Chapter 14.15 CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATIONS

Chapter 14.15
CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS AND THRESHOLD DETERMINATIONS

Sections:

14.15.010 Adoption of regulations.

14.15.020 Categorical exemptions – Rules.

14.15.030 Categorical exemptions – Flexible thresholds.

14.15.040 Planned actions – Definition and criteria.

14.15.050 Ordinances or resolutions designating planned actions – Procedures for adoption.

14.15.060 Planned actions – Project review.

14.15.070 Categorical exemptions – Determination.

14.15.080 Threshold determination – Early review at conceptual level.

14.15.090 Threshold determination – Environmental checklist.

14.15.100 Threshold determination of nonsignificance.

14.15.110 Threshold determination – Mitigated determination of nonsignificance.

14.15.120 Optional DNS process.

14.15.130 City center planned action.

14.15.010 Adoption of regulations.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC as now existing or amended by reference:

WAC

197-11-300 Purpose of this part.

197-11-305 Categorical exemptions.

197-11-310 Threshold determination required.

197-11-315 Environmental checklist.

197-11-330 Threshold determination process.

197-11-335 Additional information.

197-11-340 Determination of nonsignificance (DNS).

197-11-350 Mitigation determination of nonsignificance.

197-11-360 Determination of significance (DS/initiation of scoping).

197-11-390 Effect of threshold determination.

(Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(1)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 04-468, § 3, 11-16-04; Ord. No. 90-40, § 1(20.60), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 18-71.)

14.15.020 Categorical exemptions – Rules.

The city adopts by reference the following rules for categorical exemptions in Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or amended:

WAC

197-11-800 Categorical exemptions.

197-11-880 Emergencies.

197-11-890 Petitioning State Department of Ecology to change exemptions.

(Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(1)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 04-468, § 3, 11-16-04; Ord. No. 90-40, § 1(20.80), 2-27-90. Formerly 18-73. Code 2001 § 18-72.)

14.15.030 Categorical exemptions – Flexible thresholds.

(1) The city establishes the following exempt levels for minor new construction as provided in WAC 197-11-800(1) based on local conditions:

(a) For residential structures up to 30 single-family dwelling units and up to 60 multifamily dwelling units.

(b) For agricultural structures covering up to 10,000 square feet.

(c) For office, commercial, recreational, service or storage buildings up to 30,000 square feet gross floor area, and up to 90 parking spaces.

(d) For parking lots up to 90 parking spaces.

(e) For landfills and excavations up to 1,000 cubic yards.

(2) For any project considered exempt under subsection (1) of this section, the following shall apply:

(a) Projects shall be subject to applicable city, state, and federal regulatory requirements. Projects shall not be exempt from meeting city code requirements. This includes paying applicable transportation impact fees (Chapter 19.91 FWRC), making development improvements, including those for safety and access purposes (Chapter 19.135 FWRC), and compliance with the transportation concurrency management program (Chapter 19.90 FWRC).

(b) In the event that a future development project is proposed in a location mapped as being potentially affected by the Tacoma Asarco smelter plume, the city shall require that, prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the applicant shall submit a soil sampling and cleanup report per the Washington State Department of Ecology Tacoma Smelter Plume Model Remedies Guidance. If soil contaminants are found to be elevated per the guidance, the applicant shall remedy the soils per the guidance as a component of the grading permit and then submit a written approval of cleanup (No Further Action) from the Department of Ecology following completion of the grading activities. The No Further Action document shall be submitted to the city department of community development prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy.

(c) In the event that a future development project is proposed on or immediately surrounding a site containing a known archaeological resource, as defined in Chapter 27.53 RCW, the potential impacts on the archaeological resource shall be considered; and, if needed, a study conducted by a professional archaeologist shall be required at the applicant’s expense to determine whether the proposed development project would materially impact the archaeological resource.

(d) If the impacts on archaeological resources cannot be avoided, the city shall require that the applicant obtain all appropriate permits consistent with state and federal laws and that any required archaeological studies are completed before permitting any project that would disturb archaeological resource(s). Under Chapter 27.53 RCW, a permit must be obtained from the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) prior to disturbing a known archaeological resource or site. The avoidance of archaeological resources through selection of project alternatives and changes in design of project features in the specific area of the affected resource(s) would eliminate the need for measuring or mitigating impacts.

(e) Developers and property owners shall immediately stop work and notify the city, DAHP, and affected tribes if archaeological resources are uncovered during excavation. Following such notification, the city may require implementation of subsections (2)(c) and (d) of this section.

(f) If impacts cannot be avoided on a historic resource that is determined eligible for listing on either state or national historic registers, the applicant shall consult with DAHP regarding mitigation options and shall provide documentation of the consultation to the city.

(g) To include DAHP in the review of historic properties within the infill exemption area, the city will notify the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) regarding proposals involving eligible or designated historic properties through the evaluation of proposals consistent with Chapter 19.285 FWRC.

(3) For any project considered exempt under subsection (1) of this section that contains any multifamily residential units, or 12,000 or more square feet of nonresidential square footage, public notice must be provided in accordance with FWRC 19.65.070.

(4) Whenever the city establishes new exempt levels under this section, it shall send them to the State Department of Ecology as required by WAC 197-11-800(1)(c).

(Ord. No. 22-932, § 4, 5-3-22; Ord. No. 09-631, § 3, 11-3-09; Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(1)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 04-468, § 3, 11-16-04; Ord. No. 90-40, § 1(20.90.10, 20.90.20), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 18-73.)

14.15.040 Planned actions – Definition and criteria.

(1) A “planned action” means one or more types of project action that:

(a) Are designated planned actions by an ordinance or resolution adopted by the city;

(b) Have had the significant environmental impacts adequately addressed in an EIS prepared in conjunction with:

(i) A comprehensive plan or subarea plan adopted under Chapter 36.70A RCW; or

(ii) A fully contained community, a master planned resort, a master planned development, or a phased project;

(d) Are located within an urban growth area, as defined in RCW 36.70A.030, or are located within a master planned resort;

(e) Are not essential public facilities, as defined in RCW 36.70A.200; and

(f) Are consistent with a comprehensive plan adopted under Chapter 36.70A RCW.

(2) The city shall limit planned actions to certain types of development or to specific geographical areas that are less extensive than its jurisdictional boundaries.

(3) The city may limit a planned action to a time period identified in the EIS or the designating ordinance or resolution adopted under FWRC 14.15.050.

(Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(1)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 04-468, § 3, 11-16-04. Code 2001 § 18-74.)

14.15.050 Ordinances or resolutions designating planned actions – Procedures for adoption.

(1) The city must designate a planned action by ordinance or resolution. Public notice and opportunity for public comment shall be provided as part of the agency’s process for adopting the ordinance or resolution.

(2) The ordinance or resolution:

(a) Shall describe the type(s) of project action being designated as a planned action;

(b) Shall describe how the planned action meets the criteria in FWRC 14.15.040 (including specific reference to the EIS that addresses any significant environmental impacts of the planned action);

(c) Shall include a finding that the environmental impacts of the planned action have been identified and adequately addressed in the EIS, subject to project review under FWRC 14.15.060; and

(d) Should identify any specific mitigation measures other than applicable development regulations that must be applied to a project for it to qualify as the planned action.

(3) If the city has not limited the planned action to a specific time period identified in the EIS, it may do so in the ordinance or resolution designating the planned action.

(4) The city is encouraged to provide a periodic review and update procedure for the planned action to monitor implementation and consider changes as warranted.

(Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(1)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 04-468, § 3, 11-16-04. Code 2001 § 18-75.)

14.15.060 Planned actions – Project review.

(1) Review of a project proposed as a planned action is intended to be simpler and more focused than for other projects. A project proposed as a planned action must qualify as the planned action designated in the planned action ordinance or resolution, and must meet the statutory criteria for a planned action in RCW 43.21C.031. Planned action project review shall include:

(a) Verification that the project meets the description in, and will implement any applicable conditions or mitigation measures identified in, the designating ordinance or resolution; and

(b) Verification that the probable significant adverse environmental impacts of the project have been adequately addressed in the EIS prepared under FWRC 14.15.040(1)(b) through review of an environmental checklist or other project review form as specified in WAC 197-11-315, filed with the project application.

(2)(a) If the project meets the requirements of subsection (1) of this section, the project shall qualify as the planned action designated by the city, and a project threshold determination or EIS is not required. Nothing in this section limits the city from using this title or other applicable law to place conditions on the project in order to mitigate nonsignificant impacts through the normal local project review and permitting process.

(b) If the project does not meet the requirements of subsection (1) of this section, the project is not a planned action and a threshold determination is required. In conducting the additional environmental review under this title, the lead agency may use information in existing environmental documents, including the EIS used to designate the planned action (refer to WAC 197-11-330(2)(a) and 197-11-600 through 197-11-635). If an EIS or SEIS is prepared on the proposed project, its scope is limited to those probable significant adverse environmental impacts that were not adequately addressed in the EIS used to designate the planned action.

(3) Public notice for projects that qualify as planned actions shall be tied to the underlying permit. If notice is otherwise required for the underlying permit, the notice shall state that the project has qualified as a planned action. If notice is not otherwise required for the underlying permit, no special notice is required. However, the city is encouraged to provide some form of public notice as deemed appropriate.

(Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(1)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 04-468, § 3, 11-16-04. Code 2001 § 18-76.)

14.15.070 Categorical exemptions – Determination.

(1) When the city receives an application for a license or a city department initiates a proposal, the responsible official shall determine whether the license or proposal is exempt. The determination of exemption shall be final and not subject to administrative review. The procedural requirements of this chapter shall not apply to proposals or licenses which are determined to be exempt, nor shall an environmental checklist be required to be completed.

(2) In determining whether a proposal is exempt the responsible official shall make certain the proposal is properly defined and shall identify the governmental license required. If the proposal includes exempt and nonexempt actions, the responsible official shall determine the lead agency for the nonexempt action.

(3) If a proposal includes both exempt and nonexempt actions, the city may authorize exempt actions prior to completion of the procedural requirements of this chapter, except that:

(a) The city shall not give authorization for any action that is nonexempt, any action that would have an adverse environmental effect, or any action that would limit the choice of reasonable alternatives;

(b) The city may withhold approval of an exempt action that would lead to modifications of the physical environment serving no purpose if the nonexempt actions were not approved;

(c) The city may withhold approval of exempt actions that would lead to substantial financial expenditures by a private applicant when the expenditures would serve no purpose if the nonexempt actions were not approved.

(Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(1)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 04-468, § 3, 11-16-04; Ord. No. 90-40, § 1(20.100.10 – 20.100.30), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 18-77.)

14.15.080 Threshold determination – Early review at conceptual level.

(1) When the city’s only action on a proposal is a decision on a building permit or other permit that requires detailed project plans and specifications, the applicant may request in writing that the city conduct an environmental review prior to submission of the plans and specifications. In addition to the required environmental documents, the applicant shall submit any additional information as determined by the responsible official.

(2) An applicant may request in writing early notice of whether a determination of significance (DS) is likely under the following conditions:

(a) The request shall precede the city’s actual threshold determination for the proposal;

(b) The proposal is sufficiently definite to allow meaningful environmental analysis;

(c) Adequate information is available on the proposed action and potential environmental impacts to make a threshold determination;

(d) The responsible official may require that additional information be submitted prior to responding to the request for early notice.

(3) The responsible official’s response to the request for early notice may:

(a) State whether the city currently considers issuance of a determination of significance likely and, if so, indicate the general or specific areas of concern that are leading the city to consider a determination of significance and whether any additional information is needed. The responsible official may also indicate that with the approval of the applicant, a determination of significance would be issued and scoping initiated.

(b) State that the applicant may change or clarify the proposal to mitigate the indicated impacts, and may revise the environmental checklist and/or proposal as necessary to reflect the changes or clarifications.

(4) The city’s written response to a request for early notice shall not be construed as a determination of significance or nonsignificance. Preliminary discussion of clarifications of or changes to a proposal shall not bind the city to consider the clarification or changes in its threshold determination.

(Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(1)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 04-468, § 3, 11-16-04; Ord. No. 90-40, § 1(20.110.10 – 20.110.40), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 18-78.)

14.15.090 Threshold determination – Environmental checklist.

(1) A completed environmental checklist shall be filed at the same time as an application for a permit, license, certificate or other approval not exempted by this title unless the city and applicant agree that an environmental impact statement is required, or State Environmental Policy Act compliance has been completed or initiated by another agency. The checklist shall be in the form of WAC 197-11-960 with such additions that may be required by the responsible official in accordance with WAC 197-11-906(4).

(2) For private proposals, the applicant normally shall be required to complete the environmental checklist, although the city may decide to complete all or part of the checklist if the following occurs:

(a) The city has technical information that is unavailable to the private applicant;

(b) The applicant has provided inaccurate information on previous or current proposals.

(Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(1)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 04-468, § 3, 11-16-04; Ord. No. 90-40, § 1(20.120.10, 20.120.20), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 18-79.)

14.15.100 Threshold determination of nonsignificance.

(1) If the responsible official determines there will be no probable significant adverse environmental impacts from a proposal, the lead agency shall prepare and issue a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) substantially in the form provided in WAC 197-11-970. If an agency adopts another environmental document in support of a threshold determination, the notice of adoption (WAC 197-11-965) and the DNS shall be combined or attached to each other.

(2) When a DNS is issued for any of the proposals listed in subsection (2)(a) of this section, the requirements of this subsection shall be met. The requirements of this subsection do not apply to a DNS issued when the optional DNS process in FWRC 14.15.120 is used.

(a) An agency shall not act upon a proposal for 14 days after the date of issuance of a DNS if the proposal involves:

(i) Another agency with jurisdiction;

(ii) Demolition of any structure or facility not exempted by WAC 197-11-800(2)(f) or 197-11-880;

(iii) Issuance of clearing or grading permits not exempted in Part Nine of Chapter 197-11 WAC;

(iv) A DNS under WAC 197-11-350(2), (3) or 197-11-360(4); or

(v) A GMA action.

(b) The responsible official shall send the DNS and environmental checklist to agencies with jurisdiction, the Department of Ecology, and affected tribes, and each local agency or political subdivision whose public services would be changed as a result of implementation of the proposal, and shall give notice under FWRC 14.10.040.

(c) Any person, affected tribe, or agency may submit comments to the lead agency within 14 days of the date of issuance of the DNS.

(d) The date of issue for the DNS is the date the DNS is sent to the Department of Ecology and agencies with jurisdiction and is made publicly available.

(e) An agency with jurisdiction may assume lead agency status only within this 14-day period (WAC 197-11-948).

(f) The responsible official shall reconsider the DNS based on timely comments and may retain or modify the DNS or, if the responsible official determines that significant adverse impacts are likely, withdraw the DNS or supporting documents. When a DNS is modified, the lead agency shall send the modified DNS to agencies with jurisdiction.

(3)(a) The lead agency shall withdraw a DNS if:

(i) There are substantial changes to a proposal so that the proposal is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts;

(ii) There is significant new information indicating, or on, a proposal’s probable significant adverse environmental impacts; or

(iii) The DNS was procured by misrepresentation or lack of material disclosure; if such DNS resulted from the actions of an applicant, any subsequent environmental checklist on the proposal shall be prepared directly by the lead agency or its consultant at the expense of the applicant.

(b) Subsection (3)(a)(ii) of this section shall not apply when a nonexempt license has been issued on a private project.

(c) If the lead agency withdraws a DNS, the agency shall make a new threshold determination and notify other agencies with jurisdiction of the withdrawal and new threshold determination. If a DS is issued, each agency with jurisdiction shall commence action to suspend, modify, or revoke any approvals until the necessary environmental review has occurred (see also WAC 197-11-070).

(Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(1)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 04-468, § 3, 11-16-04. Code 2001 § 18-80.)

14.15.110 Threshold determination – Mitigated determination of nonsignificance.

(1) The responsible official may issue a determination of nonsignificance based on mitigating conditions attached to the proposal by the responsible official or on changes or clarifications proposed by the applicant. When an applicant submits a changed or clarified proposal with a revised checklist, the city shall base its threshold determination on the changed or clarified proposal as follows:

(a) If the city indicated specific mitigation measures in response to the request for early notice, and the applicant included those measures, the city shall issue a determination of nonsignificance if no additional information or mitigation is required.

(b) If the city indicated areas of concern, but did not indicate specific mitigation measures, the city shall issue a determination of nonsignificance or determination of significance as appropriate.

(c) The applicant’s proposed clarification, changes, mitigations or other conditions must be specific and presented in writing.

(2) Mitigation measures justifying issuance of a mitigated determination of nonsignificance may be incorporated in the determination of nonsignificance by reference to agency staff reports, studies or other documents.

(3) Mitigation measures incorporated in the mitigated determination of nonsignificance shall be conditions of approval of the permit and may be enforced in the same manner as any conditions of the permit, or any other manner as prescribed by the city. Failure to comply with the designated mitigation measures shall be grounds for suspension and/or revocation of any license issued.

(4) The city shall not act upon a proposal for which a mitigated determination of nonsignificance has been issued until the appeal period has expired.

(5) If the city’s tentative decision on a permit or approval does not include mitigation measures that were incorporated in a mitigated determination of nonsignificance for the proposal, the city should evaluate the threshold determination to assure consistency with WAC 197-11-340(3)(a) relating to the withdrawal of a determination of nonsignificance.

(Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(1)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 04-468, § 3, 11-16-04; Ord. No. 90-40, § 1(20.130.10 – 20.130.50), 2-27-90. Code 2001 § 18-81.)

14.15.120 Optional DNS process.

(1) If the city has a reasonable basis for determining significant adverse environmental impacts are unlikely, it may use a single integrated comment period to obtain comments on the notice of application and the likely threshold determination for the proposal. If this process is used, a second comment period will typically not be required when the DNS is issued (refer to subsection (4) of this section).

(2) If the lead agency uses the optional process specified in subsection (1) of this section, the lead agency shall:

(a) State on the first page of the notice of application that it expects to issue a DNS for the proposal, and that:

(i) The optional DNS process is being used;

(ii) This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal;

(iii) The proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes, and the project review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared; and

(iv) A copy of the subsequent threshold determination for the specific proposal may be obtained upon request (in addition, the lead agency may choose to maintain a general mailing list for threshold determination distribution);

(b) List in the notice of application the conditions being considered to mitigate environmental impacts, if a mitigated DNS is expected;

(d) Send the notice of application and environmental checklist to:

(i) Agencies with jurisdiction, the Department of Ecology, affected tribes, and each local agency or political subdivision whose public services would be changed as a result of implementation of the proposal; and

(ii) Anyone requesting a copy of the environmental checklist for the specific proposal (in addition, the lead agency may choose to maintain a general mailing list for checklist distribution).

(3) If the lead agency indicates on the notice of application that a DNS is likely, an agency with jurisdiction may assume lead agency status during the comment period on the notice of application (WAC 197-11-948).

(4) The responsible official shall consider timely comments on the notice of application and either:

(a) Issue a DNS or mitigated DNS with no comment period using the procedures in subsection (5) of this section;

(b) Issue a DNS or mitigated DNS with a comment period using the procedures in subsection (5) of this section, if the lead agency determines a comment period is necessary;

(d) Require additional information or studies prior to making a threshold determination.

(5) If a DNS or mitigated DNS is issued under subsection (4)(a) of this section, the lead agency shall send a copy of the DNS or mitigated DNS to the Department of Ecology, agencies with jurisdiction, those who commented, and anyone requesting a copy. A copy of the environmental checklist need not be recirculated.

(Ord. No. 07-554, § 5(Exh. A(1)), 5-15-07; Ord. No. 04-468, § 3, 11-16-04. Code 2001 § 18-82.)

14.15.130 City center planned action.

(1) Purpose. The city of Federal Way declares that the purpose of this section is to:

(a) Combine environmental analysis with land use planning; and

(b) Set forth a procedure designating certain project actions in a portion of the city center subarea as “planned actions” consistent with state law RCW 43.21C.440; and

(c) Streamline and expedite the land use permit review process by relying on completed and existing environmental analysis for the planned action area; and

(d) Apply the Federal Way Revised Code together with the mitigation framework in subsection (3) of this section for the purpose of processing planned action development applications.

(2) Findings. The city of Federal Way finds that:

(a) The city of Federal Way is required to prepare and implement plans in accordance with the provisions of the Growth Management Act, Chapter 36.70A RCW;

(b) The city of Federal Way has adopted a comprehensive plan and city center subarea plan in compliance with the GMA;

(c) The city center planned action environmental impact statement and supplemental environmental impact statement identify and address all significant environmental impacts associated with the planned action as defined in subsection (3) of this section;

(d) The mitigation measures contained in Exhibit B, “Planned Action Mitigation Document,” adopted by ordinance on January 19, 2016, together with applicable city development standards, are adequate to mitigate the significant adverse environmental impacts of planned action development as defined in subsection (3)(c) of this section, subject to project review;

(e) The expedited permit review procedures as set forth in this section are a benefit to the public, protect the environment, and enhance economic development; and

(f) Opportunities for public involvement and review have been provided, and comments considered as part of preparation of the planned action environmental impact statement and supplemental environmental impact statement.

(3) Procedures and criteria for evaluating and determining projects as planned actions.

(a) Planned action site. The planned action designation shall apply to the approximately 215-acre site generally bounded by South 312th Street on the north, South 324th Street on the south, Pacific Highway South on the west and 23rd Avenue South on the east. Additional area is located east of 23rd Avenue South, bordered on the north by South 317th Street and on the south by South 319th Place and shown in Exhibit A, “City Center Planned Action Area Map,” adopted by ordinance on January 19, 2016.

(b) Environmental document. A planned action designation for a site-specific application shall be based on the environmental analysis contained in the city center planned action environmental impact statement (EIS) completed by the city in 2006 and the supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) completed in 2015. “EIS” means the city center planned action environmental impact statement composed of the draft EIS (June 2006) and the final EIS (September 2006) and “SEIS” means the supplemental environmental impact statement composed of the draft SEIS (October 2015) and the final SEIS (December 2015). The planned action mitigation document is based upon the analysis of the EIS and SEIS. The mitigation document, together with applicable city codes, ordinances and standards, shall provide the framework for the decision by the city to impose conditions on a planned action project.

(i) Land uses. The following uses are the primary uses analyzed in the SEIS.

(A) Retail goods and services.

(B) Office.

(D) Residential.

(ii) Development thresholds. The planned action designation applies to development proposals that cumulatively do not exceed the development envelope established by the SEIS, and shown in the planned action development envelope table below:

Planned Action Development Envelope Table
Uses	Development Envelope
Retail	475,000 sf
Office	400,000 sf
Lodging	600 rooms
Residential	2,400 units

The planned action designation also applies to demolition of existing development (no limitation on square footage).

If proposed plans significantly change the environmental determinations of the SEIS, additional SEPA review may be required. Additional SEPA review may be conducted consistent with city SEPA procedures and state law.

Shifting the total build-out of development among uses, or similar uses that may not be specifically listed in the above table, may be permitted so long as the total build-out does not exceed the aggregate amount of the development envelope, or trip generation reviewed in the SEIS, and so long as the impacts of that development have been identified and mitigated in the SEIS and mitigation document.

(iii) The project is located within the planned action area.

(iv) Transportation.

(A) Vehicle trip generation. The trip generation alternatives reviewed in the SEIS are as follows:

Trip Generation by Alternative
Time Period	2025 No Action Alternative Total Trips	2025 Action Alternative Total Trips
AM Peak Hour	3,040	3,617
PM Peak Hour	6,919	6,792

The SEIS conducted quantitative analysis on a per-intersection basis of impacts and mitigation through 2025 (or the equivalent time, based on the cumulative totals of projected vehicle trips).

(B) Trip threshold. Proposed development that would result in a cumulative total of trips that exceeds the maximum trip levels shown above would not qualify as a planned action.

(C) Public works discretion. The public works director shall have discretion to determine incremental and total trip generation, consistent with the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) General Manual (latest ed.), for each project permit application.

(v) Elements of the environment analyzed in the SEIS. A project that would result in a significant change in impacts to any of the elements of the environment identified in the SEIS would not qualify as a planned action.

(vi) Time horizon. The planned action designation is intended to be applicable until all development shown in the planned action development envelope table (subsection (3)(c)(ii) of this section) is constructed or until the total trips in the trip generation by alternative table (subsection (3)(c)(iv) of this section) are exceeded, or until December 31, 2025, whichever occurs first. Should environmental conditions significantly change from those analyzed in the SEIS, the SEPA official may determine that the planned action designation is no longer applicable unless additional, environmental review is conducted, regardless of the date.

(d) Planned action review criteria.

(i) Uses and activities described in the SEIS, subject to the qualifications described in subsection (3)(c) of this section and the mitigation measures in the planned action mitigation document, may be designated planned actions pursuant to RCW 43.21C.440.

(ii) The SEPA official is authorized to designate a project application as a planned action pursuant to RCW 43.21C.440, if the project meets all of the following conditions:

(A) The project is not otherwise exempt from SEPA; and

(B) The project is consistent with the city of Federal Way Comprehensive Plan adopted under Chapter 36.70A RCW; and

(C) The project is subsequent or implementing a project which has had its significant adverse environmental impacts adequately identified in the SEIS; and

(D) The project falls within the planned action qualifications identified in subsection (3)(c) of this section; and

(E) The SEPA official has determined that the project’s adverse impacts are able to be mitigated through the application of mitigation measures detailed in the planned action mitigation document, as well as other applicable city, county, state, and federal requirements and conditions; and

(F) The proposed project complies with all applicable local, county, state, and federal regulations; and

(G) The proposed project is not an essential public facility, as defined in RCW 36.70A.200, unless an essential public facility is accessory to or part of a development that is designated a planned action under this subsection.

(e) Effect of planned action.

(i) Upon designation by the SEPA official that the development proposal within the planned action area qualifies as a planned action pursuant to this section and WAC 197-11-172, the project shall not be subject to a SEPA threshold determination, an environmental impact statement (EIS), SEPA appeal or any other additional review under SEPA.

(ii) Additionally, projects will be subject to applicable city, state and federal regulatory requirements. The planned action designation shall not exempt a project from meeting city code requirements. This includes paying applicable transportation impact fees (Chapter 19.91 FWRC) and making development improvements, including those for safety and access purposes (Chapter 19.135 FWRC). Projects that qualify as planned actions are not exempt from the transportation concurrency management program (Chapter 19.90 FWRC).

(f) Planned action permit process. The director of community development or designee shall review projects and determine whether they meet the criteria as planned actions. The review procedure shall consist, at a minimum, of the following:

(i) Development applications will meet the requirements of the Federal Way Revised Code. Applications shall be made on forms provided by the city.

(ii) The director of community development will determine whether the application is complete as provided in FWRC 19.15.045.

(iii) After the city receives and reviews a complete application, the SEPA official shall determine, utilizing the criteria and procedures contained in subsection (3)(d) of this section and WAC 197-11-172, whether the project qualifies as a planned action. If the project does qualify as a planned action, the director of community development shall notify the applicant, and the project shall proceed in accordance with the appropriate permit procedures, except that no additional SEPA review, threshold determination or EIS will be required.

(iv) For projects that qualify as planned actions, public notice shall be provided as specified in FWRC 14.15.060(3).

(v) If a project is determined not to be a planned action, the director of community development shall notify the applicant and prescribe a SEPA review procedure consistent with the city SEPA procedures and state law. The notice to the applicant shall describe the elements of the application that result in disqualification as a planned action.

(vi) Projects disqualified as a planned action may use or incorporate relevant elements of the environmental review analysis in the SEIS prepared for the planned action, as well as other environmental review documents to assist in meeting SEPA requirements. The SEPA official may choose to limit the scope of the SEPA review to those issues and environmental impacts not previously addressed in the SEIS.

(4) Planned action area monitoring. The city center planned action section shall be reviewed periodically by the director of community development to determine its continuing validity with respect to the environmental conditions of the project area and vicinity and applicability of planned action requirements, to ensure continued applicability of the transportation analysis and impacts. Based upon this review, this section may be amended as needed, and another review period may be specified.

(5) Conflict. In the event of a conflict between this section or any mitigation measures imposed pursuant thereto and any ordinance or regulation of the city, the provisions of this section shall control.

(Ord. No. 16-811, § 1, 1-19-16; Ord. No. 14-779, § 1, 12-2-14; Ord. No. 10-659, § 1, 5-18-10; Ord. No. 07-552, § 1, 4-3-07; Ord. No. 07-547, §§ 1 – 5, 2-20-07. Code 2001 § 18-83.)

* Code reviser’s note: Ordinance No. 10-659, Exhibit B, amends Exhibit A of Ordinance No. 07-547. A copy of the exhibit is on file in the offices of the city.