Federal Way, a Washington municipal corporation, the corporatiOn that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the said instrument. Given under my hand and official seal this day of , 1999. (notary signature) (typed/printed name of notary) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. My commission expires: STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) SS. COUNTY OF KING ) On this day personally appeared before me LAWRENCE H. DRAPER, to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and on oath swore that he/she/they executed the foregoing instrument as his free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. Given my hand and official seal this day of , 1999. (notary signature) (typed/printed name of notary) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. My commission expires: Development Agreement City of Federal Way and Draper - Courtyard Village project / South 344th Street Page 9 STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) SS. COUNTY OF KING ) On this day personally appeared before me, the undersigned Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, , to me known to be the General Partner of YEN, CHEN, CHANG AND ASSOCIATES, the Washington general partnership that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said partnership, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she/they was/were authorized to execute said instrument on behalf of said partnership. GIVEN my hand and official seal this __ day of , 1999. (notary signature) (typed/printed name of notary) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington My commission expires: Development Agreement City of Federal Way and Draper - Courtyard Village project / South 344th Street Page 10 EXHIBIT A - LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS Parcel A (Tax Lot 6) The North 412 feet of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 24, Township 21 North, Range 3 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; except the East 264 feet thereof; and except the North 382 feet of the West 500 feet thereof; and except the West 30 feet thereof conveyed to King County for road purposes by deed recorded under Recording No. 842325; and except that portion deeded to the Federal Way School District No. 210 by deed recorded under Recording No. 9303112451. Parcel B (Tax Lot 54) The West 475 feet, of the East 739 feet, of the South 411.24 feet, of the North 823.24 feet of the Southeast 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 24, Township 21, North, Range 3 East W.M., in King County, Washington. 04-26-99 09'20 AM FROM JOHN LAPE. ARCHITECT TO 2536614129 P02 EXHIBIT BIT[ PLAN ~ArE: .~ i. lq.. I PAGE: OOUR~ARD VtLLA6E .JOHN LAPE, ARCHITECT [ FEDERAL ~Y. ~SHINGTON P~. ~j 04/26/99 MON 08:51 [TX/RX NO 9355]