Chapter 19
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT

Articles:

I. In General

II. Mitigation of Development Impacts

III. Annexation

IV. Transportation Concurrency Management

Article I.
IN GENERAL

Sections:

19-1 – 19-25 Reserved.

19-1 – 19-25 Reserved.

Article II.
MITIGATION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS

Sections:

Division 1. Generally

19-26 – 19-40 Reserved.

Division 2. Procedure

19-41 Purpose.

19-42 Definition.

19-43 Determination of direct impact.

19-44 Costs.

19-45 Mitigation of direct impacts.

19-46 Methods of mitigation.

19-47 – 19-99 Reserved.

Division 1. Generally

19-26 – 19-40 Reserved.

Division 2. Procedure

19-41 Purpose.

It is the purpose of this division to provide alternatives for prospective developers of land within the city to mitigate the direct impacts that have been specifically identified by the city as a consequence of proposed development, and to make provisions for, including but not limited to, the public health, safety and general welfare, for open spaces, drainageways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds and sites for schools and school grounds. (Ord. No. 90-39, § 1(22.10), 2-27-90)

19-42 Definition.

For purposes of this division, the term “development” shall include, but not be limited to, subdivisions, short subdivisions, binding site plans and any other development activity defined by chapter 22, Zoning. (Ord. No. 90-39, § 1(22.20), 2-27-90)

19-43 Determination of direct impact.

Before any development is given the required approval or is permitted to proceed, the official or body charged with deciding whether such approval should be given shall determine direct impacts, if any, that are a consequence of the proposed development and which require mitigation, considering, but not limited to, the following factors:

(1) Predevelopment versus postdevelopment need for services such as city streets, sewers, water supplies, drainage facilities, parks, playgrounds, recreational facilities, schools, police services, fire services and other municipal facilities or services;

(2) Likelihood that a direct impact of a proposed development would require mitigation due to the cumulative effect of such impact when aggregated with the similar impacts of future development in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development;

(3) Size, number, condition and proximity of existing facilities to be affected by the proposed development;

(4) Nature and quantity of capital improvements reasonably necessary to mitigate specific direct impacts identified as a consequence of the proposed development;

(5) Likelihood that the users of the proposed development will benefit from any mitigating capital improvements or programs;

(6) Any significant adverse environmental impacts of the proposed development identified in the process of complying with the environmental policy, FWCC 18-26 et seq. or the State Environmental Policy Act, RCW 43.21C.010 et seq.;

(7) Consistency with the city’s comprehensive plan and any of its subparts;

(8) Likelihood of city growth by annexation into areas immediately adjacent to the proposed development;

(9) Appropriateness of financing necessary capital improvements by means of local improvement districts;

(10) Whether the designated capital improvement furthers the public health, safety or general welfare; and

(11) Any other facts deemed by the city to be relevant. (Ord. No. 90-39, § 1(22.30), 2-27-90)

19-44 Costs.

The cost of any investigations, analysis or reports necessary for a determination of direct impact shall be borne by the applicant. (Ord. No. 90-39, § 1(22.40), 2-27-90)

19-45 Mitigation of direct impacts.

The official or body charged with granting the necessary approval for a proposed development shall review an applicant’s proposal for mitigating any identified direct impacts and determine whether such proposal is an acceptable mitigation measure considering the cost and land requirements of the required improvement and the extent to which the necessity for the improvement is attributable to the direct impacts of the proposed development. No official or body shall approve a development unless provisions have been made to mitigate identified direct impacts that are consequences of such development. (Ord. No. 90-39, § 1(22.50), 2-27-90)

19-46 Methods of mitigation.

(a) The methods of mitigating identified direct impacts required as a condition of any development approval may include, but are not limited to, dedication of land to any public body, off-site improvements, on-site improvements, and other capital or noncapital methods that may effectively reduce direct impacts.

(b) In lieu of a dedication of land or to mitigate a direct impact that has been identified as a consequence of a proposed development, the city may approve a voluntary payment agreement with the developer, provided no such agreement shall be required as a condition of approval, and shall be subject to the following provisions:

(1) The official or body approving development must find that the money offered will mitigate or is a satisfactory alternative to mitigate the identified direct impact.

(2) The payment shall be held in a reserve account and may only be expended to fund a capital improvement or program agreed upon by the parties to mitigate the identified direct impact.

(3) The payment shall be expended in all cases within five years of collection, unless otherwise agreed to by the developer.

(4) Any payment not expended within five years of collection shall be refunded to the property owners of record at the time of the refund with interest at the rate earned in the city’s reserve account applicable at the time of refund. If the payment is not expended within five years due to delay attributable to the developer, the payment shall be refunded without interest.

(5) Property owners entitled to a refund and/or interest under the provisions of this division may voluntarily and in writing waive their right to a refund for specified period of time in the interest of providing the designated capital improvement or other capital improvement or program identified by the property owner, and acceptable to the city.

(6) The developer may voluntarily and in writing waive on behalf of the developer and subsequent purchasers the right to interest and or a refund in order to facilitate completion of an improvement. Under no condition shall such a waiver be required as a condition of approval. Such waiver shall be recorded with the county where the property is situated and shall be binding on subsequent owners.

(c) The developer or applicant may choose to pay a fee in lieu of reservation of all or portions of open space areas required. If the applicant offers to pay money in lieu of open space and if the city accepts the offer, the amount shall be determined based upon the square footage of open space which otherwise would have been required to be provided times the then current market value per square foot of similarly situated property. (Ord. No. 90-39, § 1(22.60.10 – 22.60.30), 2-27-90)

19-47 – 19-99 Reserved.

Article III.
ANNEXATION

Sections:

19-100 Annexation – Comprehensive plan designation.

19-101 Annexation – Interim comprehensive plan designation.

19-102 Annexation – Interim zone.

19-103 Annexation – Initial zone classification.

19-104 Pre-annexation concomitant agreement.

19-105 – 19-150 Reserved.

19-100 Annexation – Comprehensive plan designation.

Whenever the council shall determine that the best interests and general welfare of the city would be served by annexing territory, the director of community development shall cause an examination to be made of the comprehensive plan of the city.

(1) Outdated or no comprehensive plan. If the director of community development determines there is no comprehensive plan designation, or if the comprehensive plan designation is not current for the area of the proposed or recently annexed area, the director of community development will cause an application to be made for amendment of the comprehensive plan pursuant to FWCC 22-516.

(2) Current comprehensive plan. If the director of community development determines that a current comprehensive plan exists for the proposed or recently annexed area, the director of community development will cause an application to be filed for an initial zoning designation according to that process described in FWCC 19-103. (Ord. No. 93-190, § 1, 11-9-93; Ord. No. 00-375, § 3, 10-3-00)

19-101 Annexation – Interim comprehensive plan designation.

(a) Established by council. Upon annexation of property and in the absence of a pre-established comprehensive plan designation therefor, the city council shall, within the annexation ordinance, establish an interim classification for the property on the city’s official comprehensive plan map. The interim comprehensive plan designation shall consist of one of the following, at the election of the council:

(1) Urban residential zone. Property, including all annexed property not otherwise classified on the official comprehensive plan map, may be classified as urban residential and shall be governed by the provisions applicable to that comprehensive plan designation as defined in Federal Way comprehensive plan.

(2) Retained comprehensive plan designation. The area annexed to the city shall retain the comprehensive plan classification of its former jurisdiction until amended by the city. To effectuate the retained comprehensive plan designation as the interim comprehensive plan designation, the city council shall adopt by reference the applicable county comprehensive plan provisions pursuant to RCW 35A.13.180.

(b) Term of comprehensive plan designation. The interim comprehensive plan designation shall be in place no longer than 12 months unless otherwise provided by ordinance. For all property classified by an interim comprehensive plan designation, the planning manager shall commence all steps necessary to establish an initial comprehensive plan classification pursuant to the procedure described in FWCC 19-100(1). (Ord. No. 93-190, § 1, 11-9-93)

19-102 Annexation – Interim zone.

(a) Established by council. Upon annexation of property in the absence of a pre-established zoning designation therefor, the city council shall, within the annexation ordinance, establish an interim classification for the property on the city’s official zoning map. The interim zone shall be consistent with the area’s comprehensive plan designation or interim comprehensive plan designation and shall be of one of the following, at the election of the council:

(1) RS-9600 (residential single-family) zone. Property, including all annexed property not otherwise classified on the official zoning map, may be classified as RS-9600 zone and shall be governed by the provisions applicable to that zoning district as defined in FWCC 22-631, et seq.; or

(2) Retained zone. The area annexed to the city shall retain the zoning classification of its former jurisdiction until amended by the city. To effectuate the retained zone as the interim zone, the city council shall adopt by reference, the applicable county comprehensive plan and zoning provisions pursuant to RCW 35A.13.180.

(b) Term of interim zoning. The interim zone shall be in place no longer than 12 months unless otherwise provided by ordinance. For all property classified in the interim zone, the planning manager shall commence all steps necessary to establish an official initial zoning classification pursuant to the procedure described in FWCC 19-101 and this section. (Ord. No. 93-190, § 1, 11-9-93)

19-103 Annexation – Initial zone classification.

(a) Planning commission recommendation. Upon application by the director of community development and upon completion of all applicable SEPA review, the city’s planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing to consider the initial zoning for the area of the proposed or recently annexed area. The planning commission public hearing shall constitute the first of the two public hearings required pursuant to RCW 35A.14.340. The council shall hold the second public hearing as set forth in subsection (b)(2) of this section.

(1) Notice. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing shall be as described in FWCC 22-532 and, in addition, shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and in the area to be annexed at least 10 days prior to the hearing.

(2) Staff report. The director of community development or his/her designee shall prepare a staff report as described in FWCC 22-533.

(3) Public hearing. The planning commission shall hold a public hearing on each application, which shall be open to the public. The planning commission shall make a complete electric sound recording of each public hearing.

(4) Public comments and participation at the hearing. Any person may participate in the public hearing in either or both of the following ways:

a. By submitting written comments to the planning commission either by delivering these comments to the director of community development’s office prior to the hearing or by giving these directly to the planning commission at the hearing.

b. By appearing in person or through a representative at the hearing and making oral comments directly to the planning commission. The planning commission may reasonably limit the extent of oral comments to facilitate the orderly and timely conduct of the hearing.

(5) Continuation of the hearing. The planning commission may continue the hearing if, for any reason, they are unable to hear all of the public comments on the matter or if the planning commission determines that they need more information on the matter. If during the hearing, the planning commission announces the time and place of the next hearing on the matter and a notice thereof is posted on the door of the hearing room, no further notice of the hearing need be given.

(6) Recommendation by the planning commission.

a. Generally. After considering all of the information and comments submitted on the matter and following the public hearing, the planning commission shall issue a written recommendation to the city council.

b. Timing. Unless a longer period is agreed to by the applicant, the planning commission must issue the recommendation within 10 working days after the close of the public hearing.

c. Decisional criteria. The planning commission shall use the criteria listed in subsection (b)(5) of this section.

d. Conditions and restrictions. The planning commission shall include in the written recommendation any conditions and restrictions that the planning commission determines are reasonably necessary to eliminate or minimize any undesirable effects of granting the application.

e. Contents. The planning commission shall include the following in the written recommendation to city council.

1. A statement of facts presented to the planning commission that supports its recommendation, including any conditions and restrictions that are recommended.

2. A statement of the planning commission’s conclusions based on those facts.

3. A statement of the criteria used by the planning commission in making the recommendation.

4. The date of issuance of the recommendation and summary of the rights, as established in this article, of the applicant and others to request reconsideration and to challenge the recommendation of the planning commission.

f. Distribution of written recommendation. The planning manager shall distribute copies of the recommendation of the planning commission within two working days after the planning commission’s written recommendation is issued, a copy will be sent to the applicant, to each person who submitted written or oral testimony to the planning commission and to each person who specifically requested it.

(b) Council action. Upon receipt of the recommendation of the planning commission for the initial zoning of the area recently annexed or proposed to be annexed, and at least 30 days following the planning commission public hearing on the matter, the council shall hold a public hearing on the application.

(1) Notice. A notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing shall be as described in FWCC 22-532 and, in addition, shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and in the area proposed to be or recently annexed at least 10 days prior to the hearing.

(2) Public hearing. The council shall hold its own public hearing on each application, which shall be open to the public. The council shall make a complete electric sound recording of the public hearing.

(3) Public comments and participation at the hearing. Any person may participate in the public hearing in either or both of the following ways:

a. By submitting written comments to the council either by delivering these comments to the city clerk’s office prior to the hearing or by giving these directly to the council at the hearing.

b. By appearing in person or through a representative at the hearing and making oral comments directly to the council. The council may reasonably limit the extent of oral comments to facilitate the orderly and timely conduct of the hearing.

(4) Continuation of the hearing. The council may continue the hearing if, for any reason, they are unable to hear all of the public comments on the matter or if the council determines that they need more information on the matter. If during the hearing, the council announces the time and place of the next hearing on the matter and a notice thereof is posted on the door of the hearing room, no further notice of the hearing need be given.

(5) Decisional criteria. The city council shall approve the recommended zoning classification if:

a. It is consistent with the comprehensive plan;

b. It is consistent with all applicable provisions of the chapter, including those adopted by reference from the comprehensive plan;

c. It is consistent with the public health, safety and welfare.

(6) Decision. After consideration of the entire matter before the record of the planning commission, and at the close of the public hearing on the matter, the city council shall, by ordinance approved by a majority of the total membership, adopt an ordinance establishing the initial zoning designation for the area.

(c) Effectiveness. The ordinance adopting the initial zone classification shall be effective 30 days after its passage and publication if the area affected by the ordinance has been annexed to the city; or if the affected area has not yet been annexed to the city, shall be effective upon annexation of the area into the city. The city clerk shall file a certified copy of the ordinance and any accompanying maps or plats with the county auditor.

(d) Judicial review. The action of the city may be reviewed for illegal, corrupt, or arbitrary and capricious action in the county superior court. The petition for review must be filed within 14 days after the date of the hearing at which the council acted to pass the written ordinance. (Ord. No. 93-190, § 1, 11-9-93; Ord. No. 00-375, § 4, 10-3-00)

19-104 Pre-annexation concomitant agreement.

(a) Purpose. The intent of a pre-annexation concomitant agreement is to create a process to promote diversity and creativity in site design and to protect and enhance natural and community features. The process is provided to encourage unique developments that may combine a mixture of residential, commercial, office and industrial uses. By using flexibility in the provisions of a pre-annexation concomitant agreement, this process will promote developments that will benefit the citizens that live and/or work within the city.

(b) Application process – General description. The application process includes an informal review process, State Environmental Policy Act compliance, review by the city’s long-range planning division and annexation review committee (“committee”) and public hearings before the city council.

(c) Committee defined. The city’s annexation review committee shall consist of at a minimum: City manager, planning manager, public works director, development services manager, parks director and city attorney.

(d) Informal review process. An applicant shall meet informally with the committee to discuss any proposed pre-annexation concomitant agreement. The purpose of the meeting is to develop a proposal that will meet the needs of the applicant and the objectives of the city as defined in this article.

(e) SEPA. The State Environmental Policy Act regulations, and city SEPA requirements shall be completed prior to formal review by the long-range planning division and the committee.

(f) Concomitant review. After informal review and completion of the SEPA process, the proposals shall next be reviewed by the city’s long-range planning division and the committee.

(g) Recommendation to city council. The planning manager shall prepare a recommendation to the city council on the proposed pre-annexation concomitant agreement, which recommendation shall incorporate the comments of the committee.

(1) Decisional criteria. The recommendation shall be guided by the following criteria:

a. 1. The proposed pre-annexation concomitant agreement shall have a beneficial effect upon the community and users of the development which would not normally be achieved by traditional application of city zoning districts and shall not be detrimental to existing or potential surrounding land uses as defined by the comprehensive plan.

2. Benefits may include, but are not limited to, the securing of annexation of properties:

i. Located on critical transportation corridors;

ii. Of historical significance;

iii. Of environmental significance;

iv. Or to preserve an existing significant land use or community.

b. Unusual environmental features of the site shall be preserved, maintained and incorporated into the design to benefit the development in the community.

c. The proposed pre-annexation concomitant shall provide for areas of openness by using techniques such as clustering, separation of building groups, and use of well-designed open space and/or landscaping.

d. It is consistent with the comprehensive plan.

e. It is consistent with the public health, safety and welfare.

(2) Content. The recommendation to council shall include any conditions or restrictions that the committee determines are reasonably necessary to eliminate or minimize any undesirable effects of approving the pre-annexation concomitant application. In addition, the recommendation shall include:

a. A statement recommending approval, modification or denial of the application.

b. Any conditions or restrictions that are imposed.

c. The identification of the existing Federal Way zoning designation most compatible to the terms of the concomitant, which the concomitant shall overlay.

d. A statement of facts that support the decision, including any conditions and restrictions that are imposed.

e. A statement of the conclusions based on those facts.

f. A statement of the criteria used in making the recommendation.

g. The date of the recommendation.

(h) Council action. Council action shall be as described in FWCC 19-103(b), (c) and (d). (Ord. No. 93-190, § 1, 11-9-93)

19-105 – 19-150 Reserved.

Article IV.
TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT

Sections:

19-151 Definitions.

19-152 Purpose.

19-153 Authority.

19-154 Applicability.

19-155 Capacity reserve certificate required.

19-156 Exempt development.

19-157 Level of service standards.

19-158 Application for a capacity reserve certificate.

19-159 Amendments to capacity reserve certificates.

19-160 Use of reserved capacity.

19-161 Transfer of reserved capacity.

19-162 Capacity evaluation method.

19-163 Concurrency administration – Purpose and procedure.

19-164 Concurrency determination letter.

19-165 Mitigation methods.

19-166 Appeals.

19-167 Annual report.

19-168 Interagency coordination.

19-169 Coordination with other requirements.

19-151 Definitions.

For the purpose of this article the terms, phrases, words and their derivations have the following definitions. When not inconsistent with the context, words used in the present tense include the future tense, words in the plural number include the singular number, and words in the singular number include the plural number. The word “shall” is always mandatory. The word “may” is permissive. The public works director shall have the authority to resolve questions of interpretation or conflicts within this article.

(1) Affected intersection means any intersection within the city meeting the requirements of FWCC 19-157 and having a direct traffic impact as a result of development activity.

(2) Applicant means a person who applies for a capacity reserve certificate (CRC) under this article and who is the owner of the subject property or the authorized agent of the property owner.

(3) Background traffic means existing traffic levels and the anticipated traffic from all proposals for which CRCs have been approved under the provisions of this article.

(4) Build-out year conditions means the volume of traffic that is projected to occur on the roadway system as of the anticipated date of occupancy of a proposal. Traffic conditions include regional traffic and the anticipated traffic from all proposals for which CRCs have been approved under the provisions of this article.

(5) Capacity means the availability of an affected intersection to accommodate increased traffic resulting from a development without causing the LOS to fall below the standards established in the comprehensive plan.

(6) Available capacity means capacity which can be encumbered, reserved, or committed to future users, expressed in an appropriate unit of measure, such as p.m. peak hour trips.

(7) Reserved capacity means capacity which has been allocated to a particular property through issuance of a capacity reserve certificate reserving capacity for a set period of time.

(8) Capacity reserve certificate (CRC) means the certificate issued by the city pursuant to the terms and conditions of this article which constitutes the proof that adequate capacity for each affected intersection has been reserved to serve the densities and intensities of development within the time frame designated on the certificate.

(9) City of Federal Way development standards means those standards adopted by the Federal Way public works director.

(10) Concurrency evaluation means the evaluation by the director to ensure that necessary roadway improvements are made concurrent with proposed development activity, pursuant to RCW 36.70A.070.

(11) Concurrency denial letter means a letter issued by the director which summarizes the results of the concurrency evaluation and the reason for denying the request for a concurrency reserve certificate.

(12) Concurrency management means the process local jurisdictions use to ensure that necessary roadway improvements are made concurrent with proposed development activity, pursuant to RCW 36.70A.070.

(13) Development activity means any work, condition, or activity which requires a permit or approval under the city’s subdivision, zoning, or building code. Exempt permits are set forth in FWCC 19-156.

(14) Development approval means written authorization from the city authorizing the commencement of development activity or use.

(15) Development permit means any permit or approval under the city’s subdivision, zoning, or building code that must be obtained before initiating a use or development activity.

(16) Direct traffic impact means any net increase in vehicle traffic generated by a proposed development.

(17) Director means the director of the department of public works of the city of Federal Way or her/his designee.

(18) Level of service (LOS) means a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream, described with alphabetical representations of “A” through “F” as defined in the Highway Capacity Manual prepared by the Transportation Research Board of the National Research Council, to indicate the amount of congestion and delay at particular locations, and adopted by the city.

(19) Net new trips means the trip generation of the development activity less any allowable credit for existing activity that will be replaced, demolished or abandoned as part of the development activity.

(20) Owner means, in reference to real property, the person or persons holding fee title to the property as well as the purchaser or purchasers under any real estate contract involving the real property.

(21) Peak hour means the highest volume of traffic for a continuous hour between 4:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays.

(22) Select zone analysis means a travel demand model analysis that identifies trips generated within a selected transportation analysis zone.

(23) Six-year transportation improvement program (TIP) means the annually adopted transportation improvement program which identifies all the city’s transportation needs over the next six years, including the total project costs.

(24) Standards means the adopted city of Federal Way development standards.

(25) Total project cost means the total cost for the transportation projects, as defined in the current TIP. This cost includes, but is not limited to, studies, design, right-of-way acquisition, utility relocation, grading, and construction.

(26) Transportation analysis zone means the area defined within a travel demand model representing all the land uses contained within that area.

(27) Trip assignment means the determination within a travel demand model of the number and type of trips using a defined roadway.

(28) Trip distribution means the determination within a travel demand model of the number and type of trips traveling between any given pair of transportation analysis zones.

(29) Trip generation means the number of peak hour trips estimated to be produced by the development activity using Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, current edition, or other methodology approved by the director.

(30) Trip generation credit means a reduction in the number of new peak hour trips attributed to an application as described in FWCC 19-158, equal to the number of peak hour trips generated on the site described on the application from uses that have had a SEPA analysis prior to the effective date of the ordinance adopting this article that have ceased or will cease if the development permit is granted. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-152 Purpose.

The purpose of this article is to implement the concurrency provisions of the transportation element of the city’s comprehensive plan, in accordance with RCW 36.70A.070(6)(e), consistent with WAC 365-195-510 and 365-195-835 as currently exists or as hereafter amended. No development permit shall be issued except in accordance with this article. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-153 Authority.

The director shall be responsible for implementing and enforcing this article and adopting procedures to implement this article, including making determinations regarding concurrency and issuing capacity reserve certificates (CRCs) according to the procedures in this article.

The director’s determination of concurrency and the issuance or nonissuance of a CRC shall be integrated, insofar as possible, with any applicable decision making processes on permits, applications, and proposals submitted to the city for review and decision. For each development activity subject to concurrency evaluation and the requirement for a CRC, the director shall determine how the review can be best integrated with the decision making process. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-154 Applicability.

(a) This article shall apply to all applications for development permits, except for development exempt under FWCC 19-156, if the development activity will generate any net new trips in the peak hour.

(b) All construction or changes in use initiated pursuant to a development permit for which a SEPA decision was issued prior to the effective date of the ordinance codified in this article shall be exempt from the provisions of this article. However, if the city determines that a previously issued development permit for which the SEPA decision was issued has lapsed or expired, pursuant to the applicable development regulations, then no subsequent development permit shall be issued except in accordance with this article. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-155 Capacity reserve certificate required.

(a) Prior to the issuance of any permit for a nonexempt development activity, the director shall determine if the proposal is covered by an existing CRC or if capacity exists on the road facilities to permit the proposed development activity. Permits for the development activity shall be issued only if the director finds that the activity is covered by an existing CRC or capacity exists in accordance with level of service standards adopted in the comprehensive plan. Where such capacity exists, the director shall issue a CRC to the applicant for the development activity.

(b) A CRC shall be issued only after a capacity evaluation is performed indicating that capacity is available on all applicable road facilities.

(c) In no event shall the director determine concurrency for a greater amount of capacity than is needed for the development proposed.

(d) Residential subdivisions shall be evaluated for concurrency as a single development permit. Commercial subdivisions and other projects constructed in phases shall be evaluated for concurrency as each phase is submitted for applicable development permits, notwithstanding any requirement to analyze the commercial subdivision as a whole under SEPA. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-156 Exempt development.

(a) Any development activity or development permit may be exempted from this article if the development activity or development permit is deemed by the director to generate no net new trips in the peak hour.

(b) The following types of development permits are typically exempt from concurrency management review and the requirements of this article because they do not create additional long-term impacts on road facilities. However, if any development permit from the list below generates any net new trips in the peak period, it shall not be exempt from concurrency evaluation.

(1) Boundary line adjustment;

(2) Demolition permit;

(3) Electrical permit;

(4) Fire protection system permit;

(5) Tenant improvements with no change of use;

(6) Land surface modification;

(7) Lot line elimination;

(8) Mechanical permit;

(9) Plumbing permit;

(10) Right-of-way modification;

(11) Right-of-way use permit;

(12) Sign permit;

(13) Single-family remodeling with no change of use;

(14) Rezones;

(15) Comprehensive plan amendment;

(16) Shoreline permit;

(17) Commercial subdivisions.

(c) Exemption from concurrency review fees. City-owned facilities shall be exempted from the concurrency review fees. City-owned facilities shall not be exempted from concurrency review and appropriate mitigation, if any. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-157 Level of service standards.

The director shall use the LOS standards set forth in the comprehensive plan to make concurrency evaluations as part of the review of any application for a CRC issued pursuant to this article.

(1) The street system measured for concurrency purposes are all intersections of collectors and arterials as defined in the city’s comprehensive plan, except for the intersections of two or more minor collectors, as these intersections would exist upon completion of all projects listed in the currently adopted TIP and currently funded projects by other transportation agencies.

(2) The city’s adopted LOS standards shall be applied in the review of development activity pursuant to administrative procedures developed by the public works director. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-158 Application for a capacity reserve certificate.

(a) An application for a CRC shall be on a form provided by the director. The application shall be submitted and accompanied by the requisite fee, as determined by city council resolution.

(b) An applicant may request a concurrency feasibility analysis. However, a CRC shall not be issued for applications not associated with an active development permit, nor shall the trips generated by the development proposal be reserved. The director may adjust applicable fees for subsequent analyses on the same property associated with an active development permit to the extent that the director determines data from the feasibility analysis remains valid. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-159 Amendments to capacity reserve certificates.

(a) Any request to increase the number of trips from a development application for which capacity is reserved shall require an analysis that determines that:

(1) The analysis used for the development’s original CRC is still valid; and

(2) No level of service impact is reasonably anticipated.

In addition, the following conditions must be met in order to amend an existing CRC:

(3) The application to amend an existing CRC must be received within one year of the issue date of the CRC;

(4) The trips generated by the amendment may not exceed the greater of 10 trips or 10 percent of the trips approved in the existing CRC.

(b) The analysis will be used to develop:

(1) A finding that the additional capacity sought by the applicant through an amended CRC is available to be reserved by the project or can be made available through mitigation of the additional impact; or

(2) A finding that the amendment is denied. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-160 Use of reserved capacity.

When a valid development permit is issued for a project possessing a CRC, the CRC shall continue to reserve the capacity until the development permit expires, is withdrawn, or is cancelled, whichever occurs first. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-161 Transfer of reserved capacity.

Reserved capacity cannot be sold or transferred to property not included in the legal description provided by the applicant in the application for a CRC. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-162 Capacity evaluation method.

(a) Any development permit application that will generate any net new trips in the peak hour shall require a CRC.

(b) For the purposes of this article, application for a development permit shall include consideration of the cumulative impacts of all development permit applications for contiguous properties that are owned or under the control of the same owner, when one or more development permits would be issued within two years of the date of issuance of a development permit for such contiguous property.

(c) Increased impact on affected intersections. If a development activity would have a greater impact on affected intersections than the previous use, then a CRC shall be required for the net increase only to the extent that trips generated by the last previous use were analyzed and, if required, mitigated by a previous SEPA decision or CRC; otherwise, a CRC shall be required for all trips generated by the development activity.

(d) Demolition or termination of use. In the case of a demolition or termination of an existing structure or use, only to the extent that trips generated by the last previous use were analyzed and, if required, mitigated by a previous SEPA decision or CRC, shall a trip generation credit be applied to the trip generation for the use subsequent to the effective date of the ordinance codified in this article. The number of trips allowed in the credit shall be as estimated using ITE’s Trip Generation, or other methodology approved by the director. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-163 Concurrency administration – Purpose and procedure.

Where either the city or the applicant may perform any part of the concurrency transportation impact analysis, analysis prepared by the applicant is subject to the review and approval of the city at the applicant’s expense. The applicant may also review and comment on any analysis prepared by the city.

(1) The concurrency management transportation impact analysis may be prepared by the city or the applicant and shall follow the procedure outlined below. Each development permit subject to this article shall be analyzed in the order the concurrency application is deemed complete by the director, as described in subsection (2) of this section. Concurrency transportation impact analyses shall be completed sequentially in the order of receipt of the concurrency application. The most recent concurrency management transportation impact analysis shall be the beginning point for each succeeding concurrency management transportation impact analysis.

(2) In performing the concurrency evaluation, the city or the applicant subject to the city’s approval shall determine the impact of the traffic generated by the proposed development activity on the city’s road system. The evaluation shall be based on data generated by the city, by professional associations, by the applicant and, if needed, by independent analysis. The city shall examine the data to verify that existing and projected trip generation is consistent with the latest version of the ITE’s Trip Generation or documented generation for uses not typical of uses in Trip Generation. Upon successful evaluation, the concurrency application will be deemed complete by the director.

(3) The city or the applicant shall perform level of service calculations for all applicable intersections affected by the development based upon build-out year conditions with and without the proposed development. The city or the applicant shall determine if the capacity on the city’s road facilities, plus the capacity that is or shall be generated by all existing, reserved, and approved development, can be provided while meeting the LOS standards set forth in the comprehensive plan.

(4) Technical provisions for each concurrency evaluation shall be prepared in the following format:

a. Project description shall be provided by the applicant in enough detail to accurately determine the scope of analysis required.

b. Analysis scope shall be provided by city after consultation with affected departments.

c. The city, based on the information supplied by the applicant, shall determine project trip generation. If the applicant provides a detailed trip generation study, that data shall be used for concurrency management traffic impact analysis at the discretion of the public works director. The applicant may also review and comment on a city-prepared calculation of trip generation.

d. Project trip assignment to the street system shall be provided by the city, consistent with the most current and updated travel demand forecasting model. Three levels of analysis are defined based on the number of new trips generated:

1. For applications generating less than 50 peak hour trips, a select zone analysis shall be conducted.

2. For applications generating 50 peak hour trips or more, but less than 500 peak hour trips, a new trip assignment shall be conducted.

3. For applications generating 500 or more peak hour trips, a new trip distribution and assignment shall be conducted.

e. Traffic volumes at existing intersections that include background traffic shall be provided by the city.

f. The city shall include appropriate through traffic to each affected intersection to obtain a revised traffic assignment for affected roadways and intersections.

g. The applicant or the city, at the applicant’s request and expense, in compliance with the latest version of the Highway Capacity Manual, shall complete the capacity analysis, using the city’s chosen software. The applicant may review and comment on a city-prepared capacity analysis.

h. After verification of the capacity analysis, the applicant or the city, at the applicant’s request and expense, shall prepare the final report.

i. The applicant or the city, at the applicant’s request and expense, may propose suggested mitigation measures for any LOS failures identified in the capacity analysis.

j. The applicant or the city, at the applicant’s request and expense, shall also identify pro-rata share contributions for TIP projects impacted by the net new trips generated by the proposed development in a manner consistent with Chapter 82.02 RCW. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-164 Concurrency determination letter.

The director shall issue a concurrency determination letter to the applicant advising the applicant as to whether available capacity exists. If the applicant is not the property owner, the concurrency determination letter shall also be sent to the property owner. The concurrency determination letter shall identify the application and identify which status is determined to be applicable to the application: approval; approval with mitigation; or denial.

(1) Approval with mitigation shall include a recommendation that would provide adequate capacity and a description of the options available to the applicant. These may include:

a. The applicant may agree to construct the recommended mitigation measures at the applicant’s cost;

b. The applicant may agree to construct alternative mitigation measures that address the level of service deficiencies, subject to the approval of the director; or

c. The applicant may modify the development proposal to reduce trip generation to within available capacity by any combination of capacity improvements and transportation demand management measures, subject to the approval of the director.

(2) Denial. If no appeal is transmitted to the director pursuant to FWCC 19-166 within 14 days after issuance of the determination, the encumbrance shall be released and made available for subsequent applications. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-165 Mitigation methods.

(a) If mitigation is required to meet the level-of-service standard, the applicant may choose to:

(1) Reduce the size of the development until the standard is met,

(2) Delay the development schedule until the city and/or others provide needed improvements, or

(3) Provide the mitigation per subsection (b) of this section.

(b) Payment for and timing of improvements. The director shall determine the method by which assurance is provided the city that the mitigation is provided in a manner that is concurrent with development consistent with state law. This determination shall address whether the improvements are to be constructed by the applicant or if the applicant would fund the cost of the improvement to be constructed by the city or another party. If the latter case, the determination shall also include the appropriate amount and timing of payment to the city.

(1) Construction improvements subject to the city’s direct operational control which are required of a developer under FWCC 19-164 must be completed prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, final plat approval, or other such approval upon which new trips are generated.

(2) The developer may provide funding in an amount equal to the director’s cost estimate for improvements required under FWCC 19-164, if approved by the director. The director may require actual construction rather than provision of funding. Payment for transportation improvements must occur prior to issuance of building permit, final plat approval, or other such approval.

(3) All funds received by the city under subsection (b)(2) of this section shall be expended consistent with state law.

(4) A proposal for construction of transportation improvements to intersections partially or wholly outside the city’s direct operational control, or payment for those improvements in an amount equal to the director’s cost estimate, which improvements are required of a developer to meet the requirement of FWCC 19-164, must be submitted to the agencies which have control of the intersection prior to issuance of building permit, final plat approval, or other such approval.

(c) Transportation demand management.

(1) As a mitigation measure, the developer may propose to establish transportation demand management strategies to reduce single occupancy vehicle trips generated by the project. The director shall determine the corresponding trip volume reduction, considering adjacent land uses and trips generated, how well the site is served by transit, HOV facilities, bicycle facilities, and pedestrian facilities, workforce composition, employer-provided incentives, and parking availability, among others.

(2) The director shall monitor and enforce the transportation demand management performance as directed under FWCC 15-200 et seq. A performance assurance device may be required as determined by the director.

(d) Decision criteria – Acceptable mitigation. Acceptable mitigation requires a finding by the director that:

(1) The mitigation is consistent with the comprehensive plan.

(2) The mitigation contributes to system performance.

(3) Improvements to an intersection or roadway may not shift traffic to other intersections for which there is no reasonable mitigation available.

(4) The improvement shall not violate accepted engineering standards and practices. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-166 Appeals.

The concurrency determination of the director may be appealed by the applicant or owner using the same process as the underlying development permit application or process I of Chapter 22 FWCC if there is no underlying development permit, substituting the director of public works for the director of community development. The appeal, in the form of a letter of appeal, must be delivered to the department of public works within 14 calendar days after issuance of the decision of the director. In those cases where the proposed development activity may require a public hearing under the authority of other chapters of this code, the hearings may be combined. For example, if the underlying development permit application is a preliminary plat, the appeal shall be heard at the preliminary plat public hearing. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-167 Annual report.

The city shall monitor LOS standards through an annual update of the six-year transportation impact program, which shall add data reflecting development permits issued and trip allocations reserved. The city’s traffic demand model shall be recalibrated at least biannually based on traffic count information, obtained from at a minimum the city’s public works department. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-168 Interagency coordination.

The city may enter into agreements with other agencies having authority over transportation facilities to identify impacts and provide mitigation for those impacts. In no case shall mitigation payments to the city be reduced to account for mitigation payments to other jurisdictions. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)

19-169 Coordination with other requirements.

(a) Concurrency determinations are categorically exempt from SEPA.

(b) Concurrency determinations provide for mitigation only for vehicle capacity issues during the weekday evening peak hour. Mitigation of transportation impacts outside of vehicle capacity issues during the weekday evening peak hour shall be addressed through other review processes (in city code, land use permit conditions, or SEPA). This analysis may be prepared either by the applicant or the city at the applicant’s expense. (Ord. No. 06-525, § 1(Exh. A), 6-6-06)