Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-04-2020 PC 11.4.20 PacketPlanning Commission Meeting Nov ember 4, 2020 - 7:00 P M A GE NDA I .Virtual Participation Link A .Virtual Participation L ink The City of Auburn Planning Commission Meeting scheduled for Wednesday, November 4, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. will be held virtually and telephonically. To attend the meeting virtually please clink the link or enter the meeting I D into the Z oom A pp or call into the meeting at the phone number listed below. P er the Governor's E mergency Proclamation 20-28, the City of A uburn is prohibited from holding an in-person meeting at this time. P er City of A uburn Resolution No. 5533, the location for the Planning Commission meetings will be virtual until King County enters into Phase 3 of the Governor's Safe S tart Reopening P lan. J oin Z oom Meeting https://zoom.us/j/95038060198 Meeting I D: 950 3806 0198 1 253 215 8782 I I .C AL L T O O RD E R B .RO L L C AL L/E S TAB L I S HM E NT O F Q UO RUM C.P L E D G E O F AL L E G I ANC E I I I .AP P RO VAL O F M INUT E S A .October 20, 2020 Draft Minutes from the Special P lanning Commission Meeting I V.P UB L I C HE ARI NG S A .C PA20-0003, 2020 Comprehensive P lan Text Amendment - A cademy S pecial P lanning Area Policies B .C PA20-0002 & R E Z 20-0002, 2020 A nnual Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment & Rezone – Westport Capital C.P ublic Hearing for Z oning Code Amendments for W ireless Communication Faciities The purpose of the changes are to modernize the code in response to changes in Page 1 of 465 federal regulations that affect the permitting of expansion of existing wireless communication facilitities. V.O T HE R B US I NE S S V I .C O M M UNIT Y D E V E L O P M E NT RE P O RT Update on Community Development Services activities. V I I .AD J O URNM E NT The City of Auburn Planning Commission is a seven member advisory body that provides recommendations to the Auburn City Council on the preparation of and amendments to land use plans and related codes such as zoning. Planning Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the City Council. Actions taken by the Planning Commission, other than approvals or amendments to the Planning Commission Rules of Procedure, are not final decisions; they are in the form of recommendations to the city council which must ultimately make the final decision. Page 2 of 465 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: October 20, 2020 Draft Minutes from the Special Planning Commission Meeting Date: October 26, 2020 Department: Community Development Attachments: October 20, 2020 Draft Minutes from the Special Planning Commission Meeting Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: Planning Commission to approve October 20, 2020 Special Planning Commission Meeting Minutes Background Summary: Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Staff:Dixon Meeting Date:November 4, 2020 Item Number: Page 4 of 465 PLANNING COMMISSION October 20, 2020 Draft MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER Chair Judi Roland called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. via Zoom due to Governor Inslee’s “Stay Home, Stay Healthy” initiative due to the Covid 19- Pandemic and City Ordinance No. 5533. a.) ROLL CALL/ESTABLISHMENT OF QUORUM Commissioners present: Chair Judi Roland, Vice-Chair Lee, Commissioner Mason, Commissioner Moutzouris, Commissioner Khanal and Commissioner Stephens. Staff present: Kendra Comeau, City Attorney; Doug Ruth, Assistant City Attorney; Ingrid Gaub, Public Works Director; Jeff Dixon, Planning Services Manager; Jason Krum, Development Services Manager; Chris Barack, Code Enforcement Manager; Thaniel Gouk, Senior Planner; Anthony Avery, Senior Planner; Dustin Lawrence, Senior Planner; Jennifer Oliver, Administrative Assistant. Members of the public present: Karen Stewart, Fire Marshal Valley Regional Fire Authority; Hans Thygeson; Meridee Pabst; Alison Moss; Greg Gratias; Bob Sanders; Kim Allen. b.) PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. October 6, 2020 – Regular Meeting Minutes Commissioner Khanal moved and Vice Chair Lee seconded to approve the minutes from the October 6, 2020 meeting as written. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6-0 III. PUBLIC HEARING A. ACC Title 15 (Building and Construction) Planning Commission to conduct a public hearing and recommend to the City Council to review and adopt the proposed updates to Title 15 “Buildings and Construction” of the Auburn City Code (ACC) relating to amendments to the regulations for building construction as shown in the attached exhibits. Chair Roland opened the public hearing on October 20, 2020 at 7:07 p.m. Development Services Manager, Jason Krum provided the staff report for Building Code updates. Page 5 of 465 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 20, 2020 Page 2 The Washington State Building Code Council has adopted updated 2018 building codes and related standards and associated State amendments. This is a recurring update that typically occurs every three (3) years in response to the publication of updated codes and standards by the International Code Council and associated organizations. Updated codes are anticipated to be effective February 1, 2021. Title 15 of the Auburn City Code (ACC) contains the City’s adoption and amendments of the codes that regulate building and related construction. The proposed changes are being originated by staff to prepare Auburn City Code for consistency with State adoption, provide additional clarity for currently adopted amendments where needed, and implement additional amendments in anticipation of future needs. The proposed code changes are shown by strikeout/underline code attached to this memo as Exhibit 1, and a “clean” version, with all the proposed changes accepted as Exhibit 2. A narrative summary of the proposed amendments are included as Exhibit 3. Staff presented an introductory memo and discussion proposed amendments to the Planning Commission on October 6, 2020. After it was discussed at the October regular Planning Commission meeting, Staff requested to proceed with preparing the proposed code amendments for a public hearing. Based on this discussion, no modification have been made to the previously reviewed proposed amendments. The Commission and staff discussed the proposed updates to Title 15 “Buildings and Construction” of the Auburn City Code (ACC) relating to amendments to the regulations for building construction as shown in the attached exhibits. Chair Roland asked staff if the proposed updates and amendments go thru the State Legislature. Staff responded that the State Building Code Council makes recommendations to the State Legislature where they then go on to vote and adopt the updates and amendments. At the October 6, 2020 Planning Commission Regular Planning Commission meeting the Commissioners inquired about the Blower Test Cost and the typical individual test cost is $250-$500. Staff reached out to the Developer of the Copper Gate Apartments and their cost was $3700 per building. A follow up to Energy Code Applicability for Alterations Staff found that current code applies to alteration areas- not unaltered portions (the building cannot be less energy efficient), like materials for repairs- not for replacement. Windows are an exception. The Planning Commission asked if the Energy Efficient Window Code was nationwide and Staff responded that it is Washington State specific but California has similar codes for energy efficiency. The Commission inquired if the energy efficient window code would apply to just residential or both residential and commercial as well as slider windows. Staff confirmed that it is both residential and commercial and sliders included. Staff included that although home owners may not be aware of the window code change, local installers, vendors and stores such as Home Depot or Lowes are aware and should offer that information to the public if they are replacing or installing new energy star windows. The City of Auburn Department of Community Page 6 of 465 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 20, 2020 Page 3 Development is also available for any inquires from the public regarding the code change for energy efficient windows. The Planning Commission inquired on a section of the Fire Code that mentions the obstruction of fire access road and asked if the intent was to give construction companies notice to not block the access road during construction. Staff responded that it is for that intent but also for long term enforcement if there is a fire lane established that’s part of a development that should not have parking in it. Building and Fire Codes speak to having access available to occupants in the building to emergency vehicles to get to the building. This element existed in 15.38 A that was moved. City of Auburn engineering design standards will prevail over in the case were the existing standards are less restrictive then the fire code. With no other public testimony, and not further questions from the Planning Commissioners, Chair Roland closed the public hearing at 7:44 PM. Vice Chair Lee moved and Commissioner Khanal seconded to recommend ACC Title 15 (Building and Construction) Amendments and Code Change be moved forward to City Council for approval. Motion Passed 6-0 IV. OTHER BUSINESS A. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Briefing #2 Private annual Comprehensive Plan Amendments CPM20-0002 & CPM20-0003 Staff member, Anthony Avery, Senior Planner, presented the staff report for Comprehensive Plan Amendment Briefing Group #2 of amendments. As part of the 2020 Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment process, the city evaluates any private comprehensive plan amendments meeting submittal criteria. This year, the city received three applications. One was discussed at our last meeting concerning the Auburn School District Land Use Designation Amendment and Re-Zone. At this meeting, we’d like to discuss the other two private amendment applications the city received. The attached documents are an addendum of the physical binder the Planning Commission received prior to the October 6 briefing. At the October 20, 2020 Planning Commission meeting, staff would like to briefly review and discuss the second group of docket items consisting of: Group #2 - Private Initiated Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments (CPA20- 0003) • P/T #10 – Volume 1: Land Use Element. The Auburn Adventist Academy is making multiple updates to their Adopted Area documents to better address their current needs and long-term direction. Some changes to maps as part of the Page 7 of 465 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 20, 2020 Page 4 special area plan cannot be ruled out, and may be needed. No application to amend any maps have been received. A number of documents are provided to complete and evaluate the application and are presented into the record. The staff report (Exhibit 1) references these documents in finding of fact and analysis of the application. A map was provided by Staff to the Commission to show the proposed location. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments Private-Initiated Map Amendments: • CPM#3 – CPA20-0002: Request by Request by Westport Capital Investments to change the designation of King County Parcel numbers 0004200024, 0004200022, and 0004200003 totaling approximately 32.4 acres and located approximately 650 feet east of the intersection of I Street and 40th Street NE, from "Single Family Residential" to "Multiple-Family Residential" and an associated rezone from “R-7, Residential 7 dwelling units per acre” to “R-16, Residential”. The requested changes are not directly related to a project, however, if approved it would allow any use permitted in the R-16 Residential zone. This includes uses such as apartments, assisted living facilities, mixed-use buildings, and single family houses. A map was provided by Staff to the Commission to show the proposed location along with maps to show the existing land use designation and proposed land use designation. Chair Roland asked staff how many acres of land does CPM#3 Map Amendment affect and does the new parcels extend it out to a road. Staff replied that it was 37.3 acres and confirmed the road would reach I street and 40th St NE.. The Commission asked if the land would eventually become a school. The concern would be traffic impact if a school would be built. Staff offered to find out additional information and report back to the Commission and will invite the City of Auburn Traffic Engineer to attend the next meeting. The Commissioners asked if this area is also near the future development of the King County Bus Barn and how would traffic affect that. Staff provided a map during the presentation to show where that potential site could be. However, Public Works Director Ingrid Gaub announced that due to Covid 19, the King County Bus Barn project was put on hold due to budget deficits. Planning Services Manager Jeff Dixon said that there are also no plans for a school to be built on that site but the Commission requested that Staff reach out to the district to confirm the intentions for the site in the future. Planning Services Manager Dixon reminded the Commission that what is presented is the Comp Plan changes so the request is to change the land use designation in terms of the set of allowed uses that could go on at these sites. For those purposes, Staff has requested and received a general traffic Page 8 of 465 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 20, 2020 Page 5 study that looks at a range of uses that could be in the future. There could be specific plans for some the properties such as the Academy that is interested in assisted living facilities but staff does not have the specific traffic studies for that use. In terms of the Westport Capital amendment they did not present a specific plan for that site, hence why there is only a general traffic study report for now. When the request comes in for an actual plan for the site is when a specific traffic study would be completed. Public Works Director, Ingrid Gaub mentioned that when they city is evaluating a comp plan amendment that deals with potential development, staff is looking at the classification of the roadway and how much traffic those roadways serve those properties and what those roadways can handle long term. That doesn’t mean when they actually go to build or develop a site that the City wont require them to build roadway improvements. When the developer completes their detailed analysis for that design, staff will look at what is the specific mitigation that’s required for that development. That’s not a detail they will be able to give Staff during comp plan amendment time. The studies are showing that those specific roads referred to in the amendment, can handle traffic from future development. Roadway improvements could be specified by staff at the time of site development. Director Gaub went on to explain that roadway traffic counts are done every other year, and the off years turn movements at intersections are counted. That information gets fed into any future developments when the developer is actually performing their traffic study. Once that site a site is developed, that will serve as the baseline for future traffic impact studies. B. Introductory Discussion on Proposed Code Amendments related to Wireless Telecommunications Regulations, ZOA20-0005. The purpose of the changes are to modernize Titles 17, “subdivision” and Title 18, “Zoning”, in response to changes in federal regulations that affect the permitting of expansion of existing wireless communication facilities. Planning Services Manager, Jeff Dixon, presented to the Commission. Commissioner Khanal excused himself from this portion of the meeting due to a conflict of interest with his employer. “Wireless" is a broad term that encompasses many different types of technologies and devices that transmit data over the air rather than over wires, including cellular communications. Most wireless communication facilities/tools are either located in public rights- of-way (ROW) or located outside of ROW on private or public property. Those wireless communication facilities located in the public ROW are subject to local government oversight by exercising their authority to regulate the public ROW through franchises, master permits, and right-of-way use agreements that authorize utilities and other business entities to use the ROW under contractual obligation and subject to local ROW permitting requirements. Administration and enforcement of these requirements is generally the responsibility of the City’s Public Works Department. Page 9 of 465 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 20, 2020 Page 6 Those facilities located outside of the ROW and on private or public property, are regulated as a land use and are subject to local zoning and building code regulations, as a private utility. However, since the facilities most often include tall towers and are the subject of specific federal authority, they are not treated the same as other private utilities and substations and are usually given unique treatment by separate categorization in the zoning regulations. Administration and enforcement of these requirements is generally the responsibility of the City’s Community Development Department. Purpose of code changes The City is systematically initiating changes to various city code sections to address consistency with changes in federal law requirements and to reflect changes in wireless communication technology among other changes. Due to the highly technical and litigious nature of the subject, the City hired a legal consultant specializing in the subjects of wireless communication and ROW permitting of franchises and that is familiar with the results of court decisions. City Legal Dept., Public Works Dept., and Community Development Dept. staff has been working with this consultant over the last year on drafting code changes. Based on this code drafting, the City is simultaneously proposing to amend code sections affecting public right-of-way franchises, and right-of-way use permits among others and these changes are not the subject of Planning Commission consideration since they primarily address the subject of city rights-of-way. However, the city is proposing to amend city code section, Title 17 ‘Land Adjustment and Divisions’ (the subdivision code) and Title 18 ‘Zoning’ which are subject to review and recommendation by the Planning Commission. For context for the Planning Commissioners, what follows is a list of the seven city code titles that are proposed to be changed simultaneously. It is necessary to change these simultaneously since there are cross references to definitions that are found in a different portion of the code. These cross references avoid duplication and aid future internal consistency of terms and facilities that are common to ROW and non-ROW locations. A listing of the Code Titles to be changed and a brief summary of the proposed changes is provided below: Not subject to Planning Commission Review: (copy not provided) Title 3, REVENUE AND FINANCE • Chapter 3.42, Cable Television Utility Tax • Chapter 3.84, Telephone Business • Chapter 3.88, Utility Services The key changes to Title 3, are:  Align definitions with those of Title 20 for utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process.  Repeal of ACC 3.84.110 as annexation notification is addressed by applicable state law. Page 10 of 465 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 20, 2020 Page 7  Repeal of ACC 3.88.030 as the provision is outdated and duplicative of requirements in Title 5. Title 5, BUSINESS LICENSES AND REGULATIONS • Chapter 5.84, Licensing of Telecommunications Carriers, Operators, Providers, and Other Utilities The key changes to Title 5, are:  Remove purpose statement of business licensing as it is duplicative.  Align definitions with those of Title 20 for utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process. Title 12, STREETS, SIDEWALKS AND PUBLIC WORKS • Chapter 12.24, Construction Permits • Chapter 12.32, Sidewalk Obstructions The key changes to Title 12, are:  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process.  Ensure that any construction work performed under this title is done per the City’s Engineering Design and Construction Standards. Title 13, WATER, SEWERS AND PUBLIC UTILITIES • Chapter 13.32A, Underground Wiring • Chapter 13.36, CATV Systems (Repealed) • Chapter 13.44, Electrical Franchise (Repealed) The key changes to Title 13, are:  Align definitions with those of Title 20 for utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process.  Ensure that any construction work performed under this title is done per the City’s Engineering Design and Construction Standards.  Update requirements, exemptions and process for undergrounding of utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Repeal of Chapter 13.36 ACC as the provisions are being moved to Title 20 and updated to reflect current federal requirements.  Repeal of Chapter 13.44 ACC as the provisions are outdated and addressed under the provisions of Title 20. Title 20, FRANCHISES, CABLE FRANCHISES, AND LEASES • Chapter 20.02, General Provisions • Chapter 20.04, Utility and Telecommunications Franchises • Chapter 20.06, Cable Franchise • Chapter 20.08, Facilities Lease • Chapter 20.10, Conditions of Public Way Agreements, Franchises and Facilities Leases (Repealed) • Chapter 20.12, Open Video Systems (Repealed) • Chapter 20.14, Small Wireless Facilities The key changes to Title 20, are:  Align definitions throughout the titles for utilities, telecommunications and cable. Page 11 of 465 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 20, 2020 Page 8  Update City Code in conformance with current federal and state requirements for utilities, telecommunications and cable in the public ways and on city owned facilities and property.  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process.  Repeal of Chapter 20.10 ACC as the provisions of this chapter have been updated and moved to Chapter 20.02 ACC.  Repeal of Chapter 20.12 ACC as this chapter was empty. Subject to Planning Commission Review and Recommendation: (copy provided, see attachments) Title 17, LAND ADJUSTMENTS AND DIVISIONS • Chapter 17.14, IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS – SUBDIVISIONS • Chapter 17.28, Infrastructure Conduit (Repealed) The key changes to Title 17, are:  Minor changes to improve clarity and correct references.  Repeal of ACC 17.28 because addressed in ACC 13.32A. Title 18, ZONING • Chapter 18.02, General Provisions • Chapter 18.04, Definitions • Chapter 18.07, Residential Zones • Chapter 18.23, Commercial and Industrial Zones • Chapter 18.31, Supplemental Development Standards • Chapter 18.35, Special Purpose Zones The key changes to Title 18, are:  Changes to be consistent with the requirements of federal legislation that provide the city must approve additions or modifications to existing wireless communication facilities that do not exceed a ”substantial increase” and that the city must approve within a specified timeframe. This requires new terminology, procedures, and regulations.  Also changes were made to accommodate the new technology of “small cell wireless communication” facilities when located on private property.  Other minor housekeeping or administrative changes were also made. The proposed changes are shown by strikeout (deletions) and underline (additions) in the code attached to this memo. The following sections summarize the effect of federal regulations and the key points affecting City Titles 17 and 18. Wireless Antenna Facilities With the evolving technology and increased usage of wireless devices by the population, wireless antenna facilities have been given special consideration by federal regulations. Local jurisdictions across the country need to ensure that their regulations regarding wireless antenna facility siting are consistent with section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of Page 12 of 465 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 20, 2020 Page 9 2012, as set forth in the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC’s) October 2014 Acceleration of Broadband Deployment Order. Regulating Wireless Antenna Facilities Local governments can develop ordinances and policies to provide opportunities for wireless communication facilities (WCF) consistent with the statutory rights of wireless communication service providers provided by the federal regulations while also providing for an orderly development of the city and protecting the health, safety, and general welfare of the city’s residents and property owners. A primary objective of these ordinances is to preserve the existing visual and aesthetic character of the jurisdiction and its neighborhoods, and minimize incompatibility, as well as minimizing the noise impacts generated by these facilities. The City has regulated WCFs located on public and private property by zoning regulations since Ordinance No. 6245 in 2009. Most recently the Planning Commission reviewed changes to these regulations in April 2019 as a result of the need to address construction of a unique category of wireless communication by Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network (PSERN) for an emergency response communications facility. These changes were adopted by Ordinance No. 6716 in 2019. Small Cell Communication Technology In recent years, the dramatic increase in use of wireless devices has triggered the need for new subcategory of wireless communication facility referred to as “small cell” technology to increase signal coverage. (The term: “small wireless facility” is used in the proposed city code changes.) The signal coverage is increased by use of smaller antennas (less than 3 cubic feet), not mounted as high, and more closely-spaced. A typical small cell is between 25-45 feet in height, attaches to existing utility poles or light/traffic pole within the right-of- way, and requires an aerial or underground line to access power and fiber in order to transmit cellular phone and data signals. Small cell facilities may also be installed on public or private property outside of the right-of-way and thus are also addressed in zoning code changes. As a result of the increased demand for this technology, there has been a substantial increase in applications from providers seeking to place small cell facilities in municipal rights-of-way. In 2018, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a 2-part Declaratory Ruling with the intent to streamline the deployment of Fourth Generation (4G) and Fifth Generation (5G) mobile communication system infrastructure. Regulating Small Cell Technology To meet rapidly increasing demand for wireless services and encourage investment in a national infrastructure for 5G, wireless communication providers must deploy infrastructure at significantly more locations using new, small cell facilities. This Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order is part of a national strategy to promote the timely buildout of this new infrastructure across the country by eliminating regulatory impediments, unnecessarily add Page 13 of 465 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 20, 2020 Page 10 delays and costs to bringing advanced wireless services to the public. The ruling was effective January 14, 2019. Some key provisions of the federal legislation: • Clarify that federal regulations apply to support structures and to transmission equipment used in connection with any Commission-licensed or authorized wireless transmission. • Define "transmission equipment" to encompass antennas and other equipment associated with and necessary to their operation, including power supply cables and backup power equipment. • Define "tower" to include any structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any Commission-licensed or authorized antennas and their associated facilities. • Clarify that the term "base station" includes structures other than towers that support or house an antenna, transceiver, or other associated equipment that constitutes part of a "base station" at the time the relevant application is filed with municipal authorities, even if the structure was not built for the sole or primary purpose of providing such support, but does not include structures that do not at that time support or house base station components. • Clarify that a modification "substantially changes" the physical dimensions of a tower or base station, as measured from the dimensions of the tower or base station inclusive of any modifications approved prior to the federal legislation, if it meets a defined set of criteria: o It increases the height of the tower by more than ten percent or by more than twenty feet, whichever is greater; o It involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the tower more than twenty feet, or more than the width of the tower structure at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is greater; o For any eligible support structure, it involves installation of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, but not to exceed four cabinets; or, for base stations, it involves installation of any new equipment cabinets on the ground if there are no preexisting ground cabinets associated with the structure, or else involves installation of ground cabinets that are more than ten percent larger in height or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the structure; o It entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site/lease area, as defined; o It would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support structure; and o It does not comply with original approval conditions unrelated to a “substantial change”. And thus is determined to be an “eligible facilities request” under the federal legislation. Page 14 of 465 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 20, 2020 Page 11 • Provide that localities may continue to enforce and condition approval on compliance with generally applicable building, structural, electrical, and safety codes and with other laws codifying objective standards reasonably related to health and safety. • Provide the following guidance for reviewing an application under federal legislation: o A local government may only require applicants to provide documentation that is reasonably related to determining whether the “eligible facilities request” meets the requirements; o Within 60 days from the date of filing, accounting for tolling, a local government shall approve an application meeting the “eligible facilities request”; o The running of the period may be tolled by mutual agreement or upon notice that an application is incomplete provided in accordance with the same deadlines, but not by a moratorium; and o An application meeting the “eligible facilities request”; is deemed granted if a State or local government fails to act on it within the requisite time period. • Clarify that federal legislation applies only to State and local governments acting in their role as land use regulators and does not apply to such entities acting in their proprietary capacities. • Provide that parties may bring disputes-including disputes related to application denials and deemed grants-in any court of competent jurisdiction. • Establish new “presumptively reasonable” permit review timelines (referred to as shot clocks) applicable to small cell facilities. • Clarify the use of the term “collocation” in relation to small cell facilities. • Publishes fee limitation for the use of city-owned infrastructure (such as light and signal poles). • Establish guidelines for imposing aesthetic standards that must be: reasonable, no more burdensome than those applied to other types of infrastructure deployments, objective, and published in advance. • Interpret the term “effectively prohibit”. Next steps If the Planning Commission feels like the changes are ready to proceed, Staff will move forward with scheduling the public hearing for November 4, 2020. The Planning Commission asked if this code change would include the cosmetic aspects of the code. Meaning would the towers be painted to blend in with the trees, or painted a specific color? Staff responded that not existing ones but possibly new Page 15 of 465 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES October 20, 2020 Page 12 ones in the future. The City does requests the towers be painted the same color of the base installation. V. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT Planning Services Manager, Jeff Dixon reported that Copper Gate Development located at the North end of Auburn at the old Valley 6 Drive Ins site has been issued a temporary building occupancy permits. The Commission asked if that site would have any retail attached to it. Staff reported that Phase 1 was just multi family development but that future development would be commercial or professional office space. No permits have been applied for as of right now for the commercial portion of the site. VI. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Planning Commission, Chair Roland adjourned the meeting at 9:27 p.m. Page 16 of 465 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: CPA20-0003, 2020 Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment - Academy Special Planning Area Policies Date: October 27, 2020 Department: Community Development Attachments: Staff Report Application Form Written Narrative SEPA Checklis t CAA TIA Scoping Doc Illus trative Site Plan DNS Affidavits Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: Background Summary: Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Staff:Dixon Meeting Date:November 4, 2020 Item Number:PH.1 Page 17 of 465 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Subject/Title: CPA20-0003, 2020 l Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment – Academy Special Planning Area Policies Date: November 4, 2020 Department: Community Development Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrative Recommendation: Planning Commission to conduct public hearing and recommend to City Council approval of the 2020 Privately-Initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments (Policy/Text Amendments). Applicant: Bob Sanders Creations Northwest, LLC 14020 SE Johnson Rd, Suite 102 Milwaukie, OR 97267 Agent: Alison Moss Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt 700 Washington St, Suite 701 Vancouver, WA 98660 Owner Doug Bing Western Washington Conference Corporation of SDA 32229 Weyerhaeuser Way S Federal Way, WA 98001 Request: Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to Land Use Policy LU-135 and to the Academy Special Planning Area policies A.1.2 and A.1.8. The purpose of the amendments is to clarify that multifamily uses providing long-term revenue to the Western Conference of the Seventh Day Adventists supporting its educational mission are allowed. Location: The site abuts Auburn Way South, between 32nd Street SE & Academy Drive SE. While the Academy occupies multiple parcels within this area, the proposed text amendment is primarily associated with King County Parcel Numbers 2721059117, 2721059090, 2721059055, 2721059086, and 2721059079. Existing Zoning: The zoning designation of the site is “I” Institutional. The entire site is located within the Academy Special Planning Area, adopted under Resolution No. 2254 on November 14, 1991. Existing Comprehensive Plan Designation: The Comprehensive Plan Map Designation of the site is “Institutional”. SEPA Status: A Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) was issued under City File No. SEP20-0012 on September 15, 2020. The comment period ended on September 30, 2020. No comments were provided in response to the DNS. Page 18 of 465 Staff Member: Avery Date: November 4, 2020 Page 2 of 9 Findings 1. Agent, Alison Moss with Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt, representing Bob Sanders of Creations Northwest LLC, submitted an application for a Comprehensive Plan Text amendment (File No. CPA20-0003). More specifically, the purpose of the text amendment is the amend Land Use Policy LU-135 and Academy Special Planning Area policies A.1.2 and A.1.8. The purpose of the amendments is to clarify that multifamily uses providing long- term revenue to the Western Conference of the Seventh Day Adventists supporting its educational mission are allowed. The Applicant identifies that this is a non-project action. 2. The applicant proposes to develop a portion of the Academy’s property with a combination of multi-family, memory care, independent living, and assisted living residential units. An illustrative site plan was provided with the application. The plan is marked as Exhibit 7. 3. Any future development of the site will be analyzed separately from the subject Comprehensive Plan Text amendment for consistency with local, state, and federal regulations, including the Auburn City Code (ACC) and Public Works Design Manual. 4. The site abuts Auburn Way South, between 32nd Street SE & Academy Drive SE. While the Academy occupies multiple parcels within this area, the proposed text amendment is primarily associated with King County Parcel Numbers 2721059117, 2721059090, 2721059055, 2721059086, and 2721059079. 5. The Auburn Adventist Academy is a multi-use campus located on approximately 250 acre property owned and operated by the Western Conference of the Seventh Day Adventists. It play a large role in Washington Conference. It is designated on Comprehensive Plan Map 1.4 as an Adopted Area, a category of Special Planning Area. The City Council adopted the Academy Special Planning Area Plan (Academy Plan) by Resolution 2254, in 1991. 6. According to the applicant, in the earlier years, agriculture was the way the Academy supported the school financially. Agricultural uses and products included orchards, crops, berries, a large dairy farm. See Exhibit 3 7. According to the applicant, in 1987, the City established the Institutional Use District (I) for Auburn Adventist Academy (Academy). The I Zone permitted such uses as schools, day care, churches, nursing homes, recreation and single family uses outright. It authorized other uses, including multifamily dwellings, through administrative or conditional use permits. The City Council rezoned the Academy Planning Area “I” as part of its adoption of the Academy Plan. See Exhibit 3 8. According to the owner, (the Academy), its mission is to continuously create a strong private Christian education that is academically significant, while providing whole life development, personal reliance, and personal accountability. Pursuing this mission requires extensive programing, staffing, and facilities that are maintained on its 250+ acres. Only approximately one-third of the Academy’s operating income comes from student tuition. Over many years the governance of the Academy has sought ways to be better stewards of the Academy Page 19 of 465 Staff Member: Avery Date: November 4, 2020 Page 3 of 9 properties by creating income from the parcels not occupied by the church and school facilities (Supporting Parcels) to fund its mission. See Exhibit 3 9. A Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) the environmental review decision required under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), for a Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment was issued under City File No. SEP20-0012 on September 15, 2020. The comment period ended September 30, 2020 and the appeal period ended October 14, 2020. 10. The applicant provided a Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping Document, prepared by Heath and Associates, Inc., dated August 25, 2020. The analysis identifies how traffic impacts will be analyzed in the future should the site subject to the text amendments be developed. A more detailed Traffic Impact Analysis will be prepared once the specific design of the site is determined, at which point, specific mitigation (if any) will be determined. The applicant’s Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping Document is marked as Exhibit 6 11. The applicant provided a Critical Areas Assessment, prepared by Habitat Technologies, dated July 9, 2019. The assessment notes that there is one, .25 acre, Category IV wetland within the area associated with the Comprehensive Text Amendment. Any future impacts to wetlands or other critical areas will be reviewed as part of the project specific SEPA review for the site. The Critical Areas Assessment is marked as Exhibit 5 12. The public hearing notice was published on September 15, 2020 in the Seattle Times at least 10-days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing scheduled for November 4, 2020. Public notice was also mailed to property owners of record within 300 feet, posting on-site and on the city’s webpage. 13. The following report identifies a Comprehensive Plan text amendment request scheduled for the Planning Commission’s November 4, 2020 public hearing with a staff recommendation. 14. The City of Auburn first-adopted amendments to its Comprehensive Plan in compliance with the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements, as amended in 1995. The Auburn Comprehensive Plan has been amended annually each year since generally for housekeeping items and for capital facilities plan coordination. 15. The City of Auburn adopted a substantially revised Comprehensive Plan (including map amendments) in response to periodic updates required by the Growth Management Act (GMA) by Ordinance No. 6584 on December 14, 2015. 16. City Code Section 14.22, “Comprehensive Plan” provides the city’s laws for amending the Comprehensive Plan. Amendments can be initiated by the City of Auburn (city-initiated) and by private citizens (privately-initiated). 17. This staff report and recommendation describes and addresses a Comprehensive Plan text amendment. The other private initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment applications received this year, as well as the 2020 City initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments are addressed in separate staff reports. Page 20 of 465 Staff Member: Avery Date: November 4, 2020 Page 4 of 9 18. Comprehensive Plan amendments are initially reviewed during a public hearing process before the City of Auburn Planning Commission, who then provides a recommendation to the City Council for final action. City Council consideration and action on the amendments generally occurs but is not required prior to the end of the year. 19. RCW 36.70A.130 (The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA)) provides for annual amendments to locally adopted comprehensive plans. Except in limited circumstances as provided for in State law, Comprehensive Plan amendments shall be considered by the city or county legislative body no more frequently than once per year. The annual limitation and exceptions are also restated in city code at ACC 14.22.060. 20. The City of Auburn established a June 5, 2020 submittal deadline for comprehensive plan amendments for the year 2020 (map or policy/text amendments). Notice to the public of the application filing deadline was provided on the City’s website, publication of a legal notice the Seattle Times Newspaper, and sent to a notification list of potentially interested parties. 21. No comment letters from the surrounding neighborhood were received by the City in response to the combined public Notice of Application and DNS. 22. Auburn City Code Chapter 14.22 “Comprehensive Plan”, outlines the process for submittal of private initiated amendments and the processing of Comprehensive Plan amendments as follows: “Section 14.22.100 A. The planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing on all proposed amendments to the comprehensive plan. Notice of such public hearing shall be given pursuant to Chapter 1.27 ACC and, at a minimum, include the following: 1. For site-specific plan map amendments: a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing; b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record within a radius of 300 feet of the proposed map amendment request, not less than 10 calendar days prior to the public hearing; 2. For area-wide plan map amendments: a. Notice shall be published once in the official newspaper of the city not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of public hearing; b. Notice shall be mailed by first class mail to all property owners of record within the area subject to the proposed amendment; c. Notice shall be posted in at least two conspicuous locations in the area subject to the proposed amendment not less than 10 calendar days prior to the date of the public hearing. B. Notwithstanding the above, the director may expand the minimum noticing provisions noted above as deemed necessary. C. Planning Commission Recommendation. The planning commission shall conduct a public hearing on all potential comprehensive plan amendments and shall make and forward a recommendation on each to the city council. The planning commission shall adopt written findings and make a recommendation consistent with those findings to the city council. Page 21 of 465 Staff Member: Avery Date: November 4, 2020 Page 5 of 9 D. The city council, if it elects to amend the comprehensive plan, shall adopt written findings and adopt said amendments by ordinance. E. State Review. All comprehensive plan amendments considered by the planning commission shall be forwarded for state agency review consistent with RCW 36.70A.106. F. Any appeal of an amendment to the comprehensive plan shall be made in accordance with Chapter 36.70A RCW. (Ord. 6172 § 1, 2008.)” 23. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed comprehensive plan amendments outlined in this agenda bill were sent to the Washington State Office of Commerce and other state agencies as required for the 60-day state review. No comments have been received from the Washington State Department of Commerce or other state agencies as of the writing of this report. 24. Due to the scope and limited number of privately initiated policy/text changes, the optional process as provided in the city code for a public open house was not conducted. 25. The City’s Comprehensive Plan contains the following objectives and policy guidance, as it relates to this application: Volume 1 – Land Use Element “Public and Institutional Land Use Designations” “Character Sketch” “Public and institutional uses will occur in both low and high-density environments. For passive uses, land and views will be protected; limited access to these areas will be typical. For more active uses, usability and accessibility will be key features and new development will be subject to standards reflecting programmed space and interconnectivity. These spaces will be varied in type, providing service to areas large and small, urban and more rural in character. Sustainable solutions and innovations that are responsive to the native ecology will be typical of public and institutional uses.” “General Policies LU-89. The primary purpose of this designation is to address public needs while taking advantage of synergies with the adjacent areas where they are sited. LU-90. Innovative strategies to integrate the uses and sites into the areas where they are sited is encouraged. These strategies should maximize use of the site while minimizing fiscal impacts and impacts to adjacent areas.” “Institutional Designation” Description” “This category includes those areas that are reserved for public or institutional uses. These public uses include public schools and institutional uses such as large churches and schools. It is also intended to include those of a significant impact, and not those smaller public uses that are consistent with and may be included in another designation. For Page 22 of 465 Staff Member: Avery Date: November 4, 2020 Page 6 of 9 example, public uses of an industrial character are included in the industrial designation, and small-scale religious institutions of a residential character are included in the residential designation” “Designation Criteria 1. Previously developed institutional uses; or 2. Located along major arterial streets; 3. Properties that are buffered from the single-family designation by landscaping, environmental features, or the Residential Transition designation and buffered from all other Residential designations; and 4. Meets the development parameters of the Institutional designation. 5. Properties identified in the Airport Master Plan as Landing Field.” “Policies LU-101. A responsible management entity and the purpose for the institutional designation should be identified for each property interest within this designation. Management policies and plans are appropriate for all lands in this designation. LU-102. Appropriate uses for this designation include facilities that serve the needs of the larger community such as public schools, active parks, city operated municipal facilities, large churches, and fire stations 26. The City code provides certain criteria for decision-making for comprehensive plan amendments as follows: “ACC 14.22.110 Decision criteria for plan amendments. A. The comprehensive plan was developed and adopted after significant study and public participation. The principles, goals, objectives and policies contained therein shall be granted substantial weight when considering a proposed amendment. Therefore, the burden of proof for justifying a proposed amendment rests with the applicant, who must demonstrate that the request complies with and/or relates to the following decision criteria: 1. The proposed change will further and be consistent with the goals and objectives of the plan and the plan will remain internally consistent; 2. Whether the capacity to provide adequate services is diminished or increased; 3. Assumptions upon which the comprehensive plan is based are found to be invalid; 4. A determination of change or lack of change in conditions or circumstances has occurred since the adoption of the latest amendment to the specific section of the comprehensive plan that dictates the need for a proposed amendment; 5. If applicable, a determination that a question of consistency exists between the comprehensive plan and Chapter 36.70A RCW, the countywide planning policies for either King and/or Pierce County, as appropriate, and Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region Page 23 of 465 Staff Member: Avery Date: November 4, 2020 Page 7 of 9 CONCLUSIONS The City Code provides certain criteria for decisions on amending the Comprehensive Plan under ACC 14.22.110. These criteria are listed below in bold, followed by a Staff Analysis. 1. The first criterion is that the change must further and be consistent with the goals and objectives of the plan and the plan will remain internally consistent. Staff Analysis: As identified in the submittal information, the Applicant’s purpose for the Comprehensive Plan text amendment is to clarify that multifamily uses providing long-term revenue to the Western Conference of the Seventh Day Adventists supporting its educational mission are allowed. The applicant notes that when the site was originally zoned “I” Institutional and when the Academy Special Planning Area was established, multi- family was a use that was permitted. The proposal to change the text of LU-135 and Academy Special Planning Area policies A.1.2 and A.1.8 is meant to add further clarity that multi-family and similar uses will support the Academy’s long term mission and are permitted. Because the Academy Special Planning area policy A.1.8 currently indicates that ‘residential and nursing home uses’ are allowed within the area immediately to the north of Auburn Way South and that multi-family uses are allowed within the Institutional zoning district, the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan will remain internally consistent. 2. The second decision criterion is that the comprehensive plan amendment must not diminish or increase the ability to provide adequate services. Staff Analysis: The application for changes to the Comprehensive Plan text policies have been reviewed by Valley Regional Fire Agency and the City Utilities and Traffic divisions. Based on these reviews, the changes would not adversely affect the provision of services. The proposed Comprehensive Plan text change by itself, if approved will not affect the ability to provide adequate services. As typical with development in the City, the infrastructure improvements needed to support the development would be the responsibility of the future development. At the time of development, adequate services would be required to be provided concurrent with the development in order for the project to be authorized. As such, it is not anticipated that approval of the request will negatively affect the provision of services. Utility and street frontage improvements, and possibly off-site improvements, would be required to support the development. 3. The third decision criterion is that the assumptions on which the comprehensive plan is based are found to be invalid. Staff Analysis: While the policies of the Comprehensive Plan are not invalid, the current text amendment attempts to clarify existing policies and how they integrate with the Academy’s long term mission. The intent of the Academy is to continue their operation as a religious and educational institution offering vocational training. By amending the text policies to clarify that multi-family and senior housing type uses are allowed, the Academy will have the financial means to continue to operate. Page 24 of 465 Staff Member: Avery Date: November 4, 2020 Page 8 of 9 4. The fourth decision criterion is that there has been a change or lack of change in conditions or circumstances has occurred since the adoption of the latest amendment to the comprehensive plan that dictates the need for a proposed amendment. Staff Analysis: There has been a change in circumstances that generates the need for the text amendment. According to the Applicant, the original agricultural uses associated with the site are no longer economically viable, the surrounding area has become considerably more urban, and water and sewer infrastructure has greatly improved near the site. Further, the region is experiencing a higher demand for affordable housing and senior housing options. By making updates and refinements to the Academy Special Area plan, the Academy will be able to utilize multiple under-utilized parcels in a manner that will help them continue to operate and carry out their mission of providing religious and vocational related instruction. Based on this information, it is necessary for the Academy to make updates to the Comprehensive Plan and the Academy Special Planning Area. 5. The fifth decision criterion is that the change must be determined to be consistent with the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), the Countywide Planning Policies of the relevant county and “Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region”. Staff Analysis: The change if approved would continue to be consistent with the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), the Countywide Planning Policies of King County and “Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region”. The proposal is consistent because it intends to clarify existing policies without materially changing them. Further, the existing Institutional Comprehensive Plan Map designation and Institutional zoning will remain. 6. The sixth decision criterion, applies only to changes of the mapped land use designation of a specific property, the applicant must demonstrate one of the following: a. The current land use designation was clearly made in error or due to an oversight; b. The proposed land use designation is adjacent to property having a similar or compatible designation, or other conditions are present to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties; c. There has been a change in conditions since the current land use designation came into effect. Staff Analysis: Because no Comprehensive Plan map change is proposed, the above criterion is not applicable. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission to recommend approval of a text amendment to land use policy LU-135 and to the Academy Special Planning Area policies A.1.2 and A.1.8. Page 25 of 465 Staff Member: Avery Date: November 4, 2020 Page 9 of 9 EXHIBIT LIST (As provided to Planning Commission October 20, 2020) Exhibit 1 Staff Report Exhibit 2 Completed Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Form Exhibit 3 Applicant’s Narrative Statement Exhibit 4 SEPA Environmental Checklist Exhibit 5 Critical Areas Assessment, Habitat Technologies Exhibit 6 Traffic Impact Analysis (Scoping Document), Heath & Associates Exhibit 7 Illustrative Site Plan Exhibit 8 Combined Notice of Application and Determination of Non-Significance SEP20- 0012 Exhibit 9 Notice of Public Hearing Exhibit 10 Affidavits of Publication, Mailing, and Posting Page 26 of 465 Page 27 of 465 1 - PDX\133979\254493\ALM\28103626.1 Written Statement - Decision criteria for plan amendments. 1. The proposed change will further and be consistent with the goals and objectives of the plan and the plan will remain internally consistent. 7. Describe why the text amendment is being proposed. Identify the anticipated benefits to making the change. The Auburn Adventist Academy is a multi-use campus located on approximately 250 acre property owned and operated by the Western Conference of the Seventh Day Adventists. It play a large role in Washington Conference. It is designated on Comprehensive Plan Map 1.4 as an Adopted Area, a category of Special Planning Area. The City Council adopted the Academy Special Planning Area Plan (Academy Plan) by Resolution 2254, in 1991. At that time and since the following uses have been located and events occurred on the campus:  Meeting place for many events.  Several events over the summer include meetings called "camp meetings" where Adventists from Washington and around the world come together to celebrate the Adventist culture. Attendance is often more than 10,000 people.  150 RV sites, most with full hookups  Site of NBC basketball camps.  One of the largest Adventist churches in the northwest.  The Conference’s largest elementary school, Buena Vista.  A retail store for literature and health foods.  23 single family residences.  Three dormitory structures used for students and community.  A swimming pool that is used by the community including scuba lessons and a pre- olympic swim team training.  A large auditorium that was used for the Auburn High School graduation for many years.  A large food service building regularly used as a banquet facility.  Green houses built to generate income and jobs.  Several industrial buildings occupied by approximately 10 separate businesses.  A large airstrip and hangars used by the School and Adventist community. In the earlier years, agriculture was the way the Academy supported the school financially. Agricultural uses and products included orchards, crops, berries, a large dairy farm. As explained in more detail below, the Academy always sought income from its property to subsidize operations. See 1936 map, Attachment A. In 1987, the City established the Institutional Use District (I), created primarily for Auburn Adventist Academy (Academy). The I Zone permitted such uses as schools, day care, churches, nursing homes, recreation and single family uses outright. It authorized other uses, including multifamily dwellings, through administrative or conditional use permits. The City Council Page 28 of 465 2 - PDX\133979\254493\ALM\28103626.1 rezoned the Academy Planning Area “I” as part of its adoption of the Academy Plan. See, Academy Plan §III.C. As explained in the June, 2020 letter from the Western Conference to the City Council, Attachment B, its mission is to continuously create a strong private Christian education that is academically significant, while providing whole life development, personal reliance, and personal accountability. Pursuing this mission requires extensive programing, staffing, and facilities that are maintained on its 250+ acres. Only approximately one-third of the Academy’s operating income comes from student tuition. Over many years the governance of the Academy has sought ways to be better stewards of the Academy properties by creating income from the parcels not occupied by the church and school facilities (Supporting Parcels) to fund its mission. We refer to these income producing uses as Supporting Uses. At the time of its development, the Purpose Section of the Academy Plan focused on redevelopment of the closed Harris Pine Mills buildings, active agricultural uses, and aviation training. This focus is reflected in Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-135. In the intervening 29 years since adoption of the Academy Plan, Auburn’s population has grown from approximately 33,000 to 87,000, an increase of 160%. The area is considerably more urban. Infrastructure has been vastly improved, the industrial buildings are continuously rented by about 10 separate businesses, and some historic agricultural uses are no longer an economically viable means of generating income to fund the Academy’s mission. See, Attachment B. The Academy is currently working with Creations Northwest, LLC on a long term land lease which will allow the development of the Academy parcels north of Auburn Way S. and south of 32nd Street SE for multifamily use and a senior housing community. An illustrative site plan of this property is attached as Attachment C. While the multifamily uses will provide workforce housing offering a limited amount of employment and vocational opportunities for some students, they support the Academy’s mission primarily by providing long term revenue. The long term revenue generated through a land use for the senior housing and multifamily developments on the Academy parcels will allow the Academy to do such things as create an endowment to subsidize student tuition and provide financial aid to students needing tuition assistance, for new educational programs, additional faculty, and facility maintenance and upgrades and other needs that cannot be funded through tuition. The senior housing and multifamily land use would generate much more revenue for the Academy mission than the previous agricultural uses on these parcels were able to produce. The Academy wishes to more fully capture in the Academy Plan and Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-135 the fact that developing Supporting Parcels for profitable uses has contributed and continues to contribute to its mission in far more ways than simply providing student employment opportunities and vocational training on the developed parcels. The proposed text amendment is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan text and policies: Page 29 of 465 3 - PDX\133979\254493\ALM\28103626.1 Land Use Element  Introduction, p. LU-1. All land within the City of Auburn is assigned a land use designation, which builds off the past Comprehensive Plan Map, the existing land use pattern, previously approved subarea plans, topography, natural features, and targeted goals for shifting the character of specified areas. Analysis: Clarifying that multifamily and senior community uses are allowed secondary uses of the Academy parcels north of Auburn Way S. and south of 32nd Street SE builds off the previously approved subarea plan, the Academy Plan, which, as explained above, not only recognized that Supporting Uses are essential to the Academy’s ability financially to fulfill its mission but also envisioned multifamily and senior community uses of the property.  Public and Institutional Land Use Designations, General Policies LU-90 Innovative strategies to integrate the uses and sites into the areas where they are sited is encouraged. These strategies should maximize use of the site while minimizing fiscal impacts and impacts to adjacent areas. Analysis: A long-term lease for the development of workforce multifamily housing and a senior community is an innovative strategy to support the Academy’s mission. As described throughout this analysis, it will, among other things, allow the Academy to fund an endowment for the benefit of the school and its students.  Subarea Policies LU-124 Each subarea will contain its own vision, goals, policies and strategies. Analysis: Policy LU-135 essentially summarizes the Purpose statement of the Academy Plan. Amending it to specifically authorize multifamily and senior community uses in the area lying north of Auburn Way S. and south of 32nd Street SE implements the Plan’s intent to allow viable Supporting Uses. Housing Element Workforce housing promotes many housing policies including H-4 (promote housing that meets the needs of Auburn’s workforce); and H-10 (provide a land use plan and zoning that offers opportunities to achieve a variety of housing styles and densities). This clarifying amendment will not create an inconsistency. 2. Whether the capacity to provide adequate services is diminished or increased. Providers’ ability to provide adequate services should not be affected by this proposal. Academy Plan Land Use Policy A.1.8 currently expressly allows academic, church, nursing and retirement Page 30 of 465 4 - PDX\133979\254493\ALM\28103626.1 homes, and limited retail sales and service. We do not anticipate that the proposed multifamily housing and senior community will generate a significantly different service need that these uses. The following discussion is taken from the March 23, 2020 Pre-Application Conference Summary, City File number PRE 20-0011. Sewer: There is a 24 inch sewer trunk line in Academy Drive SE and 32nd Street SE that has adequate capacity to convey flow from the proposed multifamily site. Water: There is an existing 6 inch water main along 37th Place SE stubbed at the north property line of the area proposed for multifamily uses, an existing 12 inch water main stubbed at the northeast corner, and an existing 12 inch water main along Auburn Way S. to the south of the proposed multifamily parcels. Transportation: Development of the property proposed for multifamily uses will require the preparation of a traffic study, half street improvements to Auburn Way S. rechannelization of Auburn Way S. to match the existing 3-lane section to the east, frontage improvements, and payment of a Transportation Impact fee. The illustrative site plan Attachment C depicts a 3 phase project including 372 multifamily units and a senior care facility. A scope for a Transportation Impact Analysis is provided as Attachment D. Based on the illustrative site plan, the impact fee would be approximately $1,157,630.) 3. Assumptions upon which the comprehensive plan is based are found to be invalid; No assumptions upon which the Comprehensive Plan was based are invalid. However, as mentioned above, the Academy Plan is now nearly 3 decades old and reflects outdated assumptions regarding infrastructure and viable Supporting Uses and does not fully reflect the ways in which Supporting Parcels and Uses serve the Academy’s mission. 4. A determination of change or lack of change in conditions or circumstances has occurred since the adoption of the latest amendment to the specific section of the comprehensive plan that dictates the need for a proposed amendment; Please see our responses to criteria 1-3. In summary:  Some of the historical agricultural uses of the area north of Auburn Way S. and south of 32nd Street SE are no longer economically viable  The surrounding area is considerably more urban  Auburn’s population has dramatically increased  The Puget Sound Region is suffering an affordable housing crisis  Water and sewer infrastructure serving the proposed multifamily property is greatly improved  Neither the Academy Plan nor Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-135 fully captures the ways in which Supporting Uses financially advance the Academy mission. 5. If applicable, a determination that a question of consistency exists between the comprehensive plan and Chapter 36.70A RCW, the countywide planning policies for either King and/or Page 31 of 465 5 - PDX\133979\254493\ALM\28103626.1 Pierce County, as appropriate, and Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region. The proposed amendments are consistent with VISION 2040 and the 2012 King County Countywide Planning Policies. VISION 2040 designates Auburn as a Core City. Core cities are intended to accommodate a significant share of future growth, contain key hubs for the region’s long-range multimodal transportation system. They are major civic, cultural, and employment centers within their counties. The Regional Growth Strategy envisions a major role for these cities in accommodating growth: the 14 Core Cities are called upon to accommodate 22 percent of the region’s population growth and 29 percent of its employment growth by the year 2040. (This is an increased role compared to current adopted targets for the year 2025, which call for approximately 17 percent of regional population growth and 26 percent of regional employment growth to occur in Core Cities.) VISION 2040 Regional Growth Strategy, p. 21. Making clear that multifamily housing is allowed on the property north of Auburn Way S. and south of 32nd Street SE helps Auburn fulfill its role as a Core City. It is also consistent with the 2012 King County Countywide Planning Policies for housing, including H-5 (adopt policies, strategies, actions and regulations at the local and countywide levels that promote housing supply, affordability and diversity…); H-9 (plan for housing that is accessible to major employment centers and affordable to the workforce in them so people of all incomes can live near or within reasonable commuting distance of their places of work…); and H- 12 (plan for residential neighborhoods that protect and promote the health and well-being of residents by supporting active living and healthy eating and by reducing exposure to harmful environments). 6. If the request is to change the land use designation of a specific property on the comprehensive land use map, the applicant must demonstrate one of the following: a. The current land use designation was clearly made in error or due to an oversight; b. The proposed land use designation is adjacent to property having a similar or compatible designation, or other conditions are present to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties; c. There has been a change in conditions since the current land use designation came into effect. Not Applicable. 6. Describe the proposed text amendment, indicating the exact nature of the change sought. If possible, provide suggested text language. If the proposal is to amend or delete existing text, include the applicable Conference of Plan citation and use underline to indicate new text and strikeout for text proposed for deletion. The requested amendments to Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-135 and the Academy Plan are attached as Attachment E and Attachment F, respectively. Page 32 of 465 ATTACHMENT A Page 33 of 465   Page 34 of 465 ATTACHMENT B Page 35 of 465 RE: Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment to Policy LU – 135 and calf Academy Special Planning Area Summary: Auburn Adventist Academy (AAA) is currently working with Creations Northwest on a long term lease to allow the development of the Academy parcels north of Auburn Way South and south of 32nd Street SE with the goal of creating multifamily use and a Senior Community. The multifamily use would provide workforce housing that will generate income to further the mission of AAA. The Academy Special Planning Area (Academy Plan) which was adopted by Resolution 2254 in 1991, references many potential uses of its property all intended to provide the environment necessary for a successful institution, including maintaining and creating income producing uses which would support our Mission over the long term. Over the last 30 years, the City of Auburn population has created a more urban reality that to which AAA and our vision today and tomorrow needs to adapt. Mission: Auburn Adventist Academy’s mission is to continuously create a strong private Christian education that is academically significant while providing whole life development, personal reliance, and personal accountability. Financial Support for our Mission: Pursuing this mission requires extensive programing, staffing, and facilities that are maintained on our 250+ acres. With only about one third of the Academy operating income coming from student tuition we are required to create subsidy from many sources. Over many years the governance of the Academy has sought ways to be better stewards of the Academy properties by creating income from the parcels not occupied by the church and school facilities (Supporting Parcels). Most private institutions create endowments that live in perpetuity to aid the organization’s mission through income. Following is an excerpt from Harvard’s endowment materials: “Harvard’s endowment, the University’s largest financial asset, is a perpetual source of support for the University and its mission of teaching and research. The endowment is made up of more than 13,000 funds; the two largest categories of funds support faculty and students, including professorships and financial aid for undergraduates, graduate fellowships, and student life and activities.” Today more than ever, we see the need to use the Supporting Parcels of our “property endowment” to create income to continue and advance the mission of our school. To that end, we are pursuing development of the parcels north of Auburn Way South and south of 32nd Street SE. The long-term income from this development will directly aid the mission of the Academy. Financial benefit can include support for student financial aid, new educational programs, additional faculty, and facilities’ maintenance and upgrades. Student Employment: Student employment has always been part of the Academy’s program. It teaches our students personal responsibility as well as life skills and specific job skills that many graduates build on. Over the years student 32229 Weyerhaeuser Way S Federal Way, WA 98001-9347 Telephone: (253) 681-6008 Fax: (253) 681-6009 Washingtonconference.org Page 36 of 465 employment has become less available as employment laws and academic requirements have changed. The proposed development will offer high quality student employment opportunities creating income from the community. The opportunities would include office, grounds, janitorial, and senior care. When the senior care facilities are completed, it is expected that, in addition to employment, there will be opportunities for students to graduate with certificates such as Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). Community Change: Over time, the city of Auburn has had significant population growth. In 1919, when the Academy was formed, the city of Auburn had a population of about 3,000. In 1991, when the Academy Plan was adopted, the city of Auburn had a population of about 33,000 and today, in thirty years, the population has grown by 54,000 (160%) to about 87,000. Twenty-nine years ago when the Academy Plan was developed, we indicated that the Academy would be giving more focus to active agricultural uses of land with possibilities of growing Christmas trees, corn, hay and a variety of consumable products. (See Academy Plan, Section 1.A.) Our community has changed and will continue to change; agriculture is no longer viable and we are now part of an urban community. Therefore, we have looked toward supporting uses which are more consistent with our urban setting. We believe our vision of creating a work-force- housing development and a Senior Community is beneficial to our AAA community as well as the broader community of the city of Auburn. Change in Services: As Section III.C of the Academy Plan makes evident, in 1991, lack of capacity in facilities limited development of the Supporting Parcels. Since that time, the city of Auburn has upgraded the key services. The city has advised that there is a 24 inch sewer trunk line in Academy Drive SE and 32nd Street SE that has adequate capacity to convey flow from the proposed multifamily site. There is an existing 6 inch water main along 37th Place SE stubbed at the north property line of the area proposed for multifamily uses, an existing 12 inch water main stubbed at the northeast corner, and an existing 12 inch water main along Auburn Way South to the south of the proposed multifamily parcels. (See March 23, 2020 Pre-Application Conference Summary, City File number PRE 20-0011.) We trust we are pursuing a vision that can be supported by the city of Auburn, together creating the opportunity for Auburn Adventist Academy to continue to excel. X Peter Fackenthall Auburn Adventist Academy's Principal X Douglas L. Bing Washington Conference of SDA's President Page 37 of 465 ATTACHMENT C Page 38 of 465 C:\Users\Robert\Dropbox (HTIP)\Auburn Investment and Development, LLC\5000 Site Development\Auburn Site 2-4-20.gxd -- 02/10/2020 -- 11:13 AM -- Scale 1 : 1200 Page 39 of 465 ATTACHMENT D Page 40 of 465 Heath & Associates, Inc. (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SCOPING INFORMATION Project Title: Auburn Site G: Phase I Project Description: Phase I of a residential development— 204 apartment units Address: 5000 Auburn Way, Auburn, WA 98092 Parcel(s): 272105-9117; -9055; -9079; -9086; -9090 Trip Generation: Phase Quantity Land Use Code Description AWDT Rate AM Peak Hour Rate PM Peak Hour Rate Pass-By Rate I 204 units 220 Multi-Family Low-Rise T = 7.56(X) -40.86 Ln(T) = 0.95 Ln(X) - 0.51 Ln(T) = 0.89 Ln(X) - 0.02 0% II 168 units 220 Multi-Family Low-Rise T = 7.56(X) -40.86 Ln(T) = 0.95 Ln(X) - 0.51 Ln(T) = 0.89 Ln(X) - 0.02 0% III Unknown - Senior Care Facility - - -- AWDT: Average Weekday Daily Trip Total Daily Trips 1501 Total AM Peak Hour Trips: 94 (22 Enter / 72 Exit) Total PM Peak Hour Trips: 111 (70 Enter / 41 Exit) Time Period to Evaluate: Weekday: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM; 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM Horizon Year: 2022 Background Growth: 2%1 Pipeline Projects: Brown’s Corner Left Turn Warrant: Will be analyzed where applicable Intersections to Study: 1.Auburn Way S & 32nd Street SE 2.Auburn Way S & Academy Dr SE 3.Auburn Way S & Project Entrance Preliminary Trip Distribution: See attached figure. May modify based on field counts. Additional Comments: 1.The TIA will only analyze Phase I of the proposed development 1 Growth rate derived from historical 2016 and 2018 city of Auburn turning movement counts taken at the nearby intersections of Auburn Way S & 32nd Street SE and Auburn Way S & Academy Drive SE Page 41 of 465 N FIGURE 1 HEATH & ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC AND CIVIL ENGINEERING AUBURN SITE G SITE PLAN 2 Page 42 of 465 3 Page 43 of 465 4 Page 44 of 465 5 Page 45 of 465 6 Page 46 of 465 7 Page 47 of 465 8 Page 48 of 465 9 Page 49 of 465 Prepared for: City of Auburn Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. Phone: (253) 926-6009 FAX: (253) 922-7211 E-Mail: Team@TC2inc.com WBE/DBE Intersection:Auburn Way S & 32nd St SE Date of Count:Wed 4/06/2016 Location:Auburn, Washington Checked By:Jess Time From North on (SB) From South on (NB) From East on (WB) From West on (EB) Interval Interval Auburn Way S Auburn Way S 32nd St SE 0 Total Ending at T L SRTL SRTL SRTL SR 7:15 A51573090 198 1 4 0 0 8 0 0 00 295 7:30 A 6 19 90 0 12 0 254 3 1 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 380 7:45 A 2 29 128 0 2 0 222 5 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 395 8:00 A 4 28 144 0 3 0 157 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 336 8:15 A55092060 147 1 1 1 0 610 0 00 352 8:30 A121289060 163 0 0 0 0 160 0 00 280 8:45 A121789060 142 2 3 1 0 150 0 00 266 9:00 A5997070 150 2 2 0 0 9 0 0 00 267 9:15 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:30 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:45 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Survey 51 179 802 0 51 0 1433 15 11 2 0 140 0 0 0 0 2571 Peak Hour: 7:15 AM to 8:15 AM Total 17 126 454 0 23 0 780 10 2 1 0 92 0 0 0 0 1463 Approach 580 790 93 0 1463 %HV 2.9%2.9%2.2%n/a 2.9% PHF 0.84 0.77 0.38 n/a 0.93 Auburn Way S 1452 580 872 0 Bike 0 0 454 126 0Ped 32nd St SE 92 0 Ped 0 0 93 Bike 0 1 229 0 0 0 Bike 0 0 7:15 AM to 8:15 AM 1Ped 136 0 PEDs Across:NS EW Ped 0 0 780 10 1580 1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volume INT 01 0Bike 0 PHF %HV INT 02 11 EB n/a n/a INT 03 0 455 790 Check WB 0.38 2.2% INT 04 0 In:1463 NB 0.77 2.9% INT 05 0 1245 Out:1463 SB 0.84 2.9% INT 06 0 Auburn Way S T Int.0.93 2.9% INT 07 0 Bicycles From: N S E W Conditions: INT 08 0 INT 01 0 INT 09 0 INT 02 0 INT 10 0 INT 03 0 INT 11 0 INT 04 0 INT 12 0 INT 05 0 00 101 INT 06 NO BIKES 0 Special Notes INT 07 0 INT 08 0 INT 09 0 INT 10 0 INT 11 0 INT 12 0 00 0 00 AUB16026M_85a 10 Page 50 of 465 Prepared for: City of Auburn Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. Phone: (253) 926-6009 FAX: (253) 922-7211 E-Mail: Team@TC2inc.com WBE/DBE Intersection:Auburn Way S & 32nd St SE Date of Count:Wed 4/06/2016 Location:Auburn, Washington Checked By:Jess Time From North on (SB) From South on (NB) From East on (WB) From West on (EB) Interval Interval Auburn Way S Auburn Way S 32nd St SE 0 Total Ending at T L SRTL SRTL SRTL SR 4:15 P 4 15 194 0 6 0 163 3 0 2 0 11 0 0 0 0 388 4:30 P 4 17 219 0 2 0 125 0 1 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 371 4:45 P 4 11 212 0 5 0 152 3 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 393 5:00 P 1 10 230 0 0 0 133 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 388 5:15 P 3 8 205 0 0 0 204 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 427 5:30 P 0 17 209 0 4 0 158 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 398 5:45 P 2 7 215 0 4 0 143 3 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 388 6:00 P 0 7 202 0 2 0 131 5 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 357 6:15 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Survey 18 92 1686 0 23 0 1209 14 1 2 0 107 0 0 0 0 3110 Peak Hour: 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM Total 8 46 856 0 9 0 647 3 0 0 0 54 0 0 0 0 1606 Approach 902 650 54 0 1606 %HV 0.9%1.4%n/a n/a 1.1% PHF 0.94 0.80 0.90 n/a 0.94 Auburn Way S 1603 902 701 3 Bike 0 0 856 46 0Ped 32nd St SE 54 0 Ped 0 0 54 Bike 0 0 103 0 0 0 Bike 0 0 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM 2Ped 49 0 PEDs Across:NS EW Ped 0 0 647 3 1708 1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volume INT 01 0Bike 1 PHF %HV INT 02 0 EB n/a n/a INT 03 22 856 650 Check WB 0.90 n/a INT 04 0 In:1606 NB 0.80 1.4% INT 05 0 1506 Out:1606 SB 0.94 0.9% INT 06 0 Auburn Way S T Int.0.94 1.1% INT 07 11Bicycles From: N S E W N U's S U's E U's W U's INT 08 0 INT 01 00 INT 09 0 INT 02 11 2 1 INT 10 0 INT 03 31 4 0 INT 11 0 INT 04 00 INT 12 0 INT 05 00 00 303 INT 06 00 Special Notes INT 07 00 INT 08 00 INT 09 0 INT 10 0 INT 11 0 INT 12 0 42 0 06 1000 AUB16026M_85p 11 Page 51 of 465 3UHSDUHGIRU&LW\RI$XEXUQ Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. 3KRQH  )$;  (0DLO7HDP#7&LQFFRP :%('%( ,QWHUVHFWLRQ$XEXUQ:D\6 QG6W6('DWHRI&RXQW:HG /RFDWLRQ$XEXUQ:DVKLQJWRQ &KHFNHG%\-HVV 7LPH )URP1RUWKRQ 6% )URP6RXWKRQ 1% )URP(DVWRQ :% )URP:HVWRQ (% ,QWHUYDO ,QWHUYDO $XEXUQ:D\6 $XEXUQ:D\6 QG6W6(7RWDO (QGLQJDW 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  7RWDO 6XUYH\                  3HDN+RXU $0 WR $0 7RWDO                  $SSURDFK  +9 QD  3+)   QD  $XEXUQ:D\6   0 %LNH  3HG QG6W6(  3HG  %LNH  0 %LNH $0 WR $0 3HG   3('V $FURVV16 (:3HG   1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volume ,17%LNH 0 3+)+9 ,17(%QD QD ,17&KHFN :%  ,17,Q1%  ,17 2XW6%  ,17123('6 $XEXUQ:D\6 7,QW  ,17%LF\FOHV)URP 1 6 ( :&RQGLWLRQV ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17  ,17 6SHFLDO1RWHV ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17    $8%70BD 12 Page 52 of 465 3UHSDUHGIRU&LW\RI$XEXUQ Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. 3KRQH  )$;  (0DLO7HDP#7&LQFFRP :%('%( ,QWHUVHFWLRQ$XEXUQ:D\6 QG6W6('DWHRI&RXQW:HG /RFDWLRQ$XEXUQ:DVKLQJWRQ &KHFNHG%\-HVV 7LPH )URP1RUWKRQ 6% )URP6RXWKRQ 1% )URP(DVWRQ :% )URP:HVWRQ (% ,QWHUYDO ,QWHUYDO $XEXUQ:D\6 $XEXUQ:D\6 QG6W6( 7RWDO (QGLQJDW 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  7RWDO 6XUYH\                  3HDN+RXU 30 WR 30 7RWDO                  $SSURDFK      +9 QD  3+)   QD  $XEXUQ:D\6   0 %LNH  3HG QG6W6(  3HG  %LNH  0 %LNH 30 WR 30 3HG   3('V $FURVV16 (:3HG   1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volume ,17%LNH0 3+)+9 ,17(%QD QD ,17&KHFN :%  ,17,Q1%  ,17 2XW6%  ,17$XEXUQ:D\6 7,QW  ,17%LF\FOHV)URP 1 6 ( :&RQGLWLRQV ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17  ,1712%,.(6  6SHFLDO1RWHV ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17    $8%70BS 13 Page 53 of 465 3014 Page 54 of 465 3115 Page 55 of 465 3UHSDUHGIRU&LW\RI$XEXUQ Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. 3KRQH  )$;  (0DLO7HDP#7&LQFFRP :%('%( ,QWHUVHFWLRQ$FDGHP\'U6( $XEXUQ:D\6 'DWHRI&RXQW:HG /RFDWLRQ$XEXUQ:DVKLQJWRQ &KHFNHG%\-HVV 7LPH )URP1RUWKRQ 6% )URP6RXWKRQ 1% )URP(DVWRQ :% )URP:HVWRQ (% ,QWHUYDO ,QWHUYDO $FDGHP\'U6($XEXUQ:D\6 $XEXUQ:D\6 7RWDO (QGLQJDW 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  7RWDO 6XUYH\                  3HDN+RXU $0 WR $0 7RWDO                  $SSURDFK  +9 QD  3+) QD   $FDGHP\'U6(   0 %LNH $XEXUQ:D\6 3HG $XEXUQ:D\6  3HG  %LNH 0  0 %LNH  $0 WR $0 3HG   3('V $FURVV16 (:3HG   1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volume ,17%LNH 0 3+)+9 ,17(%  ,17&KHFN :%  ,17,Q1%QD QD ,172XW6%  ,17123('6 7,QW  ,17%LF\FOHV)URP 1 6 ( :&RQGLWLRQV ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17  ,1712%,.(6  6SHFLDO1RWHV ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17    $8%70BD 16 Page 56 of 465 3UHSDUHGIRU&LW\RI$XEXUQ Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. 3KRQH  )$;  (0DLO7HDP#7&LQFFRP :%('%( ,QWHUVHFWLRQ$FDGHP\'U6( $XEXUQ:D\6 'DWHRI&RXQW:HG /RFDWLRQ$XEXUQ:DVKLQJWRQ &KHFNHG%\-HVV 7LPH )URP1RUWKRQ 6% )URP6RXWKRQ 1% )URP(DVWRQ :% )URP:HVWRQ (% ,QWHUYDO ,QWHUYDO $FDGHP\'U6(  $XEXUQ:D\6 $XEXUQ:D\6 7RWDO (QGLQJDW 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  7RWDO 6XUYH\                  3HDN+RXU 30 WR 30 7RWDO                  $SSURDFK      +9 QD  3+) QD   $FDGHP\'U6(   0 %LNH $XEXUQ:D\6  3HG $XEXUQ:D\6  3HG  %LNH 0  0 %LNH  30 WR 30 3HG   3('V $FURVV16 (:3HG   1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volume ,17%LNH 0 3+)+9 ,17(%  ,17&KHFN :%  ,17,Q1%QD QD ,172XW6%  ,177,QW  ,17%LF\FOHV)URP 1 6 ( :&RQGLWLRQV ,17  ,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17    ,1712%,.(6  6SHFLDO1RWHV ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17    $8%70BS 17 Page 57 of 465 1 - PDX\133979\254493\ALM\28624350.1 LU-135 Adventist Academy - Adopted under Resolution No. 2254 on November 14, 1991. The Auburn Adventist Academy is primarily a secondary school Special Planning Area (Adopted Area) is a multi-use campus operated by the Western Washington Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists. The Campus plays a large role in the Western Washington Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists’ private elementary and secondary education system in Washington and hosts many community events as well as an annual regional camp meeting for Adventists from Washington and around the world . The Campus previously housed Harris Pine Mill, a furniture manufacturer, for many years. The Mill provided financial benefit to the Academy’s budget and provided employment opportunities, learning experiences, and vocational education for Academy students . Since the school is sited on a larger complex that formerly housed a mill, t The Academy continues has also sought to include in its plan industrial uses that support the mission of the school financially. The industrial uses provide employment opportunities, learning experiences, and vocational education for students of the Academy. The reuse of existing mill buildings and redevelopment of buildings lost to a fire in 1989 are the focal points of the current industrial development. In addition to institutional and industrial uses, the Academy is also interested in agricultural uses for commercial and vocational purposes and currently operates a landing strip and associated aircraft hangars for student aviation and flight training. A single family subdivision is located to the south of the airstrip. In addition to these uses, the Academy wishes to allow development of uses such a multi- family and senior housing and assisted living and memory care which will generate perpetual revenue through a long-term land lease on a portion of the Campus lying generally north of Auburn Way South and south of 32 nd Street S.E. that will directly aid its mission. The financial benefit from these uses will allow funding an endowment, subsidize student tuition, provide financial aid for students needing tuition assistance, for new educational programs, for additional faculty, facilit y maintenance and upgrades, and other needs. The plan focuses on providesing predictability to planning, zoning, subdivision, and development decisions within the Special Planning Area (Adopted Area) made by the City. Page 58 of 465 ATTACHMENT F Page 59 of 465 1 - PDX\133979\254493\ALM\28104748.1 Proposed amendments to AUBURN ADVENTIST ACADEMY PLAN I. PLAN FRAMEWORK A PURPOSE OF THE PLAN The Comprehensive Plan for the City of Auburn was adopted in August 1986 and provides the overall vision and policy framework for the City. The Comprehensive Plan provides a mechanism, called Special Planning Areas, for detailed planning of large areas under single or coordinated management within the Community Serving Area of the City. Each Special Planning Area is to have a specific plan developed for it based on the goals, objectives and policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan. The Auburn Adventist Academy was designated as a Special Planning Area in that a number of unique uses occur at the Academy other than the school. The Auburn Adventist Academy is a private secondary school multi-use campus owned and operated by the Western Washington Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists. The Campus plays a large role in the Western Washington Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists’ private elementary and secondary education system in Washington and hosts many community events as well as an annual regional camp meeting for Adventists from Washington and around the world. The Campus previously housed Harris Pine Mill, a furniture manufacturer, for many years. The Mill provided financial benefit to the Academy’s budget and provided employment opportunities, learning experiences, and vocational education for Academy students. While this has historically been the main cause of the property, the Church also desires to utilize its property to sever other needs of the Church membership in a manner compatible with the school. One need is the development of an “Industrial Park” to utilize the buildings which remained after the closure of Harris Pine Mills and to replace those buildings The Academy continues to include in its plan industrial uses that support the mission of the school financially. The reuse of existing mill buildings and redevelopment of buildings Ddestroyed by the fire in 1989 are the focal points of the current industrial development. The Academy will also be giving more focus to active agricultural uses of land with possibilities of growing Christmas trees, corn, hay and a variety of consumable products. These ancillary activities of the Academy provide employment opportunities for its students. Whenever possible these employment opportunities also provide real life learning experiences and vocational education. Since the school is a boarding school, opportunities for the students to earn their support is particularly important. The Academy is interested in increasing the range of employment opportunities it now provides in order to diversify the student’s educational opportunities and to provide more employment to more students. Thus, the versatility in the use of land for school/industry programs is vital to the Academy needs. The Academy also provides a unique educational experience in aviation training through its In addition to institutional and industrial uses, the Academy also operatesion of a private landing strip on their its property and associated aircraft hangers for student aviation and flight training. A single family subdivision is located to the south of the airstrip. In addition to these uses, the Academy wishes to allow development of uses such a multi-family and senior housing, assisted living, and memory care which will generate a perpetual revenue that will directly aid its Page 60 of 465 2 - PDX\133979\254493\ALM\28104748.1 mission through a long-term land lease on a portion of the Campus. The financial benefit from these uses will allow funding an endowment, subsidize student tuition, provide financial aid for students needing tuition assistance, for new educational programs, for additional faculty, and facility maintenance and upgrades, and other needs not funded by student tuition. III. PLAN POLICIES A. LAND USE POLICIES A.1.2 Secondary uses shall be related to the Plan Purpose which is based on the Academy’s “Mission statement”. Excerpts of the Mission Statement, applicable to this Plan, are found within the “Auburn Academy Special Planning Area, Background Report,” prepared by the City of Auburn Planning Department in 1991. A.1.8 The area lying generally north of Auburn Way South and south of 32nd Street S.E. shall either be used for academic, including administrative offices; church, multi- family and senior housing, assisted living and memory care which will generate a perpetual revenue that will directly aid the Academy’s mission; residential to include nursing and retirement homes, recreational campground or agricultural and associated uses, excluding livestock. Other uses may involve retail sales and service, but on a limited basis. Page 61 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 1 of 8 SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Date Received: Physical Address: Auburn City Hall Annex, 2nd Floor 1 E Main St Mailing Address: 25 W Main St Auburn, WA 98001 Webpage & Application Submittal: www.auburnwa.gov applications@auburnwa.gov Phone and Email: 253-931-3090 permitcenter@auburnwa.gov Project Name: Parcel Number(s): A. Background [help] 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 2. Name of Applicant: Name of Agent (if applicable): 3. Address and phone number of Applicant: Address and phone number of Agent (if applicable): 4. Date Checklist prepared: Date(s) Checklist Revised: 5. Agency requesting checklist: 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable). 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Comprehensive Plan Text amendment to LU-135 and related amendments to Auburn Adventist Academy Special Planning Area (AAASPA). 2721059042 and surrounding area encompassing 68 parcels and 250 +/- Ac. See "I" Institutional Use District and AAASPA Comprehensive Plan text amendment to LU-135 and related amendments to Auburn Adventist Academy Special Planning Area (AAASPA).HT Industrial Properties, LLC Alison Moss 14020 SE Johnson Rd., Suite 102 Milwaukie, OR 97267; (503) 908-0563 700 Washington St., Suite 701 Vancouver, WA 98660; (206) 407-1563 06/03/20 City of Auburn To process the update to the Comprehensive Plan in the 2020 amendment cycle. Development that is allowed per the updated plan would follow under separate permits and SEPA review. proposal? If yes, explain. Continued use of the AAA Special Planning Area is anticipated. The described AAASPA uses will continue to be active and vibrant to financially support the Academy's mission. Critical Areas Assessment by Habitat Technologies dated July 9, 2019; Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping by Heath & Associates, Inc. None known City Council Approval of Comprehensive Plan text amendment. SEPA determination. No construction is proposed with this application. Future development will be permitted separately. Comprehensive Plan text amendment to Land Use Policy LU–135 and related text amendments to the Auburn Academy Special Planning Area adopted under Resolution 2254 and to clarify that uses providing perpetual revenue to the Western Conference of the Seventh Day Adventists supporting its educational mission are allowed. Page 62 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 2 of 8 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. B. Environmental Elements [help] 1. Earth [help] a. General description of the site: … flat, … rolling, … hilly, … steep slopes, … mountainous, … other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? c.What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 2. Air [help] a.What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. b.Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Auburn Adventist Academy campus is located generally north and east of Auburn Way South/ SR 164, via 32nd St SE and Academy Drive SE. The Academy address is 5000 Auburn Way South. The site is within portions of the NW, SW, NE and SE quarters of section 27 township 21 range 05. ■■ NE portions of the AASPA are near 40-50% According to NRCS soil map inventory the AAASPA is primarily Buckley gravelly silt loam (BU), the northern slope area is identified as Alderwood and Kitsap Soils (AkF), the southern area near Auburn Way is identified as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (AgC). There are no surface indications or known history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity. There is no development proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment proposal. Future development will be required to obtain City permits, including applicable SEPA reviews. N/A N/A N/A. There is no development proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment proposal. Future development will be required to obtain City permits, including applicable erosion and sediment control plans utilizing best management practices. This Comprehensive Plan text amendment will not result in any emissions to the air. None known. N/A. There is no development proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment proposal. Page 63 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 3 of 8 3.Water [help] a.Surface Water. [help] 1.Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. 3.Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. 4.Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. 6.Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. b. Ground Water. [help] 1.Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 2.Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals. . . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. c. Water runoff (including stormwater). 1.Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. 3. Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. Yes, the AAASPA is generally located between the White and Green rivers with a highway and approx 300' of elevation change, respectively, separating the site from those waterbodies. Habitat Technologies has identified a category IV wetland on site, see report. No work is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A N/A No, see FEMA Panels 53033C1266F and 53033C1267F N/A N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. Page 64 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 4 of 8 4. Plants [help] a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: … deciduous tree: … alder, … maple, … aspen, … other … evergreen tree: … fir, … cedar, … pine, … other … shrubs … grass … pasture … crop or grain … orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops … wet soil plants: … cattail, … buttercup, … bullrush, … skunk cabbage, … other … water plants: … water lily, … eelgrass, … milfoil, … other … other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. 5. Animals [help] a.Check any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. … Birds: … hawk, … heron, … eagle, … songbirds, … geese, … ducks, … crows, … other … Mammals: … deer, … bear, … elk, … beaver, … other … Fish: … bass, … salmon, … trout, … herring, … shellfish, … other b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. 6. Energy and Natural Resources [help] a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. None Known N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. None Known None Known corridors across the site and as all of Western Washington is part of the Pacific Flyway, those migratory birds are in the general area. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. None Known. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. No the proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendment will not affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. See the Habitat Technologies report that cites wildlife movement Page 65 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 5 of 8 7. Environmental Health [help] a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. 1. Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. 2. Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. 3. Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. 4. Describe special emergency services that might be required. 5. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: b.Noise. 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: 8. Land and Shoreline Use [help] a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? 1.Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. None Known N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. None Known N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. The AAASPA has frontage along Auburn Way South/SR 164 although noise from this road has not affected the Academy. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. The AAASPA is a multi use campus with educational, religious, industrial, residential and recreational uses. The Comprehensive Plan text amendment clarifies how those uses can operate and generate income for the Academy but does not change the types of uses allowed. The adjacent land uses, residential and residential transitional, are expected to remain unaffected by the AAASPA. Yes, agricultural uses associated with the Academy student programs has and will continue to occur on portions of the AAASPA. There are no resource lands of long-term commercial significance and no property within the farmland or forest tax land status that will be converted. so, how: N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. Page 66 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 6 of 8 c. Describe any structures on the site. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? f. What is the current Comprehensive Plan designation of the site? g. If applicable, what is the current Shoreline Master Program designation of the site? h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area? If so, specify. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: 9. Housing [help] a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: 10. Aesthetics [help] a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: 11. Light and Glare [help] a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? See the overall Academy site plan. There are many structures on the 250 +/- ac special planning area. This includes RV sites, 3 dorms, auditorium, green houses, 23 SF homes, church, retail store, swimming pool, elementary school, food and banquet facility, etc No "I" Institutional Academy adopted area N/A Yes, see the Critical Areas Assessment by Habitat Technologies. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. Future development will be permitted separately and will need to comply with City development and design standards as well as zoning and building codes. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. The AAASPA will continue agricultural uses. housing. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. It is likely that once approved future development will propose housing units for high to middle income and a senior community. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. The ability for future development proposals on the AAASPA would allow the City to provide more housing to help meet the housing needs of residents and seniors. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. Page 67 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 7 of 8 b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: 12. Recreation [help] a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation [help] a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers ? If so, specifically describe. b.Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. c.Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP), archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. 14. Transportation [help] a.Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. b.Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. None Known. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. Cameron park is located adjacent to the AAASPA. The Academy has recreational opportunities within its campus for students and these are also open to the public. No. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. No registered structures. The house at 5435 Auburn Way South was built in 1926, the inventory shows the eligible status as "not determined". Barn at 3709 Academy and the house at 5540 Auburn Way South were inventoried as "not eligible". No. There is a Native education center at 5602 Auburn Way South, just south of the AAASPA. DAHP provides an online search for registered and inventoried properties, known as WISAARD. WISAARD was reviewed for this checklist. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. The AAASPA is served by Auburn Way South/SR 164. Internal access is from a network of public roads including 32nd St SE, Academy Dr SE, Wyman Dr, Maple Drive. See the Overall academy site plan. Yes, there is a King County Metro bus stop on both sides of Auburn Way South at the intersection of 32nd St SE. Page 68 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 8 of 8 c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: 15. Public Services [help] a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. 16. Utilities [help] a. Check utilities currently available at the site: … electricity, … natural gas, … water, … refuse service, … telephone, … sanitary sewer, … septic system, … other b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. C. Signature [help] Signature: Name of Signee: Position and Agency/Organization: Date Submitted: N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. Future development will evaluate if any new improvements are necessary. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. See the Traffic Impact Analysis Scoping Information by Heath and Associates which quantifies trips associated with a future potential multi-family project. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. Any future development will need to mitigate for adverse transportation impacts as part of a separate City permitting process including a SEPA determination. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. This amendment allows the long term viability of the Academy. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. Future development will add to the tax base of the City which funds public services. N/A, no development is proposed with this Comprehensive Plan text amendment. The AAASPA is currently served by urban utilities. Future development will add to those services and through separate permitting availability and capacity of services will be verified. Cheryl Ebsworth Senior Planner Apex Engineering, LLC 06/05/2020 Page 69 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 11 of 12 D. Supplemental sheet for nonproject actions [HELP] (IT IS NOT NECESSARY to use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; pro- duction, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, ZLOGHUQHVVZLOGDQGVFHQLFULYHUVWKUHDWHQHGRUHQGDQJHUHGVSHFLHVKDELWDWKLVWRULFRU FXOWXUDOVLWHVZHWODQGVIORRGSODLQVRUSULPHIDUPODQGV" 5IF"""41"JTBNVMUJVTFDBNQVTXJUINBOZBMMPXFEVTFT5IJT$PNQSFIFOTJWF1MBOUFYUBNFOENFOU DMBSJGJFTIPXUIPTFVTFTDBOPQFSBUFBOEHFOFSBUFJODPNFGPSUIF"DBEFNZXIJDIIFMQTUIFNDPNFUP GSVJUJPO CVUJUEPFTOPUDIBOHFUIFUZQFTPGVTFTPDDVSSJOHPSBMMPXFEUPPDDVS"OZOFXEFWFMPQNFOUIBTB QPUFOUJBMGPSFSPTJPOBOETUPSNXBUFSSVOPGG FNJTTJPOTUPBJSGSPNDPOTUSVDUJPOFRVJQNFOUBOEGJSFQMBDF IFBUJOHBOEJODSFBTFECBDLHSPVOEOPJTF 'VUVSFEFWFMPQNFOUXPVMECFSFWJFXFEBTQBSUPGBTFQBSBUFQFSNJUUJOHQSPDFTTUPFOTVSFUIBU$JUZBOE4UBUF SFRVJSFNFOUTGPSBOZFNJTTJPOT UPYJDPSIB[BSEPVTTVCTUBODFTBOEOPJTFBSFOPUFYDFFEFE$PNNPO NJUJHBUJPOJODMVEFTCFTUNBOBHFNFOUQSBDUJDFTEVSJOHDPOTUSVDUJPO EFTJHOFETUPSNXBUFSTZTUFNT DSJUJDBM BSFBCVGGFSNBOBHFNFOU FOIBODFEMBOETDBQiOH BJSGJMUFSTPOJOEVTUSJBMQSPDFTTCVJMEJOHT NBJOUFOUBODFPG GBDJMJUJFT CVJMEJOHTXIJDINFFUFOFSHZDPEFTBOECVTJOFTTFTBOESFTJEFOUJBMDPNNVOJUJFTUIBUBEIFSFUPUIF $JUZOPJTFPSEJOBODFT"QQSPQSJBUFNFBTVSFTXPVMECFBQQMJFEUPGVUVSFEFWFMPQNFOUQFSNJUBQQSPWBMT 5IF$PNQSFIFOTJWF1MBOUFYUBNFOENFOUEPFTOPUQSPQPTFBOZJNQBDUUPQMBOUT BOJNBMT GJTIPSNBSJOF MJGF 'VUVSFEFWFMPQNFOUBQQMJDBUJPOTXPVMECFSFRVJSFEUPBEESFTTUIFFOWJSPONFOUBMDPODFSOTBOENFFUUIF $JUZPG"VCVSO5JUMFUPFOTVSFQPUFnUJBMOFHBUJWFJNQBDUTUPQMBOUT BOJNBMT GJTIPSNBSJOFMJGFBSF NJOJNJ[FE 5IF$PNQSFIFOTJWF1MBOUFYUBNFOENFOUEPFTOPUQSPQPTFBOZEFWFMPQNFOUTPEPFTOPUEFQMFUFFOFSHZ PSOBUVSBMSFTPVSDFT 'VUVSFEFWFMPQNFOUXJMMBEIFSFUPUIF4UBUFPG8BTIJOHUPOBOEUIF$JUZPG"VCVSOFOFSHZDPEFTGPS CVJMEJOH Page 70 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 12 of 12 Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. 5IF$PNQSFIFOTJWF1MBOUFYUBNFOENFOUIBTJEFOUJGJFEBOPOTJUFDBUFHPSZ*7XFUMBOE5IFSFJT OPVTFPSBGGFDUUPFOWJSPONFOUBMMZTFOTUJWFBSFBTPSBSFBTEFTJHOBUFEGPSHPWFSONFOUBMQSPUFDUJPO BTTPDJBUFEXJUIUIFUFYUBNFOENFOU 'VUVSFEFWFMPQNFOUBQQMJDBUJPOTXPVMECFSFRVJSFEUPBEESFTTUIFFOWJSPONFOUBMDPODFSOTBOENFFUUIF $JUZPG"VCVSO5JUMFUPFOTVSFQPUFOUJBMOFHBUJWFJNQBDUTUPTFOTUJWFBSFBTPSBSFBTEFTJHOBUFEGPS HPWFSONFOUBMQSPUFDUJPOBSFBWPJEFEPSNJOJNJ[FE 5IFQSPQPTFE$PNQSFIFOTJWF1MBOUFYUBNFOENFOUEPFTOPUBMUFSUIF"DBEFNZMBOEVTFEFTJHOBUJPOPS UIF**OTUJUVUJPOBM[POJOHEFTJHOBUJPO5IJTJNQSPWFTUIF"""41"hTMPOHUFSNWJBCJMJUZ CZBMMPXJOH GVOEJOHTPVSDFTUPLFFQQBDFXJUIJOEVTUSZOPSNTNBJOUBJOJOHUIFFYJTUi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and payment of impact fees GSPNEFWFMPQFNFOUTVQQPSUTQVCMJDTFSWJDFT%VSJOHQFSNJUSFWJFXEFGFDJFODJFT JGBOZ XPVMECF identiGJFEBOESFRVJSFEJNQSPWFNFOUTXPVMECFQSPWJEFEUPHBJOQFSNJUBQQSPWBMT 5IFSFJTOPLOPXODPOGMJDUXJUIMPDBM TUBUF PSGFEFSBMMBXTPSSFRVJSFNFOUTGPSUIFQSPUFDUJPOPGUIF FOWJSPONFOU Page 71 of 465 HABITAT TECHNOLOGIES wetlands, streams, fisheries, wildlife – mitigation and permitting solutions P.O. Box 1088, Puyallup, Washington 98371 253-845-5119 contact@habitattechnoligies.net CRITICAL AREAS ASSESSMENT Parcel 2721059117 Auburn Adventist Academy City of Auburn, King County, Washington prepared for Mr. Greg Gratias, Growth and Development Dept. @ Auburn Academy 5000 Auburn Way South Auburn, Washington 98092-7204 e-mail gagratias@gmail.com prepared by HABITAT TECHNOLOGIES P.O. Box 1088 Puyallup, Washington 98371-1088 253-845-5119 July 9, 2019 Page 72 of 465 2 19022 Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 3 1.1 PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION ........................................................................ 3 2.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION ........................................................................... 4 2.1 NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY ................................................................. 4 2.2 STATE OF WASHINGTON PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES .................... 4 2.3 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE .............. 4 2.4 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ........ 4 2.5 CITY OF AUBURN INVENTORY MAPPING ...................................................... 5 2.6 KING COUNTY MAPPING ................................................................................. 5 2.7 SOILS MAPPING ............................................................................................... 5 3.0 ONSITE ANALYSIS ............................................................................................... 5 3.1 CRITERIA FOR CRITICAL AREA IDENTIFICATION ......................................... 5 3.2 STUDY METHODS ............................................................................................ 8 3.2.a Soils ............................................................................................................ 9 3.2.b Hydrology .................................................................................................... 9 3.2.c Vegetation ................................................................................................. 10 3.2.d Wildlife Observations ................................................................................. 11 3.2.e State Priority Species ................................................................................ 12 3.2.f Federally Listed Species ........................................................................... 13 4.0 ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................... 13 4.1 IDENTIFIED CRITICAL AREAS ....................................................................... 13 4.1.a Wetlands ..................................................................................................... 13 4.1.b Field Ditches (streams) ............................................................................... 14 4.1.c Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas .......................................................... 15 5.0 SITE PLANNING ................................................................................................. 15 6.0 STANDARD OF CARE ........................................................................................ 16 7.0 FIGURES ............................................................................................................. 17 8.0 REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND LIST ........................................................... 18 9.0 APPENDIX A – HYDROLOGY MONITORING DATA .......................................... 20 10.0 APPENDIX B – WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET ............................................ 21 Page 73 of 465 3 19022 1.0 INTRODUCTION This document presents the culmination of activities and onsite evaluations undertaken to complete a Critical Areas Assessment Report (wetlands, surface water drainage corridors, fish and wildlife critical habitats) - within and immediately adjacent to Parcel 2721059117 (project site). The project site was located within the City of Auburn “Academy Special Planning Area” and defined within the City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan (Resolution No. 1702 dated August 18, 1986) and was associated within the existing Auburn Adventist Academy Facility located at 4987 Auburn Way South (SR164), within the City of Auburn, King County, Washington (Figure 1). The onsite assessment and characterization of specific critical areas was completed followed the methods and procedures defined in the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987 Manual) with the 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (2010 Supplement); Washington State Wetlands Rating System (2014 update); the State of Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Forest Practice Rules (WAC 222-16-030); and the City of Auburn Chapter 16.10 – Critical Areas. The evaluation and characterization of onsite and adjacent specific critical areas is a vital element in land use planning. The goal of this approach is to ensure that present and future proposed planned site development does not result in adverse environmental impacts to identified critical areas, their associated protective buffers, or local water quality. This document was designed to accommodate site planning and potential regulatory actions, and has been prepared for submittal to the City of Auburn and potentially other resource permitting agencies for critical areas verification and permitting actions. Please Note: this assessment did not include an evaluation of potential floodplain elevations, septic suitability, erosion potential, stormwater, or geotechnically hazardous critical areas. 1.1 PROJECT SITE DESCRIPTION The primary project site - Parcel 2721059117 - was irregular in shape, generally flat, and approximately 22.6-acres in size. This project site had been regularly used and managed for the production of agricultural corps for several decades. This utilization and management had included routine plowing, discing, annual crop planting and harvesting, and cover crop seeding. In addition, this agricultural utilization and management had included the creation and management of a pattern of drainage ditches to allow for the undertaking of spring crop management actions. The project site was located within the Auburn Adventist Academy Facility, generally surrounded by existing development of church facilities and a mixture of single-family homesites, and was well served by public and private services. The southern boundary of the project site was dominated by the Auburn Way South (SR164) roadway corridor. Page 74 of 465 4 19022 Directions to Project Site: From the City of Auburn continue generally southeasterly on Auburn Way South (SR164). From Auburn Way South turn northeasterly onto 32nd Street SE. The project site is to the east of the Auburn Adventist Academy Facility immediately to the east of the intersection of Auburn Way South and 32nd Street SE. 2.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2.1 NATIONAL WETLAND INVENTORY The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) Mapping completed by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 2). This mapping resource did not identify any wetlands or drainage corridors within the project site. This mapping resource did identify the White River offsite generally to the south and a number of surface water drainage ditches offsite to the north and northeast that lead to the Green River Corridor offsite generally to the north. 2.2 STATE OF WASHINGTON PRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES The State of Washington Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) Mapping was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 3). This mapping resource did not identify any priority habitats or species within the project site. This mapping resource did identify the White River offsite generally to the south and a number of surface water drainage ditches offsite to the north and northeast that lead to the Green River Corridor offsite generally to the north similar to the NWI Mapping noted above. Both the White River and the Green River were also identified to provide habitats for state listed species. 2.3 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE The State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) SalmonScape Mapping was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 4). This mapping resource did not identify any drainage corridors or water bodies within the project site. 2.4 STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES The State of Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Water Type Mapping was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 5). This mapping resource did not identify any drainage corridors or water bodies within the project site. Page 75 of 465 5 19022 2.5 CITY OF AUBURN INVENTORY MAPPING The City of Auburn Inventory Mapping (1990) was reviewed as a part of this assessment. This mapping resource identified that the project site may contain possible wetland areas based other existing resource mapping. 2.6 KING COUNTY MAPPING The King County Mapping was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 6). This mapping resource did not identify any wetlands or streams within the project site. This mapping resource did identify the White River offsite generally to the south and a number of surface water drainage ditches offsite to the north and northeast t hat lead to the Green River Corridor offsite generally to the north similar to the NWI Mapping noted above. 2.7 SOILS MAPPING The Soil Mapping Inventory completed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service was reviewed as a part of this assessment (Figure 7). This mapping resource identified the soil throughout the majority of the project site as Buckley gravelly silt loam (Bu). The Buckley soils series is defined as poorly drained, as formed in the Osceola mudflow, and as listed as “hydric.” This mapping resource also identified the soil along the southern boundary of the project site – along Auburn Way South – as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam (AgC). The Alderwood soil series is defined as moderately well drained, as formed in glacial till, and to exhibit inclusion of hydric soil. 3.0 ONSITE ANALYSIS 3.1 CRITERIA FOR CRITICAL AREA IDENTIFICATION For the purpose of this assessment the critical areas reviewed included wetlands, surface water drainage corridors (streams), and fish and wildlife habitats which may be located within or immediately adjacent to the project site. This assessment did not include an evaluation of potential floodplain elevations, septic suitability, erosion potential, stormwater, or geotechnically hazardous critical areas. Wetlands: Wetlands are transitional areas between aquatic and upland habitats. In general terms, wetlands are lands where the extent and duration of saturation with water is the primary factor determining the nature of soil development and the types of plant and animal communities living in the soil and on its surface (Cowardin, et al., Page 76 of 465 6 19022 1979). Wetlands are generally defined within land use regulations as "areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions" (United States Army Corps of Engineers, 1987). Wetlands exhibit three essential characteristics, all of which must be present for an area to meet the established criteria (United States Army Corps of Engineers, 1987 and United States Army Corps of Engineers, 2010). These essential characteristics are: 1. Hydrophytic Vegetation: The assemblage of macrophytes that occurs in areas where inundation or soil saturation is either permanent or of sufficient frequency and duration to influence plan occurrence. Hydrophytic vegetation is present when the plant community is dominated by species that require or can tolerate prolonged inundation or soil saturation during the growing season. 2. Hydric Soil: A soil that formed under conditions of saturation, flooding, or ponding long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper parts. Most hydric soils exhibit characteristic morphologies that result from repented periods of saturation or inundation. These processes result in distinctive characteristics that persist in the soil during both wet and dry periods. 3. Wetland Hydrology: Permanent or periodic inundation, or surface soil saturation, at least seasonally. Wetland hydrology indicators are used in combination with indicators of hydric soil and hydrophytic vegetation to define the area. Wetland hydrology indications provide evidence that the site has a continuing wetland hydrology regime. Where hydrology has not been altered vegetation and soils provide strong evidence that wetland hydrology is present. The City of Auburn defines “wetlands” as those areas where water covers or saturates the soil; frequently this water is only visible or apparent during the spring and may be dry during other seasons. Wetlands are commonly referred to as swamps, marshes, and bogs and may occur near streams, in depressions, or simply isolated from other critical areas. Wetlands are classified into four types, based on a combination of habitat, water quality, and flood-flow-reduction functions. 1. “Category I wetlands” include wetlands which: represent unique or rare wetland types, are more sensitive to disturbance than most wetlands, are relatively undisturbed and contain ecological attributes that are impossible to replace within a human lifetime, or provide a high level of functions, as indicated by a rating system score of 23 points or more on the classification system referenced (Ecology Publication No. 14-06-029, or as revised and approved by Ecology). Page 77 of 465 7 19022 2. “Category II wetlands” provide high levels of some functions, being difficult, though not impossible to replace, and have a moderately high level of functions, scoring between 20 and 22 points. 3. “Category III wetlands” have a score between 16 and 19 points, generally have been disturbed in some way and are often less diverse or more iso lated from other natural resources in the landscape than Category II wetlands. 4. “Category IV wetlands” have the lowest levels of functions, scoring fewer than 16 points and are often heavily disturbed. These are wetlands that should be able to be replaced, or in some cases be improved. However, experience has shown that replacement cannot be guaranteed in any specific case. These wetlands may provide some important functions, and should be protected to some degree. 5. “Artificially created wetlands” are purposefully created landscape features, ponds and storm water detention or retention facilities. Artificially created wetlands do not include wetlands created as mitigation, and wetlands modified for approved land use activities. Purposeful creation must be demonstrated to the director through documentation, photographs, statements and/or other evidence. Artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites are excluded from regulation under this se ction. Surface Water Drainages (Streams): The City of Auburn defines “streams” as those natural channels where water flows at least part of the year. Streams are classified into four types, based on their flow and capacity to support fish. Artificial channels (e.g., ditches) are generally not protected by the City of Auburn, unless they are fish-bearing or convey a stream that previously occurred naturally in that location. 1. “Type S streams” are those natural streams identified as “shorelines of the state” under Chapter 90.58 RCW and the city of Auburn shoreline master program. 2. “Type F streams” are those natural streams that are not Class I streams and are either perennial or intermittent and have one of the following characteristics: a. Contain fish habitat; or b. Has significant recreational value, as determined by the director. 3. “Type Np streams” are those natural streams with perennial (year-round) or intermittent flow and do not contain fish habitat. 4. “Type Ns streams” are those natural streams and drainage swales with channel width less than two feet taken at the ordinary high water mark, that do not contain fish habitat. Page 78 of 465 8 19022 5. “Intentionally created streams” are those manmade streams defined as such in these regulations, and do not include streams created as mitigation. Purposeful creation must be demonstrated through documentation, photographs, statements and/or other evidence. Intentionally created streams may include irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales and canals. Intentionally created streams are excluded from regu lation under this section, except manmade streams that provide “critical habitat,” as designated by federal or state agencies, for salmonids. Fish and Wildlife Habitat Areas: Fish and wildlife habitat conservation are defined by the City of Auburn as those areas that provide food, water, nesting and rearing areas, cover, and movement opportunities for fish and wildlife. These areas are often located in conjunction with other critical areas such as wetlands and streams. Wetland habitat areas are classified into three types, based on the amount of support they provide. Habitat areas shall be classified as critical, secondary or tertiary according to the criteria in this section: 1. “Critical habitat” are those habitat areas which meet any of th e following criteria: a. The documented presence of species or habitat listed by federal or state agencies as “endangered,” “threatened,” or “sensitive”; or b. The presence of unusual nesting or resting sites such as heron rookeries; c. Category I wetlands, as defined in these regulations; or d. Type S streams, as defined in these regulations. 2. “Secondary habitat” is habitat which is valuable to fish and wildlife and supports a wide variety of species due to its undisturbed nature, a diversity of plant species and structure, presence of water, or the area’s size, location, or seasonal importance. 3. “Tertiary habitat” is habitat which is not classified as critical or secondary. It is habitat which, while supporting some wildlife and performing other valuable functions, does not currently possess essential characteristics necessary to support diverse wildlife communities. Tertiary habitat also includes habitat which has been created purposefully by human actions to serve other or multiple purposes, such as open space areas, landscape amenities, and detention facilities. 3.2 STUDY METHODS Habitat Technologies initially completed a series of onsite assessment beginning in the fall of 2018. However, because the project site was generally flat and regularly managed for the production of agricultural crops the project team conclude that an assessment of early growing seasonal hydrology patters would be required to provide a Page 79 of 465 9 19022 more accurate depiction of potential project site features. As outlined below, onsite assessment completed during the spring of 2019 allowed for an evaluation and characterization of early growing season hydrology patterns as a way to more fully understand whether or not the wetland criteria are being met within the project site. 3.2.a Soils As noted throughout the project site the surface soil had been modified by prior and ongoing land use actions generally associated with agricultural production. Such ongoing actions have included a combination of once to twice a year surface plowing/discing generally to a depth between eight (8) to ten (10) inches and somewhat regular (at lease very few years) plowing generally to a depth of 20 inches. As such, the majority of the soil across the site (as defined at the established soil test holes - with the exception of C2 and D2 - created to monitoring spring hydrology pattens) exhibited a typical soil profile dominated by the following characteristics. These characteristics were identified as not meeting the hydric soils criteria. SOIL DEPTH SOIL MATRIX COLOR REDOX FEATURES COMMENTS 0-9” 10YR 3/2 none Mixed loam with small gravels. Area of surface plowing. 9-22” 10YR 4/3 1% to 2% 10YR 4/6 mottles in matrix Mixed gravelly loam. Area of surface plowing. The soil characteristics document as hydrology test holes C2 and D2 exhibited the following. These characteristics were identified as meeting the hydric soils criteria and located within a shallow depression. SOIL DEPTH SOIL MATRIX COLOR REDOX FEATURES COMMENTS 0-12” 10YR 2/2 none Mixed loam with small gravels. Area of surface plowing. 12-22” 10YR 4/2 2% to 10% 10YR 4/6 mottles in matrix Mixed gravelly loam. Area of surface plowing. 3.2.b Hydrology Onsite hydrology patterns across the project site were monitored at 18 established test plots between the last week of February 2019 and the end of April 2019 (Appendix A). Using a hand-held GPS a new test hole was dug at each monitoring location during each site visit. Because of the onsite agricultural actions shallow monitoring tubes (slotted 2-inch PVC) were not used. Upon the excavation of each test hole the level of free water and the level of soil saturate were documented following a period of a minimum of 30 minutes with the test hole open. Page 80 of 465 10 19022 Those test holes that exhibited soil saturation within 12-inches of the surface for a consecutive period of greater than 14 days were considered to meet the establish wetland hydrology criteria. As noted through the monitoring program, with the exception of the test holes defined to meet the wetland hydrology criteria, early spring growing season appeared to follow seasonal rainfall events and the majority of the test holes were identified to drain following seasonal rainfall events. However, the test holes defined to meet the wetland hydrology criteria (C2 and D2) appeared to remain saturated at or near the surface even during periods of limited rainfall. The project site was also well served by a pattern of generally excavated perimeter ditches. The ditch along the northern boundary of the project site directed seasonal rainfall generally to the west and then to the southwest to enter the ditch along the edge of the Auburn Way South roadway. These two ditches met at the very western point of the project site and conveyed seasonal surface water runoff generally to the west to either enter a culvert associated with Auburn Way South or to continue northwesterly along Auburn Way South. An excavated perimeter ditch was also noted along the eastern boundary of the project site. This ditch conveyed stormwater runoff from the residential community to the east, from Auburn Way South, and from the project site to the north. This eastern ditch appeared to eventually continue offsite to the northeast through a series of ditches. 3.2.c Vegetation The project site was actively managed for the production of agricultural crops which included plowing, discing, seeding, harvesting, and cover crop establishment. As such, the vegetation throughout the majority of the project site varied between the winter cover crop and the summer production crop. The plant community generally along the outer perimeter ditches was also somewhat managed through mowing and included Himalayan blackberry (Rubus procera), Scots broom (Cytisus scoparius), evergreen blackberry (Rubus laciniatus), sapling red alder (Alnus rubra), domestic apple (Pyrus spp.), willow (Salix spp.), Douglas spiraea (Spiraea douglasii), and rose (Rosa spp.), orchard grass (Dactylis glomerate), bluegrass (Poa spp.), quackgrass (Agropyron repens), colonial bentgrass (Agrostis tenuis), meadow foxtail (Alopecurus pratensis), brome (Bromus spp.), fescue (Festuca spp.), velvet grass (Holcus lanatus), ryegrass (Lolium spp.), bracken fern (Pteridium aquilium), Canadian thistle (Cirsium arvensis), bull thistle (Cirsium vulgare), plantain (Plantago major), sheep sorrel (Rumex acetosella), common dandelion (Taraxacum officinale), daisy (Bellis perennis), buttercup (Ranunculus repens), clover (Trifolium spp.), scouring rush (Equisetum hymale), reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea), and cats ear (Hypochaeris glabra). Page 81 of 465 11 19022 The plant community within the shallow topographic depressions included bluegrass, quackgrass, colonial bentgrass, redtop bentgrass (Agrostis alba), meadow foxtail, fescue, velvet grass, Canadian thistle, plantain, buttercup (Ranunculus repens), softrush (Juncus effusus), toad rush (Juncus bufonius), curled dock (Rumex crispus), and reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea). These areas also had starts of red alder (Alnus rubra), black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), willow (Salix spp.), Douglas spiraea (Spiraea douglasii), and rose (Rosa spp.). This plant community was identified as hydrophytic in character (i.e. typical of wetlands). Onsite site management had retained a single, large Oregon white oak (Quercus garryana) tree generally within the middle of the project site. The understory appeared managed through mowing and was dominated by a variety of grasses, herbs, and shrubs starts. 3.2.d Wildlife Observations Wildlife species observed directly and indirectly within the project site, along with those species previously observed within the area, and those species that would reasonably be expected to use the habitats provided within and immediately adjacent to the project site included red tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis), common raven (Corvus corax), American crow (Corvus brachynchos), American robin (Turdus migratorius), dark eyed junco (Junco hyemalis), Steller’s jay (Cyanocitta stelleri), Northern flicker (Colaptes auratus), mourning dove (Zenaida macroura), black capped chickadee (Parus atricapillus), chestnut backed chickadee (Parus rufescens), black-capped chickadee (Parus atricapillus), golden crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia atricapilla), purple finch (Carpodacus purpureus), Canada goose (Branta canadensis), song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), white crowned sparrow (Zonotrichia leucophrys), rufous hummingbird (Selasphorus rufus), Anna’s hummingbird (Calytpe anna), coyote (Canis latrans), raccoon (Procyon lotor), eastern cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), opossum (Didelphis virginianus), deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), shrew (Sorex spp.), mole (Scapanus spp.), bats (Myotis spp.), Norway rat (Rattus norvegicus), eastern gray squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus), shrew (Sorex spp.), and common garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis). The project site was not identified and has not been documented to provide suitable spawning/juvenile rearing habitats for amphibians or direct habitats for salmonid fish species. Wildlife Movement Corridors: The project site was surrounded by urban development that included a mixture of church facility, residential developments, and public roadways. As identified by onsite wildlife trails, small and medium sized mammals appeared to be moving throughout the project site and into adjacent urbanized areas. The project site is also within the general area of the migratory movement of passerine birds. Page 82 of 465 12 19022 3.2.e State Priority Species Several species identified by the State of Washington as “Priority Species” were observed onsite or potentially may utilize the habitats provided by the project site. Priority species require protective measures for their survival because of population status, sensitivity to habitat alteration, and/or recreational, commercial, or tribal importance. Game Species: “Game species” are regulated by the State of Washington through recreational hunting bag limits, harvest seasons, and harvest area restrictions. Observed or documented “game species” within and adjacent to the project site included mourning dove and Canada goose. State Monitored: State Monitored species are native to Washington but require habitat that has limited availability, are indicators o f environmental quality, require further assessment, have unresolved taxonomy, may be competing with other species of concern, or have significant popular appeal. No State Monitored species were identified or documented within or adjacent to the project site. State Candidate: State Candidate species are presently under review by the State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) for possible listing as endangered, threatened, or sensitive. No State Candidate species were identified or documented within or adjacent to the project site. State Sensitive: State Sensitive species are native to Washington and is vulnerable to declining and is likely to become endangered or threatened throughout a significant portion of its range without coo perative management or removal of threats. No State Sensitive species were identified or documented within or adjacent to the project site. State Threatened: State Threatened species means any wildlife species native to the state of Washington that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout a significant portion of its range within the state without cooperative management or removal of threats. The project site did not appear to provide direct critical habitats for State Threatened species. State Endangered: State endangered species means any species native to the state of Washington that is seriously threatened with extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range within the state. The project site did not appear to provide direct critical habitats for State Endangered species. Page 83 of 465 13 19022 3.2.f Federally Listed Species No federally listed endangered, threatened, or sensitive species were observed or have been documented to utilize the habitats provide d within the project site. Both the White River offsite to the south and the Green River offsite to the north have been documented to provide habitats for: SPECIES FEDERAL STATUS Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Threatened Puget Sound Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) Threatened Native char - bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) Threatened Coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) Species of concern Bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) Species of concern 4.0 ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS 4.1 IDENTIFIED CRITICAL AREAS Critical Areas determination was based on specific criteria in accordance with the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (1987 Manual) with the 2010 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (2010 Supplement); the Washington State Wetlands Rating System (WDOE 2014 version); the State of Washington Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) Forest Practice Rules (WAC 222-16-030); and the City of Auburn Chapter 16.10 – Critical Areas. Based on these methods – in particular the early growing season hydrology patterns - one (1) area within the project site was identified to exhibit all three of the established wetland criteria (Figure 8). This assessment did not identify any regulated streams or fish and wildlife habitat areas within or immediately adjacent to the project site. 4.1.a Wetlands Wetland A was identified within a shallow depression in the southeastern portion of the project site. Wetland A was actively managed as a part of the ongoing agricultural production throughout the project site to include regular plowing/discing, seeded, harvest, and cover crop rotation. Wetland A was identified as approximately 0.25 acres in total size and as meeting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) criteria for classification as palustrine, emergent, seasonally saturated, farmed (PEMEf). Wetland A was also was identified to meet the criteria for designation as a City of Auburn Category IV Wetland. Wetland A achieved a total functions score of 13 points utilizing Page 84 of 465 14 19022 the 2014 Washington State Department of Ecology (WDOE) Wetland Rating Form for Western Washington (Hruby 2014) (Appendix B). The standard City of Auburn protective buffer for a Category IV Wetland is 40 feet in width with the implementation of the potential impact minimization measures outlined in ACC 16.10.090(E)(1)(a)(ii) or 50 feet in width without the minimization measures (below). Disturbance Required Measures to Minimize Impacts Lights – Direct lights away from wetland Noise – Locate activity that generates noise away from wetland – If warranted, enhance existing buffer with native vegetation plantings adjacent to noise source – For activities that generate relatively continuous, potentially disruptive noise, such as certain heavy industry or mining, establish an additional 10-foot heavily vegetated buffer strip immediately adjacent to the activity Toxic runoff – Route all new, untreated runoff away from wetland while ensuring wetland is not dewatered – Establish covenants limiting use of pesticides within 150 feet of wetland – Apply integrated pest management Storm water runoff – Retrofit storm water detention and treatment for roads and existing adjacent development – Prevent channelized flow from lawns that directly enters the buffer – Use Low Intensity Development techniques Change in water regime – Infiltrate or treat, detain, and disperse into buffer new runoff from impervious surfaces and new lawns Pets and human disturbance – Use privacy fencing or plant dense vegetation to delineate buffer edge and to discourage disturbance using vegetation appropriate for the ecoregion – Place wetland and its buffer in a separate tract or protect with a long-term conservation easement Dust – Use best management practices to control dust 4.1.b Field Ditches (streams) As noted above, the project was well served by a pattern of generally excavated and maintained perimeter ditches. The ditch along the northern boundary of the project site directed seasonal rainfall generally to the west and then to the southwest to enter the Page 85 of 465 15 19022 ditch along the edge of the Auburn Way South roadway. These two ditches met at the very western point of the project site and conveyed seasonal surface water runoff generally to the west to either enter a culvert associated with Auburn Way South or to continue northwesterly along Auburn Way South. An excavated perimeter ditch was also noted along the eastern boundary of the project site. This ditch conveyed stormwater runoff from the residential community to the east, from Auburn Way South, and from the project site to the north. This eastern ditch appeared to eventually continue offsite to the northeast through a series of ditches. This pattern of field ditches appeared best defined based on historical aerial photos and onsite assessment as “intentionally created” and routinely managed as a part of the ongoing agricultural production activities throughout the project site. In addition, these field ditches were not observed and have not been documented to provide “critical habitat” - as designated by federal or state agencies - for salmonids (genius Oncorhynchus). As defined by the City of Auburn such intentionally created ditches (streams) are excluded from regulation under the provisions of the City of Auburn Chapter 16.10 – Critical Areas. 4.1.c Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas The City of Auburn has defined Fish and Wildlife Conservation Areas as either critical, secondary, or tertiary. The project site was not identified as “critical habitat” because the project site has not been documented to provide habitats for species listed by federal or state agencies as endangered, threatened, or sensitive; as not providing unusual nesting or resting sites; and as not containing Category 1 Wetlands or Type S Streams. The project site was also not identified a “secondary habitat” because the project site does not provide valuable habitats for wide variety of species generally associated with undisturbed areas, a diversity of plant species and structure, the presence of water, the site location, and seasonal importance. The project site was identified to provide – while limited - “tertiary habitat.” The project site does not currently possess essential characteristics necessary to support diverse wildlife communities. 5.0 SITE PLANNING A potential future Selected Site Development Action has not been formulated for Parcel 2721059117. Pending such site planning activities the project site shall continue to be managed for the production of agricultural crops. Page 86 of 465 16 19022 6.0 STANDARD OF CARE This document has been completed by Habitat Technologies for use by the Auburn Adventist Academy. Prior to extensive site planning the defined critical habitats should be reviewed and verified by the City of Auburn personnel and potentially other resource and permitting agencies. Habitat Technologies has provided professional services that are in accordance with the degree of care and skill generally accepted in the nature of the work accomplished. No other warranties are expressed or implied. Habitat Technologies is not responsible for design costs incurred before this document is approved by the appropriate resource and permitting agencies. Bryan W. Peck Wetland Biologist Thomas D. Deming, PWS Habitat Technologies Page 87 of 465 17 19022 7.0 FIGURES Page 88 of 465 K in g C oun ty Date : 3/23/20 20 Notes: ±The informati on included on this map has been c ompil ed by King County s taff from a variety of sources and issubject to change without notice. King County makes no repr esentations or warr anties, ex press or implied,as to accurac y, completeness, timel iness, or rights to the us e of such information. T hi s doc ument i s not intendedfor use as a s urvey product. Ki ng County shall not be l iable for any general , special, indirect, incidental, orconsequential damages i ncl uding, but not li mited to, lost revenues or los t profits resulting from the us e or mi sus eof the information contained on this map. Any sale of thi s map or informati on on this map is prohi bited exc ept bywritten permi ss i on of Ki ng County. Figure 1 Site Vici nity Page 89 of 465 Figure 2 NWI Mapping U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Standards and Support Team,wetlands_team@fws.gov Wetlands Estuarine and Marine Deepwater Estuarine and Marine Wetland Freshwater Emergent Wetland Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland Freshwater Pond Lake Other Riverine March 23, 2020 0 0.2 0.40.1 mi 0 0.35 0.70.175 km 1:1 4,275 This page was produced by the NWI mapperNational Wetlands Inventory (NWI) This map is for general reference only. The US Fish and Wildlife Service is not responsible for the accuracy or currentness of the base data shown on this map. All wetlands related data should be used in accordance with the layer metadata found on the Wetlands Mapper web site. Page 90 of 465 SOURCE DATASET:WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFEPRIORITY HABITATS AND SPECIES REPORTREPORT DATE:P200325101841PHSPlusPublic03/25/2020 10.19Query ID:Priority AreaCommon NameAccuracySource EntityOccurrence TypeResolutionNotesSource DateSite NamePHS Listing StatusScientific NameSource DatasetState StatusMgmt RecommendationsMore Information (URL)Sensitive DataFederal StatusGeometry TypeSource RecordDISCLAIMER. This report includes information that the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) maintains in a central computer database. It is not an attempt to provide you with an official agency responseas to the impacts of your project on fish and wildlife. This information only documents the location of fish and wildlife resources to the best of our knowledge. It is not a complete inventory and it is important to note that fishand wildlife resources may occur in areas not currently known to WDFW biologists, or in areas for which comprehensive surveys have not been conducted. Site specific surveys are frequently necesssary to rule out thepresence of priority resources. Locations of fish and wildlife resources are subject to vraition caused by disturbance, changes in season and weather, and other factors. WDFW does not recommend using reports more thansix months old.03/25/2020 10.191Page 91 of 465 WDFW Test Map Sou rces: Esri, HERE, Garmin , USGS , Intermap, INCRE ME NT P, NRCan ,Esri Japan, ME TI, E sri Ch ina (Hong K on g), E sri K orea, Esri (Thaila nd), PH S Re po rt C lip Ar ea PT LN PO LY AS MAPPED SECTION QTR -TW P TO WN SH IP Marc h 2 5, 2 02 0 0 0.3 0.60.15 mi 0 0.55 1.10.275 km 1:19,8 42 Page 92 of 465 Fig ure 4 WDFW Sal monsca pe Map pin g US GS/NHDEsri, HERE, G armin , (c) O pe nSt re etMap cont ributo rs, a nd the GI S usercommunitySource: Esri, Digita lG lobe , G eoE ye, Ea rt hsta r Ge ogra phics, CNES/A irb usDS, USDA, US GS, A eroG RID, IGN, and the GI S User Co mmun ity All Salmo nScap e Species March 2 3, 2 02 0 0 0.1 5 0.30.075 mi 0 0.2 0.40.1 km 1:9,02 8 Page 93 of 465 Source: Esri,DigitalGlobe, Map Symbols Forest Practices Water Type Map ¯ End of Fish orLast Fish? "Manmade Barrier*Natural Fish Barrier Start and End Point of SurveyedReach[[New Stream F Proposed Water Type Stream Removalxxx Break between water typesFN Extreme care was used during the compilation of this map to ensureits accuracy. However, due to changes in data and the need torely on outside information, the Department of Natural Resourcescannot accept responsibility for errors or omissions, and therefore, there are no warranties that accompany this material.Date: 3/23/2020 Time: 12:53:59 PM Additional Information Legal Description S28 T21.0N R05.0E, S27 T21.0N R05.0E 0 0.1Miles Page 94 of 465 Kin g C oun ty Date : 3/23/20 20 Notes: The informati on included on this map has been c ompil ed by King County s taff from a variety of sources and issubject to change without notice. King County makes no repr esentations or warr anties, ex press or implied,as to accurac y, completeness, timel iness, or rights to the us e of such information. T hi s doc ument i s not intendedfor use as a s urvey product. Ki ng County shall not be l iable for any general , special, indirect, incidental, orconsequential damages i ncl uding, but not li mited to, lost revenues or los t profits resulting from the us e or mi sus eof the information contained on this map. Any sale of thi s map or informati on on this map is prohi bited exc ept bywritten permi ss i on of Ki ng County. Leg end Pa rc els Po tentiallandslide ha za rdareas (20 16 , s eeexplanation--->) Er os ion h az ar d(19 90 SAO) Se ism ic ha za rd(19 90 SAO) Co al mine h az ar d(19 90 SAO) St rea m (19 90 SA O) cla ss 1 cla ss 2 pe ren nia l cla ss 2 sa lmon id cla ss 3 unc las s ifie d Wetlan d (1 99 0SAO) Se ns itive a re anotice on title FEMAprelimina ryfloodway FEMAprelimina ry 1 00 -ye ar floo dpla in Str eams Figu re 6 King County Mapping ± Page 95 of 465 Soil Map—King County Area, Washington (Figure 7 Soils Mapping) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 3/23/2020 Page 1 of 352361405236230523632052364105236500523659052366805236140523623052363205236410523650052365905236680563030563120563210563300563390563480563570563660563750563840563930 563030 563120 563210 563300 563390 563480 563570 563660 563750 563840 563930 47° 16' 50'' N 122° 10' 0'' W47° 16' 50'' N122° 9' 16'' W47° 16' 31'' N 122° 10' 0'' W47° 16' 31'' N 122° 9' 16'' WN Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 10N WGS84 0 200 400 800 1200 Feet 0 50 100 200 300 Meters Map Scale: 1:4,220 if printed on A landscape (11" x 8.5") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Page 96 of 465 MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Water Features Streams and Canals Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: King County Area, Washington Survey Area Data: Version 15, Sep 16, 2019 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jul 29, 2018—Jul 22, 2019 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Soil Map—King County Area, Washington (Figure 7 Soils Mapping) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 3/23/2020 Page 2 of 3 Page 97 of 465 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI AgC Alderwood gravelly sandy loam, 8 to 15 percent slopes 4.9 17.1% Bu Buckley gravelly silt loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes 23.9 82.9% Totals for Area of Interest 28.8 100.0% Soil Map—King County Area, Washington Figure 7 Soils Mapping Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 3/23/2020 Page 3 of 3 Page 98 of 465 ★ MN 15°29' Wetland Boundary Figure 8 Site Graphic 200 ft Page 99 of 465 18 19022 8.0 REFERENCE AND BACKGROUND LIST Adamus, P.R., E.J. Clairain Jr., R.D. Smith, and R.E. Young. 1987. Wetland Evaluation Technique (WET); Volume II: Methodology, Operational Draft Technical Report Y-87, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Cowardin, Lewis M. et al, 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Office of Biological Services, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, FWS/OBS-79/31. Hitchcock, C.L., A. Cronquist. 1977. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press. Seattle, Washington. Hruby, T. 2012. Calculation Credits and Debits for Compensatory Mitigation in Wetlands of Western Washington, Final Report. March 2012. Washington State Department of Ecology publication #10-06-11. Hruby, T. 2014. Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington: 2014 Update. (Publication #14-06-029). Olympia, WA: Washington Department of Ecology. Lichvar,R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetlands Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X. http://wetland-plands. Usace.army.mil/ Reppert, R.T., W. Sigleo, E. Stakhiv, L. Messman, and C. Meyers. 1979. Wetland Values - Concepts and Methods for Wetland Evaluation. Research Report 79-R1, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Institute for Water Resources, Fort Belvoir, Virginia. United States Army Corps of Engineers, 1987. Wetlands Delineation Manual. Technical Report Y-87-1, US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. March 1987. United States Army Corps of Engineers. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0), Environmental Laboratory ERDC/EL TR-08-13. US Climate Data, 2015 http://www.usclimatedata.com/climate/tacoma/washington /united-states/uswa0441/0441/2014/1 USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service Plants Database, 2015 (for hydrophytic plan classification): http://plants.usda.gov/ Page 100 of 465 19 19022 United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Web Soil Survey. 2016 http://vewsoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/newfeatures.2.3.htm. US Fish and Wildlife Service National Wetland Inventory Mapper, 2016 (for NWI wetland mapping): http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/Data/Mapper.html. Washington State Department of Ecology. 1997. Washington State Wetlands Identification and Delineation Manual. Publication Number 96-94. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Priority Habitats and Species Maps 2016 http://wdfw.wa.gov/mapping/phs/ Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife SalmonScape Mapping System, 2016 (for fish presence): http://apps.wdfw.wa.gov/salmonscape/map.html Washington State Department of Natural Resources FPARS Mapping System, 2016 (for stream typing): http://fortess.wa.gov/dnr/app1/fpars/viewer.htm Page 101 of 465 20 19022 9.0 APPENDIX A – HYDROLOGY MONITORING DATA Page 102 of 465 King C oun ty, Eag le Vie w Tech n ol ogi es, In c. Hydr ology Test Ho les Date: 3 /25 /20 20 Notes: Th e infor matio n in clu de d on t his map has been comp ile d b y Kin g Count y staf f from a variety of source s an d is su bject to cha ng ewithout n otice. Kin g Co unt y makes no re present ations o r wa rra nties, exp re ss o r im plied , a s to accu ra cy, complet en ess, t ime lin ess,or rig hts to the use of such informa tion . This d ocu me nt is not intended for u se as a survey pr od uct. King Cou nty shall n ot be lia blefor a ny g en er al, sp ecial, indirect, incide ntal, o r conse qu en tial damag es including , but not limited to , lost revenu es or lo st profitsresulting from th e use or m isu se of t he info rmat ion cont aine d on this map . An y sale of this map or in formation o n t his map isprohibited except by written p er mission of King County.± Page 103 of 465 Parcel 2721059117 – Spring 2019 Hydrology Monitoring Measurement of soil saturation from surface. Dry = no saturation to 24 inches of depth. Field plowed for spring seeding April 2, 2019. FREE = level of free water in test hole. PLOT 2/22/19 2/25/19 3/1/19 3/6/19 3/9/19 3/12/19 3/15/19 3/19/19 3/22/19 A1 dry dry -18.0 -12.0 -14.0 Sat -4.0 Free -11.0 Sat -11.0 Free -16.0 -14.5 -14.0 A2 dry dry dry -13.0 -16.0 Sat -6.5 Free -12.0 -13.0 -16.0 -15.0 A3 -19.0 dry dry -14.0 -15.5 Sat -5.5 Free -10.0 -12.5 -16.0 -17.0 A4 -17.5 -18.5 -18.5 -14.5 -14.5 Sat -8.5 Free -13.0 -11.5 -13.5 -13.0 A5 -18.0 -17.5 -16.5 -12.5 -15.5 Sat -11.5 Free -17.0 -13.5 -13.5 -14.5 B1 -15.5 -16.5 -17.5 -14.5 -15.0 Sat -11.0 Free -16.0 Sat -12.0 Free -16.0 -16.0 -15.0 B2 -16.0 -15.0 -14.0 -13.5 -14.0 Sat -9.0 Free -15.0 -13.5 -15.0 -15.5 B3 dry dry -17.0 -16.5 -16.5 Sat -11.5 Free -14.0 -14.5 -15.5 -14.5 B4 -17.0 dry -16.0 -14.0 -14.0 Sat -7.0 Free -10.5 -15.0 -16.0 -17.0 B5 -17.5 -16.5 -15.5 -13.0 -14.0 Sat -11.0 Free -14.0 -15.5 -17.0 -16.5 C1 -16.0 -15.0 -13.5 Sat -11.5 Free -17.0 Sat -12.0 Free -14.0 Sat -9.0 Free -14.0 -13.0 -14.0 -14.5 C2 -14.5 -14.0 -12.0 Sat -6.0 Free -10.0 Sat -7.5 Free -10.0 Sat 0.0 Free -1.0 Sat -3.5 Free -7.0 Sat -6.5 Free -9.0 Sat -8.5 Free -13.0 C3 -17.0 -16.0 -17.0 -13.0 -14.5 Sat -7.5 Free -12.0 Sat -11.5 Free -15.0 -14.5 -15.5 C4 -14.5 -15.5 -16.5 -14.5 -14.5 Sat -8.5 Free -12.0 -15.5 -15.5 -14.5 D1 -15.0 -15.0 -14.0 -13.0 -14.0 Sat -6.0 Free -11.5 -16.0 -17.0 -16.0 D2 Sat -12.0 Free -18.0 Sat -9.0 Free -13.0 Sat -7.5 Free -12.0 Sat -4.5 Free -8.0 Sat -7.5 Free -14.0 Sat 0.0 Free -3.0 Sat -5.5 Free -11.0 Sat -5.5 Free -12.0 Sat -5.0 Free -12.0 D3 -16.0 -14.0 -13.0 Sat -11.0 Free -17.0 -13.0 Sat -4.0 Free -7.0 -14.5 -15.0 -15.5 E1 -15.5 -14.5 -15.5 -12.5 -14.5 Sat -4.5 Free -11.0 -14.5 -15.0 -14.0 Page 104 of 465 PLOT 3/26/19 3/29/19 4/2/19 4/5/19 4/8/19 4/12/19 4/16/19 4/19/19 4/22/19 A1 -13.5 -15.5 -15.5 Sat -11.0 Free -16.0 Sat -4.0 Free -11.0 Sat -2.0 Free -10.0 Sat -9.0 Free -14.0 -14.0 -16.0 A2 -13.0 -14.0 -14.0 Sat -8.0 Free -16.0 Sat -2.0 Free -6.0 Sat -1.0 Free -6.0 Sat -11.0 Free -17.0 -14.0 -16.0 A3 -15.0 -15.0 -15.0 Sat -11.5 Free -18.0 Sat -4.5 Free -9.0 Sat -1.5 Free -5.0 Sat -11.5 Free -17.0 -14.5 -17.5 A4 -13.0 -16.0 -16.0 Sat -8.0 Free -18.0 Sat -3.0 Free -9.0 Sat -0.5 Free -3.0 -12.5 -13.5 -18.0 A5 -15.5 -16.5 -16.5 Sat -8.5 Free -16.0 Sat -5.5 Free -14.0 Sat -2.5 Free -7.0 -13.5 -15.5 -18.5 B1 -14.0 -14.0 -14.0 Sat -6.5 Free -11.0 Sat -4.5 Free -11.0 Sat -2.5 Free -10.0 Sat -7.5 Free -14.0 -13.5 -16.0 B2 -13.5 -14.5 -14.5 Sat -11.5 Free -17.0 Sat -8.5 Free -15.0 Sat -3.5 Free -10.0 Sat -7.5 Free -14.0 -15.5 -17.5 B3 -18.5 dry dry -14.5 Sat -9.5 Free -18.0 Sat -6.5 Free -14.0 -16.5 -18.5 dry B4 -16.0 -18.0 -18.0 Sat -10.0 Free -19.0 Sat -10.0 Free -17.0 Sat -5.0 Free -14.0 Sat -12.0 Free -20.0 -14.0 -16.0 B5 -16.5 -17.5 -17.5 Sat -8.5 Free -19.0 Sat -8.5 Free -14.0 Sat -3.5 Free -9.0 -13.5 -14.5 -17.5 C1 -13.0 -15.0 -15.0 Sat -7.0 Free -16.0 Sat -7.0 Free -11.0 Sat -3.0 Free -8.0 Sat -11.0 Free -17.0 -14.0 -15.0 C2 Sat-9.0 Free-14.0 Sat-10.0 Free-14.0 Sat-10.0 Free-13.0 Sat -0.0 Free -4.0 Sat -0.0 Free -3.0 Sat -0.0 Free -3.0 Sat -0.0 Free -3.0 Sat -7.0 Free -14.0 Sat -12.0 Free -18.0 C3 -14.5 -15.5 -15.5 Sat -9.5 Free -17.0 Sat -5.5 Free -13.0 Sat -2.5 Free -5.0 Sat -9.5 Free -15.0 -13.5 -17.5 C4 -14.0 -14.5 -14.5 Sat -6.5 Free -17.0 Sat -3.5 Free -11.0 Sat -2.5 Free -2.5 Sat -11.5 Free -16.0 -15.5 -18.5 D1 -15.0 -15.5 -15.5 Sat -5.5 Free -17.0 Sat -2.5 Free -13.0 Sat -2.0 Free -8.0 -13.0 -13.0 -18.0 D2 Sat-4.0 Free-11.0 Sat-5.5 Free-11.0 Sat-5.5 Free-9.0 Sat -0.0 Free -4.0 Sat -0.0 Free -3.5 Sat -0.0 Free -1.0 Sat -0.0 Free -1.0 Sat -6.0 Free -12.0 Sat -11.0 Free -17.0 D3 -14.5 -15.5 -15.5 Sat -6.5 Free -19.0 Sat -4.5 Free -11.0 Sat -2.4 Free -7.0 -14.5 -15.5 dry E1 -16.0 -15.0 -15.0 Sat -7.0 Free -16.0 Sat -4.0 Free -15.0 Sat -3.0 Free -15.0 -14.0 -16.0 dry Page 105 of 465 Page 106 of 465 21 19022 10.0 APPENDIX B – WETLAND RATING WORKSHEET Page 107 of 465 ★ MN 15°29' Wetland Figure A1 25 ft Page 108 of 465 ★ MN 15°29' Wetland 150 Feet Boundary Figure A2 50 ft Page 109 of 465 ★ MN 15°29' Wetland Figure A3 200 ft Page 110 of 465 ★ MN 15°29' Wetland 1 KM Boundary Figure A4 500 ft Page 111 of 465 Figure A5 WA Dept. of Ecology© 2020 Microsoft Corporation © 2020 DigitalGlobe ©CNES (2020)Distribution Airbus DS © 2020 HERE March 25, 2020 0 0.1 0.20.05Miles K AssessedWaters/Sediment Water Category 5 - 303d Category 4C Category 4B Category 4A Category 2 Category 1 Sedim ent Category 5 - 303d Category 4C Category 4B Category 4A Category 2 Category 1 WQ Standards Page 112 of 465 Figure A6 WA Dept. of Ecology© 2020 Microsoft Corporation © 2020 DigitalGlobe ©CNES (2020)Distribution Airbus DS © 2020 HERE March 25, 2020 0 0.25 0.50.125Miles K AssessedWaters/Sediment Water Category 5 - 303d Category 4C Category 4B Category 4A Category 2 Category 1 Sedim ent Category 5 - 303d Category 4C Category 4B Category 4A Category 2 Category 1 WQ Improvement ProjectsApproved In Development WQ Standards Page 113 of 465 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 1 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Score for each function based on three ratings (order of ratings is not important) 9 = H,H,H 8 = H,H,M 7 = H,H,L 7 = H,M,M 6 = H,M,L 6 = M,M,M 5 = H,L,L 5 = M,M,L 4 = M,L,L 3 = L,L,L RATING SUMMARY – Western Washington Name of wetland (or ID #): _________________________________ Date of site visit: _____ Rated by____________________________ Trained by Ecology?__ Yes ___No Date of training______ HGM Class used for rating_________________ Wetland has multiple HGM classes?___Y ____N NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map ______________________________________ OVERALL WETLAND CATEGORY ____ (based on functions___ or special characteristics___) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS _______Category I – Total score = 23 - 27 _______Category II – Total score = 20 - 22 _______Category III – Total score = 16 - 19 _______Category IV – Total score = 9 - 15 FUNCTION Improving Water Quality Hydrologic Habitat Circle the appropriate ratings Site Potential H M L H M L H M L Landscape Potential H M L H M L H M L Value H M L H M L H M L TOTAL Score Based on Ratings 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY Estuarine I II Wetland of High Conservation Value I Bog I Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest I Coastal Lagoon I II Interdunal I II III IV None of the above Page 114 of 465 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 2 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington Depressional Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods D 1.4, H 1.2 Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1.1, D 4.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) D 2.2, D 5.2 Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3 Riverine Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Ponded depressions R 1.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) R 2.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2 Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure) R 4.1 Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) R 3.1 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) R 3.2, R 3.3 Lake Fringe Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants L 1.2 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to another figure) L 2.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) L 3.3 Slope Wetlands Map of: To answer questions: Figure # Cowardin plant classes H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3 Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants (can be added to figure above) S 4.1 Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, S 5.1 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) S 3.3 Page 115 of 465 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 3 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? NO – go to 2 YES – the wetland class is Tidal Fringe – go to 1.1 1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? NO – Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES – Freshwater Tidal Fringe If your wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands. 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. NO – go to 3 YES – The wetland class is Flats If your wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ___The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size; ___At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). NO – go to 4 YES – The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ____The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), ____The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks, ____The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. NO – go to 5 YES – The wetland class is Slope NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). 5. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? ____The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river, ____The overbank flooding occurs at least once every 2 years. For questions 1-7, the criteria described must apply to the entire unit being rated. If the hydrologic criteria listed in each question do not apply to the entire unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 1-7 apply, and go to Question 8. Page 116 of 465 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 4 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 NO – go to 6 YES – The wetland class is Riverine NOTE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a topographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at some time during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO – go to 7 YES – The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO – go to 8 YES – The wetland class is Depressional 8. Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACK AND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating system if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM class to use in rating Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary of depression Depressional Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE If you are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply to your wetland, or if you have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Page 117 of 465 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 5 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Water Quality Functions - Indicators that the site functions to improve water quality D 1.0. Does the site have the potential to improve water quality? D 1.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with no surface water leaving it (no outlet). points = 3 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outlet. points = 2 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 1 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. points = 1 D 1.2. The soil 2 in below the surface (or duff layer) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions).Yes = 4 No = 0 D 1.3. Characteristics and distribution of persistent plants (Emergent, Scrub-shrub, and/or Forested Cowardin classes): Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area points = 5 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > ½ of area points = 3 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants > 1/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants <1/10 of area points = 0 D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal ponding or inundation : This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual. Area seasonally ponded is > ½ total area of wetland points = 4 Area seasonally ponded is > ¼ total area of wetland points = 2 Area seasonally ponded is < ¼ total area of wetland points = 0 Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12-16 = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the water quality function of the site? D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in questions D 2.1 -D 2.3? Source_______________ Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 or 4 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 3.0. Is the water quality improvement provided by the site valuable to society? D 3.1. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 mi) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub-basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 3.3. Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quality (answer YES if there is a TMDL for the basin in which the unit is found)? Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for D 3 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Page 118 of 465 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 6 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 DEPRESSIONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Hydrologic Functions - Indicators that the site functions to reduce flooding and stream degradation D 4.0. Does the site have the potential to reduce flooding and erosion? D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water outflows from the wetland: Wetland is a depression or flat depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) points = 4 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing outletpoints = 2 Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch points = 1 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 0 D 4.2. Depth of storage during wet periods: Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest part. Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 5 Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft from surface or bottom of outlet points = 3 The wetland is a “headwater” wetland points = 3 Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft (6 in) points = 0 D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to storage in the watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself. The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit points = 5 The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit points = 3 The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit points = 0 Entire wetland is in the Flats class points = 5 Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 12-16 = H 6-11 = M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page D 5.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support hydrologic functions of the site? D 5.1. Does the wetland receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 5.2. Is >10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 5.3. Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land uses (residential at >1 residence/ac, urban, commercial, agriculture, etc.)? Yes = 1 No = 0 Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 3 = H 1 or 2 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page D 6.0. Are the hydrologic functions provided by the site valuable to society? D 6.1. The unit is in a landscape that has flooding problems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the highest score if more than one condition is met . The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down -gradient into areas where flooding has damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds):  Flooding occurs in a sub-basin that is immediately down-gradient of unit. points = 2  Surface flooding problems are in a sub-basin farther down-gradient. points = 1 Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub-basin. points = 1 The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that the water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood. Explain why _____________ points = 0 There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. points = 0 D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control plan? Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Value If score is: 2-4 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Page 119 of 465 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 13 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 These questions apply to wetlands of all HGM classes. HABITAT FUNCTIONS - Indicators that site functions to provide important habitat H 1.0. Does the site have the potential to provide habitat? H 1.1. Structure of plant community: Indicators are Cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Up to 10 patches may be combined for each class to meet the threshold of ¼ ac or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked. ____Aquatic bed 4 structures or more: points = 4 ____Emergent 3 structures: points = 2 ____Scrub-shrub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) 2 structures: points = 1 ____Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0 If the unit has a Forested class, check if: ____The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub-canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20% within the Forested polygon H 1.2. Hydroperiods Check the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover more than 10% of the wetland or ¼ ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). ____Permanently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 ____Seasonally flooded or inundated 3 types present: points = 2 ____Occasionally flooded or inundated 2 types present: points = 1 ____Saturated only 1 type present: points = 0 ____Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland ____Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland ____Lake Fringe wetland 2 points ____Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points H 1.3. Richness of plant species Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ft 2. Different patches of the same species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not have to name the species. Do not include Eurasian milfoil, reed canarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle If you counted: > 19 species points = 2 5 - 19 species points = 1 < 5 species points = 0 H 1.4. Interspersion of habitats Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or mudflats) is high, moderate, low, or none. If you have four or more plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high. None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams in this row are HIGH = 3points Page 120 of 465 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 14 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 H 1.5. Special habitat features: Check the habitat features that are present in the wetland. The number of checks is the number of points. ____Large, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> 4 in diameter and 6 ft long). ____Standing snags (dbh > 4 in) within the wetland ____Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 m) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 m) ____Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered where wood is exposed) ____At least ¼ ac of thin-stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg-laying by amphibians) ____Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of strata) Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Site Potential If score is: 15-18 = H 7-14 = M 0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the site? H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly abuts wetland unit). Calculate: % undisturbed habitat + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] = _______% If total accessible habitat is: > 1/3 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3 20-33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2 10-19% of 1 km Polygon points = 1 < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland. Calculate: % undisturbed habitat + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2] = _______% Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches points = 2 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches points = 1 Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon points = 0 H 2.3. Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If > 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points = (- 2) ≤ 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity points = 0 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 4-6 = H 1-3 = M < 1 = L Record the rating on the first page H 3.0. Is the habitat provided by the site valuable to society? H 3.1. Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest score that applies to the wetland being rated. Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2  It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page)  It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists)  It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species  It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources  It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within 100 m points = 1 Site does not meet any of the criteria above points = 0 Rating of Value If score is: 2 = H 1 = M 0 = L Record the rating on the first page Page 121 of 465 Wetland name or number ______ Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 15 Rating Form – Effective January 1, 2015 WDFW Priority Habitats Priority habitats listed by WDFW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp. http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/00165/wdfw00165.pdf or access the list from here: http://wdfw.wa.gov/conservation/phs/list/) Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat.  Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha).  Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report).  Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock.  Old-growth/Mature forests: Old-growth west of Cascade crest – Stands of at least 2 tree species, forming a multi- layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200 years of age. Mature forests – Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old-growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest.  Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 – see web link above).  Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other.  Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non-forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 161 – see web link above).  Instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources.  Nearshore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report – see web link on previous page).  Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human.  Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation.  Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 m), composed of basalt, andesite, and/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs.  Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 20 in (51 cm) in western Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft (6 m) long. Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere. Page 122 of 465 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SCOPING INFORMATION - AUGUST 25, 2020 Project Title: Auburn Site G Project Description: Residential development encompassing 396 mid-rise apartment units and 224 units of senior living Address: 5000 Auburn Way, Auburn, WA 98092 Parcel(s): 272105-9117; -9055; -9079; -9086; -9090 Trip Generation: Phase Quantity Land Use Code Description AWDT Rate AM Peak Hour Rate PM Peak Hour Rate Pass-By Rate I 252 units 221 Multi-Family Mid-Rise 5.44 0.36 0.44 0% II 144 units 221 Multi-Family Low-Rise 5.44 0.36 0.44 0% III 224 units 255 Continuing Care Community 2.40 0.14 0.16 0% AWDT: Average Weekday Daily Trip Total Daily Trips 2692 Total AM Peak Hour Trips: 174 (58 Enter / 116 Exit) Total PM Peak Hour Trips: 210 (120 Enter / 90 Exit) Time Period to Evaluate: Weekday: 7:00 AM - 9:00 AM; 4:00 PM - 6:00 PM Horizon Year: 2026 Background Growth: 2%1 Pipeline Projects: Brown’s Corner Left Turn Warrant: Will be analyzed at the northern access on Auburn Way S. Auburn Way S is a classified Principal Arterial and requires a total of 82’ of right-of-way (typ.) and a five-lane cross section. A center lane may be required as part of frontage improvements. 1 Growth rate derived from historical 2016 and 2018 city of Auburn turning movement counts taken at the nearby intersections of Auburn Way S & 32nd Street SE and Auburn Way S & Academy Drive SE HEATH & ASSOCIATES, INC Transportation and Civil Engineering 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 1 Page 123 of 465 Access: Access to the site is proposed via two driveways on Auburn Way S. A deviation request will need to be submitted as this is not the lowest class of available roadway access. Further, a separate deviation will be required should more than one access be proposed along Auburn Way S, if not required by VFRA Intersections to Study: 1.Auburn Way S & North Access (full-movement) 2.Auburn Way S & South Access (right-in/right-out) 3.Auburn Way S & 32nd Street SE Preliminary Trip Distribution: See attached figures. Based primarily on traffic counts and distribution patterns when looking at the aggregate turning movements from both 32nd Street SE and Academy Drive. Additional Comments: 1.The TIA will analyze full-buildout of all Phases of the proposed development. This scoping package is intended to support the proposed Comprehensive Plan update and a full Traffic Impact Analysis will be required. 2.Access to the site is proposed via two driveways extending northeast from Auburn Way S. The southern access will be restricted to right-in, right-out turn movements. The northern access will provide separate outbound right and left turn-lanes. As discussed above, deviations will be required for one or more accesses via Auburn Way S 3.All Phase III senior community/memory care units are proposed to be defined under ITE Land Use Code 255 – Continuing Care Retirement Community as the land use encompasses all elements of the proposed facility (i.e., independent living, assisted living and skilled nursing care). 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 2 Page 124 of 465 N FIGURE 1 HEATH & ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC AND CIVIL ENGINEERING AUBURN SITE G SITE PLAN 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 3 Page 125 of 465 N FIGURE 2 HEATH & ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC AND CIVIL ENGINEERING AUBURN SITE G EXISTING AM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES SITE A U B U R N W A Y S ACADEMY DR SE32ND S T S E 33RD ST SEWYMAN DR164 1 1 0 0 1 0 8 8 3 5 5 0 1 3 2 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 4 Page 126 of 465 N FIGURE 3 HEATH & ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC AND CIVIL ENGINEERING AUBURN SITE G EXISTING PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES SITE A U B U R N W A Y S ACADEMY DR SE32ND S T S E 33RD ST SEWYMAN DR164 6 4 3 4 6 4 7 8 9 7 4 2 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 5 Page 127 of 465 N FIGURE 4 HEATH & ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC AND CIVIL ENGINEERING AUBURN SITE G AM PEAK HOUR TRIP DISTRIBUTION & ASSIGNMENT SITE A U B U R N W A Y S ACADEMY DR SE32ND S T S E 33RD ST SEWYMAN DR164 NEW AM PEAK HOUR TRIPS INBOUND: 58 VPH OUTBOUND: 116 VPH 70% 30% 2 4 5 1 2 3 5 5 7 3 5 1 2 2 4 0 4 1 0 0 0 8 1 4 1 0 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 6 Page 128 of 465 N FIGURE 5 HEATH & ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC AND CIVIL ENGINEERING AUBURN SITE G PM PEAK HOUR TRIP DISTRIBUTION & ASSIGNMENT SITE A U B U R N W A Y S ACADEMY DR SE32ND S T S E 33RD ST SEWYMAN DR164 NEW PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS INBOUND: 120 VPH OUTBOUND: 90 VPH 70% 30% 1 9 1 1 2 5 2 7 4 4 2 7 2 5 1 9 0 8 4 0 0 0 6 3 8 4 0 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 7 Page 129 of 465 N FIGURE 6 HEATH & ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC AND CIVIL ENGINEERING AUBURN SITE G AM PEAK HOUR PIPELINE VOLUMES SITE A U B U R N W A Y S ACADEMY DR SE32ND S T S E 33RD ST SEWYMAN DR164 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 8 8 0 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 8 Page 130 of 465 N FIGURE 7 HEATH & ASSOCIATES TRAFFIC AND CIVIL ENGINEERING AUBURN SITE G PM PEAK HOUR PIPELINE VOLUMES SITE A U B U R N W A Y S ACADEMY DR SE32ND S T S E 33RD ST SEWYMAN DR164 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 9 Page 131 of 465 AUBURN SITE G TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SCOPING APPENDIX 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 10 Page 132 of 465 AUBURN SITE G TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SCOPING ITE TRIP GENERATION REPORT 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 11 Page 133 of 465 Trip Generation SummaryOpen Date:Analysis Date:3/26/20203/26/2020Project:Auburn Site GAlternative: Alternative 1Phase:ITE Land UseEnter Exit Enter ExitEnter ExitTotalTotal Total***Weekday Average Daily TripsWeekday AM Peak Hour ofAdjacent Street TrafficWeekday PM Peak Hour ofAdjacent Street Traffic221 Phase 2 - Mid-Rise Apartments144 Dwelling Units392 391 783 14 38 52 38 25 63221 Phase 1 - Mid-Rise Apartments252 Dwelling Units686 685 1371 24 67 91 68 43 111255 Phase 3 - Continuing Care224 Units269 269 538 20 11 31 14 22 36Unadjusted Volume1347 1345 269258 116 174120 90 210Internal Capture Trips0 0 00 0 00 0 0000 000 0001347 1345 269258 116 174120 90 210Pass-By TripsVolume Added to Adjacent StreetsTotal Weekday Average Daily Trips Internal Capture = 0 PercentTotal Weekday AM Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic Internal Capture = 0 PercentTotal Weekday PM Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic Internal Capture = 0 PercentP. 1TRIP GENERATION 10, TRAFFICWARE, LLCSource: Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual 10th Edition- Custom rate used for selected time period.*2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 12Page 134 of 465 AUBURN SITE G TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SCOPING PIPELINE 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 13 Page 135 of 465 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 14 Page 136 of 465 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 15 Page 137 of 465 AUBURN SITE G TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SCOPING TRAFFIC COUNTS 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 16 Page 138 of 465 Prepared for: City of Auburn Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. Phone: (253) 926-6009 FAX: (253) 922-7211 E-Mail: Team@TC2inc.com WBE/DBE Intersection:Auburn Way S & 32nd St SE Date of Count:Wed 4/06/2016 Location:Auburn, Washington Checked By:Jess Time From North on (SB) From South on (NB) From East on (WB) From West on (EB) Interval Interval Auburn Way S Auburn Way S 32nd St SE 0 Total Ending at T L SRTL SRTL SRTL SR 7:15 A51573090 198 1 4 0 0 8 0 0 00 295 7:30 A 6 19 90 0 12 0 254 3 1 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 380 7:45 A 2 29 128 0 2 0 222 5 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 395 8:00 A 4 28 144 0 3 0 157 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 336 8:15 A55092060 147 1 1 1 0 610 0 00 352 8:30 A121289060 163 0 0 0 0 160 0 00 280 8:45 A121789060 142 2 3 1 0 150 0 00 266 9:00 A5997070 150 2 2 0 0 9 0 0 00 267 9:15 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:30 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9:45 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10:00 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Survey 51 179 802 0 51 0 1433 15 11 2 0 140 0 0 0 0 2571 Peak Hour: 7:15 AM to 8:15 AM Total 17 126 454 0 23 0 780 10 2 1 0 92 0 0 0 0 1463 Approach 580 790 93 0 1463 %HV 2.9%2.9%2.2%n/a 2.9% PHF 0.84 0.77 0.38 n/a 0.93 Auburn Way S 1452 580 872 0 Bike 0 0 454 126 0Ped 32nd St SE 92 0 Ped 0 0 93 Bike 0 1 229 0 0 0 Bike 0 0 7:15 AM to 8:15 AM 1Ped 136 0 PEDs Across:NS EW Ped 0 0 780 10 1580 1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volume INT 01 0Bike 0 PHF %HV INT 02 11 EB n/a n/a INT 03 0 455 790 Check WB 0.38 2.2% INT 04 0 In:1463 NB 0.77 2.9% INT 05 0 1245 Out:1463 SB 0.84 2.9% INT 06 0 Auburn Way S T Int.0.93 2.9% INT 07 0 Bicycles From: N S E W Conditions: INT 08 0 INT 01 0 INT 09 0 INT 02 0 INT 10 0 INT 03 0 INT 11 0 INT 04 0 INT 12 0 INT 05 0 00 101 INT 06 NO BIKES 0 Special Notes INT 07 0 INT 08 0 INT 09 0 INT 10 0 INT 11 0 INT 12 0 00 0 00 AUB16026M_85a 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 17 Page 139 of 465 Prepared for: City of Auburn Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. Phone: (253) 926-6009 FAX: (253) 922-7211 E-Mail: Team@TC2inc.com WBE/DBE Intersection:Auburn Way S & 32nd St SE Date of Count:Wed 4/06/2016 Location:Auburn, Washington Checked By:Jess Time From North on (SB) From South on (NB) From East on (WB) From West on (EB) Interval Interval Auburn Way S Auburn Way S 32nd St SE 0 Total Ending at T L SRTL SRTL SRTL SR 4:15 P 4 15 194 0 6 0 163 3 0 2 0 11 0 0 0 0 388 4:30 P 4 17 219 0 2 0 125 0 1 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 371 4:45 P 4 11 212 0 5 0 152 3 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 393 5:00 P 1 10 230 0 0 0 133 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 388 5:15 P 3 8 205 0 0 0 204 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 427 5:30 P 0 17 209 0 4 0 158 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 398 5:45 P 2 7 215 0 4 0 143 3 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 388 6:00 P 0 7 202 0 2 0 131 5 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 357 6:15 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Survey 18 92 1686 0 23 0 1209 14 1 2 0 107 0 0 0 0 3110 Peak Hour: 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM Total 8 46 856 0 9 0 647 3 0 0 0 54 0 0 0 0 1606 Approach 902 650 54 0 1606 %HV 0.9%1.4%n/a n/a 1.1% PHF 0.94 0.80 0.90 n/a 0.94 Auburn Way S 1603 902 701 3 Bike 0 0 856 46 0Ped 32nd St SE 54 0 Ped 0 0 54 Bike 0 0 103 0 0 0 Bike 0 0 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM 2Ped 49 0 PEDs Across:NS EW Ped 0 0 647 3 1708 1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volume INT 01 0Bike 1 PHF %HV INT 02 0 EB n/a n/a INT 03 22 856 650 Check WB 0.90 n/a INT 04 0 In:1606 NB 0.80 1.4% INT 05 0 1506 Out:1606 SB 0.94 0.9% INT 06 0 Auburn Way S T Int.0.94 1.1% INT 07 11Bicycles From: N S E W N U's S U's E U's W U's INT 08 0 INT 01 00 INT 09 0 INT 02 11 2 1 INT 10 0 INT 03 31 4 0 INT 11 0 INT 04 00 INT 12 0 INT 05 00 00 303 INT 06 00 Special Notes INT 07 00 INT 08 00 INT 09 0 INT 10 0 INT 11 0 INT 12 0 42 0 06 1000 AUB16026M_85p 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 18 Page 140 of 465 3UHSDUHGIRU&LW\RI$XEXUQ Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. 3KRQH  )$;  (0DLO7HDP#7&LQFFRP :%('%( ,QWHUVHFWLRQ$XEXUQ:D\6 QG6W6('DWHRI&RXQW:HG /RFDWLRQ$XEXUQ:DVKLQJWRQ &KHFNHG%\-HVV 7LPH )URP1RUWKRQ 6% )URP6RXWKRQ 1% )URP(DVWRQ :% )URP:HVWRQ (% ,QWHUYDO ,QWHUYDO $XEXUQ:D\6 $XEXUQ:D\6 QG6W6(7RWDO (QGLQJDW 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  7RWDO 6XUYH\                  3HDN+RXU $0 WR $0 7RWDO                  $SSURDFK  +9 QD  3+)   QD  $XEXUQ:D\6   0 %LNH  3HG QG6W6(  3HG  %LNH  0 %LNH $0 WR $0 3HG   3('V $FURVV16 (:3HG   1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volume ,17%LNH 0 3+)+9 ,17(%QD QD ,17&KHFN :%  ,17,Q1%  ,17 2XW6%  ,17123('6 $XEXUQ:D\6 7,QW  ,17%LF\FOHV)URP 1 6 ( :&RQGLWLRQV ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17  ,17 6SHFLDO1RWHV ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17    $8%70BD 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 19 Page 141 of 465 3UHSDUHGIRU&LW\RI$XEXUQ Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. 3KRQH  )$;  (0DLO7HDP#7&LQFFRP :%('%( ,QWHUVHFWLRQ$XEXUQ:D\6 QG6W6('DWHRI&RXQW:HG /RFDWLRQ$XEXUQ:DVKLQJWRQ &KHFNHG%\-HVV 7LPH )URP1RUWKRQ 6% )URP6RXWKRQ 1% )URP(DVWRQ :% )URP:HVWRQ (% ,QWHUYDO ,QWHUYDO $XEXUQ:D\6 $XEXUQ:D\6 QG6W6( 7RWDO (QGLQJDW 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  7RWDO 6XUYH\                  3HDN+RXU 30 WR 30 7RWDO                  $SSURDFK      +9 QD  3+)   QD  $XEXUQ:D\6   0 %LNH  3HG QG6W6(  3HG  %LNH  0 %LNH 30 WR 30 3HG   3('V $FURVV16 (:3HG   1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volume ,17%LNH0 3+)+9 ,17(%QD QD ,17&KHFN :%  ,17,Q1%  ,17 2XW6%  ,17$XEXUQ:D\6 7,QW  ,17%LF\FOHV)URP 1 6 ( :&RQGLWLRQV ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17  ,1712%,.(6  6SHFLDO1RWHV ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17    $8%70BS 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 20 Page 142 of 465 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 21 Page 143 of 465 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 22 Page 144 of 465 3UHSDUHGIRU&LW\RI$XEXUQ Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. 3KRQH  )$;  (0DLO7HDP#7&LQFFRP :%('%( ,QWHUVHFWLRQ$FDGHP\'U6( $XEXUQ:D\6 'DWHRI&RXQW:HG /RFDWLRQ$XEXUQ:DVKLQJWRQ &KHFNHG%\-HVV 7LPH )URP1RUWKRQ 6% )URP6RXWKRQ 1% )URP(DVWRQ :% )URP:HVWRQ (% ,QWHUYDO ,QWHUYDO $FDGHP\'U6($XEXUQ:D\6 $XEXUQ:D\6 7RWDO (QGLQJDW 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  $                  7RWDO 6XUYH\                  3HDN+RXU $0 WR $0 7RWDO                  $SSURDFK  +9 QD  3+) QD   $FDGHP\'U6(   0 %LNH $XEXUQ:D\6 3HG $XEXUQ:D\6  3HG  %LNH 0  0 %LNH  $0 WR $0 3HG   3('V $FURVV16 (:3HG   1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volume ,17%LNH 0 3+)+9 ,17(%  ,17&KHFN :%  ,17,Q1%QD QD ,172XW6%  ,17123('6 7,QW  ,17%LF\FOHV)URP 1 6 ( :&RQGLWLRQV ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17  ,1712%,.(6  6SHFLDO1RWHV ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17    $8%70BD 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 23 Page 145 of 465 3UHSDUHGIRU&LW\RI$XEXUQ Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. 3KRQH  )$;  (0DLO7HDP#7&LQFFRP :%('%( ,QWHUVHFWLRQ$FDGHP\'U6( $XEXUQ:D\6 'DWHRI&RXQW:HG /RFDWLRQ$XEXUQ:DVKLQJWRQ &KHFNHG%\-HVV 7LPH )URP1RUWKRQ 6% )URP6RXWKRQ 1% )URP(DVWRQ :% )URP:HVWRQ (% ,QWHUYDO ,QWHUYDO $FDGHP\'U6(  $XEXUQ:D\6 $XEXUQ:D\6 7RWDO (QGLQJDW 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 7 / 6 5 3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  3                  7RWDO 6XUYH\                  3HDN+RXU 30 WR 30 7RWDO                  $SSURDFK      +9 QD  3+) QD   $FDGHP\'U6(   0 %LNH $XEXUQ:D\6  3HG $XEXUQ:D\6  3HG  %LNH 0  0 %LNH  30 WR 30 3HG   3('V $FURVV16 (:3HG   1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volume ,17%LNH 0 3+)+9 ,17(%  ,17&KHFN :%  ,17,Q1%QD QD ,172XW6%  ,177,QW  ,17%LF\FOHV)URP 1 6 ( :&RQGLWLRQV ,17  ,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17 ,17,17    ,1712%,.(6  6SHFLDO1RWHV ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17 ,17    $8%70BS 2214 Tacoma Road Puyallup WA 98371 (253) 770 1401 Fax (253) 770 1473 heathtraffic.com 24 Page 146 of 465 ATTACHMENT C Page 147 of 465 C:\Users\Robert\Dropbox (HTIP)\Auburn Investment and Development, LLC\5000 Site Development\Auburn Site 2-4-20.gxd -- 02/10/2020 -- 11:13 AM -- Scale 1 : 1200 Page 148 of 465 NOTICE OF APPLICATION (NOA) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING (NOH) and DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) Oak Vista Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment SEP20-0012 / CPA20-0003 The City of Auburn is issuing a Notice of Application (NOA), Notice of Public Hearing (NOH), and Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the following described project. The project application and listed studies may be reviewed by contacting the Department of Community Development at planning@auburnwa.gov or by visiting www.auburnwa.gov/landuse. Proposal: Request to amend Comprehensive Plan Text policy LU-135 relating to the Auburn Adventist Academy Special Planning Area. The purpose of the text amendment is to provide additional clarity and refinements to current Comprehensive Plan policies that support the development of multi-family housing, senior housing, memory-care, and assisted living uses within the Academy’s Special Planning Area and that the development of these uses will directly support the Academy’s long term mission. The future development of the site will be reviewed and analyzed as under a separate, project specific SEPA. Upon future development of the site access will be via Auburn Way South. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) scoping document was prepared and submitted along with the application that provides a basic summary of the anticipated trips from the project and outlines how potential traffic impacts will be analyzed in the future when/if the site is developed. This document is available on the City’s website at www.auburnwa.gov/landuse. Location: The site is generally bounded by Auburn Way South, 32nd St SE, and Academy Dr SE, see Vicinity Map below for reference. King Co. Parcel Nos. 272105-9117, 272105-9055, 272105- 9090, 272105-9079, & 272105-9086. Notice of Application: September 15, 2020 Application Complete: July 2, 2020 Permit Application: June 5, 2020 File Nos. SEP20-0012 CPA20-0003 Owner: Doug Bing, President Western WA Conference of SDA 32229 Weyerhaeuser Way S Federal Way, WA 98001 Applicant Bob Sanders, Sr. Development Manager Creations Northwest LLC 14020 SE Johnson Rd, Suite 102 Milwaukie, OR 97267 Applicant’s Representative: Alison Moss, Shareholder Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt 700 Washington St, Suite 701 Vancouver, WA 98660 Page 149 of 465 NOTICE OF APPLICATION, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING, and DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE SEP20-0012 / CPA20-0003 (Continued) Page 2 of 3 Studies/Plans Submitted With Application:  Critical Areas Assessment, Habitat Technologies (July 9, 2019)  Traffic Impact Analysis (scoping document) (August 25, 2020)  SEPA Environmental Checklist (June 3, 2020) Other Permits, Plans, and Approvals Needed:  None for this proposal. Statement of Consistency and List of Applicable Development Regulations: This proposal is subject to and shall be consistent with the Auburn City Code, Comprehensive Plan, and Public Works Design and Construction Standards. Lead Agency: City of Auburn The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Public Comment Period: This may be your only opportunity to comment on the environmental impact of the proposal. All persons may comment on this application. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date issued below. Comments must be in writing and submitted by 5:00 p.m. on September 30, 2020 to the mailing address of 25 W Main St., Auburn, WA, 98001 or to the email address below. Any person wishing to become a party of record, shall include in their comments that they wish to receive notice of and participate in any hearings, if relevant, and request a copy of decisions once made. Any person aggrieved of the City's determination may file an appeal with the Auburn City Clerk at 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001 within 14 days of the close of the comment period, or by 5:00 p.m. on October 14, 2020. Public Hearing: The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing on the applications on November 4, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. The public hearing will be held virtually and telephonically. To attend the meeting virtually please enter the meeting ID into the ZOOM app or call into the meeting at the phone number listed below. Per City of Auburn Resolution No. 5533 the location for Planning Commission meetings will be virtual until King County enters into Phase 3 of the Governor's Safe Start Reopening Plan. Join the ZOOM meeting at the following web address: https://zoom.us/j/95038060198. Meeting ID: 950 3806 0198, or via one tap mobile: 253-215-8782, 95038060198# US (Tacoma). Written comments may be either emailed or mailed attention to the contact person below to 25 W Main St., Auburn WA, 98001 (please note, due to the current Governor’s Stay Home Stay Safe order, mailed comments may not be received by City Staff on time for inclusion in the packet provided to the Hearing Examiner), or submitted at the public hearing by email. For citizens with speech, sight, or hearing disabilities wishing to review documents pertaining to this hearing should contact the person below within 10 calendar days prior to the hearing. Each request will be considered individually according to the type of request, the availability of resources, and the financial ability of the City to provide the requested services or equipment. For questions regarding this project, please contact Dustin Lawrence, Senior Planner, at planning@auburnwa.gov or 253- 931-3082. Page 150 of 465 NOTICE OF APPLICATION, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING, and DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE SEP20-0012 / CPA20-0003 (Continued) Page 3 of 3 RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Jeff Tate POSITION/TITLE: Director of Community Development ADDRESS: 25 West Main Street Auburn, Washington 98001 253-931-3090 DATE ISSUED: SIGNATURE: Note: This determination does not constitute approval of the proposal. Approval of the proposal can only be made by the legislative or administrative body vested with that authority. The proposal is required to meet all applicable regulations. Vicinity Map September 11, 2020 SUBJECT PROPERTIES September 15, 2020 Page 151 of 465 Page 152 of 465 Page 153 of 465 -Ad Confirmation- Total NET Cost: $234.15 Class Name: Public Notices Account #: 107302 Advertiser Name: City of Auburn, Finance Dept Agency Name: Contact: Shawn Campbell Address: 25 W Main St Auburn, WA 98001 Telephone: (253) 876-1980 These are the details of your ad scheduled to run on the dates indicated below. CITY OF AUBURN NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGThe City of Auburn is issuing a Notice of Application (NOA), Determination of Non-Significance (DNS), and Notice of Public Hearing (NOH) for the following described project. The permit applications and listed studies may be reviewed at the Auburn Planning and Development De-partment at 1 E Main ST, 2nd Floor, Cus-tomer Service Center, Auburn, WA 98001. Proposal: Request to amend Comprehen-sive Plan Text policy LU-135 relating to the Auburn Adventist Academy Special Plan-ning Area. The purpose of the text amend-ment is to provide additional clarity and refinements to current Comprehensive Plan policies that support the development of multi-family housing, senior housing, memory-care, and assisted living uses within the Academy’s Special Planning Area and that the development of these uses will directly support the Academy’s long term mission. Location: The site is generally bounded by Auburn Way South, 32nd St SE, and Academy Dr SE, see Vicinity Map below for reference. King Co. Parcel Nos. 272105-9117, 272105-9055, 272105-9090, 272105-9079, & 272105-9086. Notice of Application: September 15, 2020. Notice of Completeness: July 2, 2020. Per-mit Application: June 5, 2020. File Nos. SEP20-0012 & CPA20-0003 Owner: Doug Bing, President, Western WA Conference of SDA, 32229 Weyerhaeuser Way S, Fed-eral Way, WA 98001. Applicant: Bob Sand-ers, Sr. Development Manager, Creations Northwest LLC, 14020 SE Johnson Rd, Suite 102, Milwaukie, OR 97267. Studies/Plans Submitted With Application: SEPA Checklist, TIA (scoping document), Criti-cal Areas Study. Other Permits, Plans, and Approvals Needed: N/A. Statement of Consistency and List of Applicable De-velopment Regulations: This proposal is subject to and shall be consistent with the Auburn City Code, Comprehensive Plan, and Public Works Design and Construction Standards. Lead Agency: City of Auburn. The lead agency for this proposal has de-termined that it does not have probable significant adverse impact on the envi-ronment. An environmental impact state-ment (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmen-tal checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Public Comment Period:. Comments must be in writing and submitted by 5:00pm on Sep-tember 30, 2020 to the mailing address of 25 W Main ST, Auburn, WA, 98001-4998 or emailed to the contact below. Any person wishing to become a party of record, shall include in their comments that they wish to receive notice of and participate in any hearings, if relevant, and request a copy of decisions once made. For questions re-garding this project, please contact Dustin Lawrence, Senior Planner, at planning@auburnwa.gov or 253-931-3092. Public Hearing: The meeting of the City of Auburn Planning Commission scheduled for November 4, 2020 will be held virtu-ally and telephonically at 7:00 PM. To at-tend the meeting virtually please click the link or enter the meeting ID into the Zoom app or call into the meeting at the phone number listed below. If you would like to provide written materials ahead of time, please email planning@auburnwa.gov two days prior to the meeting. Per the Governors Emergency Proclama-tion 20-28, the City of Auburn is prohibited from holding an in-person meeting at this time. All meetings will be held virtually and telephonically. City of Auburn is inviting you to a sched-uled Zoom meeting.Join Zoom Meeting https://zoom.us/j/95038060198 Meeting ID: 950 3806 0198One tap mobile +16465588656,,96768499088# US (New York) +16699009128,,96768499088# US (San Jose) Date of Notice: September 15, 2020 *The ad preview below may not be to actual scale Account Information Contact Information Contact Name: Holly Botts Phone # Email: hbotts@seattletimes.com Ad Placement Information Prepayment Information Seattle Times 09/15/20 NWclassifieds 09/15/20 NWclassifieds 09/16/20 NWclassifieds 09/17/20 NWclassifieds 09/18/20 NWclassifieds 09/19/20 NWclassifieds 09/20/20 NWclassifieds 09/21/20 Run Date(s) Ad ID: 958807 Purchase Order #: SEP20-0012 # of lines: 105 Date Method Card Type Last 4 Digits Check # Amount Page 154 of 465 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: CPA20-0002 & REZ20-0002, 2020 Annual Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment & Rezone – Westport Capital Date: October 27, 2020 Department: Planning and Development Attachments: Agenda Bill Staff Report MLU Application Revis ions Revised Comp Plan Statement Revised Rezone Narrative Rezone Conditions R16 Wes tport 2nd Revis ions TIA Wes tport October 14 SEPA Wes tport NOA/NOH/DNS Commerce REZ CPA Map Sewer Study Critical Areas Uses Table Sample Hous e Plans Comments Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: Background Summary: Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Staff: Meeting Date:November 4, 2020 Item Number:PH.2 Page 155 of 465 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Subject/Title: CPA20-0002 & REZ20-0002, 2020 Annual Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment & Rezone – Westport Capital Date: November 4, 2020 Department: Community Development Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrative Recommendation: Planning Commission to conduct a public hearing and recommend to City Council approval of the Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone (zoning map amendment), with conditions. Applicant/Owner: Rick Hathaway Westport Capital Investments 11269 NE 37th Pl. Bellevue, WA 98004 Agent: David Toyer Toyer Strategic Advisors 3705 Colby Ave., Suite 1 Everett, WA 98201 Request: Request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation of approximately 31.8 acres from Single-Family Residential to Moderate-Family Residential, and approx. 5.3 acres from Multiple-Family Residential to Moderate-Family Residential; and, rezone approx. 30.7 acres from R-7, Single-Family Residential, 5-7 Units per Acre, to R-16, Multi- Family Residential 12-16 Units per Acre, and approx. 6.4 acres from R-20, Multi-Family Residential, 15-20 Units per Acre, to R-16. The development is proposed to limit the density to 12 units per acre (plus or minus 10%), cap the number of apartment units at 128 (based off of the existing 6.4 acres of R-20 zoning), and require at least three types of ownership housing for the remainder of the property (approximately 317 dwelling units, plus or minus 10%) where each type of ownership housing must represent a minimum of 15% of the future units (e.g. 15% triplex, 15% townhomes, and 70% single-family). There is no development proposal associated with this request. The above stipulations would be memorialized through a contract rezone. Location: The site is generally located east of ‘I’ St. NE at 40th St. NE and west of the Green River, south of the Monterey Park subdivision, see Vicinity Map below for reference. King Co. Parcel Nos. 000420-0003, 000420-0013, 000420-0019, 000420-0022, 000420-0024, and 000420-0025. Page 156 of 465 Exhibit 1a – Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone – Page 1 of 12 Exhibit 1a – Staff Report to the Planning Commission Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone City File Nos: CPA20-0002 & REZ20-0002 Existing Comprehensive Plan Designation: The Comprehensive Plan Map Designations of the site are “Multi-Family Residential” (west) and “Single Family Residential” (east). Existing Zoning: The zoning designations of the site are “R-20 Residential Zone – 20 Dwelling Units per Acre” (west) and “R-7 Residential Zone – Seven Dwelling Units per Acre” (east). SEPA Status: A Determination of Non-Significance (DNS), Notice of Application, and Notice of Public Hearing was issued under City File No. SEP20-0006 on October 19, 2020. The comment period ends on November 3, 2020. At the time of writing this report two comments were received and responses provided, see Exhibit 15; should any additional comments be received they will be provided to the Planning Commission prior to, or at, the public hearing. The SEPA appeal period ends on November 17, 2020. Findings of Fact: 1. David Toyer with Toyer Strategic Investments, acting as Agent on behalf Rick Hathaway with Westport Capital Investments, Owner, submitted applications for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone. The request is to change the Comprehensive Plan Map Land Use Designation of 6 parcels totaling approx. 37.1 acres to “Moderate Family Residential” from “Multi-Family” and “Single Family Residential” and associated rezone the properties to “R-16, Residential 16 Dwelling Units per Acre (with conditions)”. 2. The proposal consists of six adjacent parcels located on the east side of ‘I’ St. NE at 40th St. NE. King Co. Parcel Nos. King Co. Parcel Nos. 000420-0003, 000420-0013, 000420-0019, 000420-0022, 000420-0024, and 000420-0025. 3. Pursuant to Chapter 197-11 WAC and Chapter 16.06 ACC, this proposal is subject to State Environmental Policy Act (“SEPA”) decision. A Determination of Non-Significance (“DNS”), for the Comprehensive Plan amendment and Rezone request was issued under City File No. SEP20-0006 on October 19, 2020; with the comment period ending on November 3, 2020 and an appeal period ending on November 17, 2020. 4. The public hearing notice was published on November 19, 2020 in the Seattle Times newspaper, at least 10 days prior to this November 4, 2020 Planning Commission public hearing. Public notice was also mailed to property owners within 300 feet and those requesting said notice, posting on the City’s website, and posting at four locations on the subject properties (on the ‘I’ St. NE frontage, and at the termini of ‘l’ St. NE, ‘O’ Pl. NE, and ‘R’ St. NE along the northern property lines). 5. This Staff Report and recommendation describes and addresses a Comprehensive Plan map amendment and rezone request by Westport Capital Investments. The other private initiated Comprehensive Plan amendment applications, as well as the 2020 City initiated Comprehensive Plan Amendments are addressed in separate staff reports. 6. Two comments were submitted, summarized as follows. Please see Exhibit 15 for the full text of the comments and Staff’s response. a. Earl Weaver, The River Mobile Home Park – concerns about any potential flood mitigation along with future development. Staff Response: Staff provided Mr. Weaver with information regarding any future development will need to meet the City’s floodplain regulations. Exhibit 1a Page 157 of 465 Exhibit 1a – Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone – Page 2 of 12 b. Melissa Child, ‘I’ Pl. NE Resident – concerns about impacts to the wetlands and wildlife habitat, traffic impacts, and that the housing will just be more apartments. Staff Response: Staff provided Ms. Child with information on the presence of wetlands, that there will likely be traffic impacts that will need to be addressed, and that a condition of the Rezone would be a limit to the number of apartment units and would require a mix of housing types. Comprehensive Plan Related Findings 7. The City of Auburn first adopted amendments to its Comprehensive Plan in compliance with the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements, as amended, in 1995. The Auburn Comprehensive Plan has been amended annually each year since, generally for housekeeping items and for coordination with the Capital Facilities Plan. 8. The City of Auburn adopted a substantially revised Comprehensive Plan (including map amendments) in response to periodic updates required by the GMA under Ordinance No. 6584 on December 15, 2015. 9. City Code Section 14.22, “Comprehensive Plan” provides the city’s laws for amending the Comprehensive Plan. Amendments can be initiated by the City of Auburn (city-initiated) and by private citizens (privately- initiated). 10. RCW 36.70A.130 (GMA) provides for annual amendments to locally adopted comprehensive plans. Except in limited circumstances, these amendments shall be considered by the City’s Legislative body no more frequently than once per year. The annual limitation and exceptions are also restated in city code under ACC 14.22.060. 11. The City of Auburn established a June 5, 2020 submittal deadline for comprehensive plan amendments for the year 2020 (map or policy/text amendments). Advance notice to the public of the application filing deadline was provided on the City’s website, publication of a legal notice the Seattle Times Newspaper, and sent to a notification list of potentially interested parties. 12. Auburn City Code (ACC) Chapter 14.22 outlines the process for submittal of privately-initiated amendments and the general processing of Comprehensive Plan amendments. 13. Per Chapter 14.22 Auburn City Code (“ACC”), privately-initiated amendments to the Comprehensive Plan shall have at least one public hearing before the Planning Commission who then forward on a recommendation to the City Council. City Council consideration and action on the amendments generally occurs, but is not required, prior to the end of the year. 14. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed comprehensive plan amendments outlined in this agenda bill were sent to the Washington State Office of Commerce and other state agencies as required for the 60-day state review. See Exhibit 9. No comments have been received from the Dept. of Commerce or other State agencies as of the date of this report. 15. Due to the nature of policy/text changes, and the minimal amount of private-initiated map amendments, the optional process for a public open house as provided for in the City Code, was not conducted. Zoning Code Related Findings 16. Chapter 18.68 ACC (Zoning) Amendments outlines the process for submittal of privately-initiated zoning amendments and the general processing. Per ACC 18.68.030(B)(1)(b), when the Planning Commission is considering a rezone (zoning map amendment) which requires a Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map amendment, the public hearings shall be conducted concurrently and a recommendation on both shall be forwarded to the City Council. Note that this amendment is vested to the version of Ch. 18.68 ACC that was in place prior to the updates to this chapter earlier in 2020 (Ord. No. 6779). Exhibit 1a Page 158 of 465 Exhibit 1a – Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone – Page 3 of 12 17. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106, the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment outlined in this agenda bill were sent to the Washington State Dept. of Commerce and other State agencies as required for the 60-day State review. See Exhibit 9. No comments have been received from the Dept. of Commerce or other State agencies as of the date of this report. 18. The following Staff Report and recommendation describes and addresses the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map amendment and Rezone request by Westport Capital Investments. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZONE– STAFF ANALYSIS: 1. The Comprehensive Plan amendment seeks to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Designation of a total of six parcels to “Moderate Density Residential”. Three of the parcels (000420-0025, 000420-0019, and 000420-0013) are currently “Multiple-Family Residential” totaling approx. 5.3 acres. The other three parcels (000420-0022, 000420-0024, and 000420-0003) are currently “Single Family Residential” totaling approx. 31.8 acres. The three parcels total approximately 1.89 acres. See Exhibit 10 and the following vicinity map: 2. The Rezone request seeks to change the zoning classification of approx. 6.4 acres from “R-20, Residential 20 Dwelling Units per Acre” and 30.7 acres from “R-7, Residential Seven Dwelling Units per Acre” to “R-16, Residential Sixteen Dwelling Units per Acre”. Note that the zoning boundary does not exactly align with the Comprehensive Plan Designations (reference Exhibit 10). 3. The Applicant has supplied narratives for the Comprehensive Plan amendment and the Rezone request applications (See Exhibits 4 and 5). At this time there is no specific construction project planned for the property if the requests are approved. 4. Based on conversations between City Staff and the Applicant, the rezone request includes the following proposed conditions: Exhibit 1a Page 159 of 465 Exhibit 1a – Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone – Page 4 of 12 a. Place a cap on the maximum density at 12 units per acre (plus or minus 10% variation), the minimum of the R-16 zone. b. Place a cap on the number of apartment units at 128. This cap is based off of the existing R-20 acreage of 6.4 acres multiplied by 20 units per acre. Any future multifamily units would be located in the southern half of the Site. c. Require at least three types of ownership housing for the remainder of the Site (approx. 320 units, plus or minus 10%) with each type of housing to represent a minimum of 15% of the housing units. 5. Based on the existing zoning classifications and acreages, a total of 128 apartment units could be built (the R-20 zoning) and up to 215 single family units (R-7 Zoning). If the Rezone request is approved the number of apartment units would remain at 128 and the number of other types of housing would be up to approx. 320 units (plus or minus 10% would make the range around 275-364 units), a potential increase of approx. 105 units (with the 10% it would range from 60-150 units). 6. As shown in the table below and the following map, the surrounding properties have varying degrees of development. The area to the north contains existing single-family residences (“Monterey Park” subdivision, formerly “Auburn 40”, approved as a planned unit development (PUD)) on small lots (~3,500 sq.-ft. lots), the property to the south is vacant (owned by the Auburn School District), to the east is owned by King County for open space / recreation, across ‘I’ St. NE to the west is developed commercial land, and northwest of the Site and east of ‘I’ St. NE is three large single-family lots with existing residences as well as 3 lots zoned R-20 (“Labrador Rezone” from 2018). Monterey Park Subdivision, approx. 3,500 sq.-ft. lots. Subject Properties Vacant ASD Property Approx. 6,000 sq.- ft. lots. Exhibit 1a Page 160 of 465 Exhibit 1a – Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone – Page 5 of 12 7. The current Comprehensive Plan Land Use designation, zoning classification, and current land uses of the subject properties and surrounding properties are as follows: Comp Plan Designation Zoning Classification Existing Land Use Site “Multiple-Family Residential” and “Single Family Residential” R-20, Residential and R-7, Residential Vacant North “Multiple-Family Residential” and “Single Family Residential” PUD and R-20, Residential Single family homes South “Single Family Residential” R-7, Residential Vacant East “Single Family Residential” R-7, Residential Vacant, Green River Trail West “Heavy Commercial”, “Multiple Family Residential”, and “Single Family Residential” C-3, Heavy Commercial, R-7, Residential, and R-20, Residential Commercial and Manufacturing Uses, Vacant, and Single family homes See Exhibit 10 for maps showing the existing and requested Comprehensive Plan Designation and Zoning Classification. 8. The two western-most of the six parcels front onto ‘I’ St. NE which is classified as a ‘Minor Arterial’ street. ‘L’ St. NE, ‘O’ Pl. NE, and ‘R’ St. NE, which are all “Local” streets, all end at the northern boundary of the site. These roadways, which were constructed along with the development of Monterey Park, were designed to be continued into this Site; upon future development one or all of these roadways will be extended into and through this Site. The existing R-20-zoned areas where approved under City Ordinance No. 4299, which required 40th St. NE to be extended into the Site to the eastern boundary of the R-20- zoned area. A condition of this Rezone will include extension of 40th through the Site to provide a connection, or multiple connections, into the Monterey Park subdivision. This is also required for emergency vehicle access which requires a secondary access when the number of dwelling units reaches 30 single family units or 100 multi-family units. 9. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) (Exhibit 6) was prepared to analyze the difference between the existing zoning and if the entire Site was rezoned to R-20 (which was the initial request by the Applicant, and later revised). As there is no development proposal at this time, the TIA looked at “worst case” scenarios of the map changes. Under this scenario the Level of Service (LOS) at the intersection of ‘I’ St. NE and 40th St. NE would require intersection improvements upon future development. What improvements will be required is not known at this time since there is no development proposed, so a general condition will be included with the Ordinance. 10. The Site is located within the City of Auburn water service boundaries. It is anticipated that there will be adequate water service upon future development, with any development responsible for extending water service to and through the Site, consistent with the Title 13 ACC and the City of Auburn Engineering Design Standards. 11. The Site is located within the City of Auburn sewer service boundaries. There is an existing sewer pump station that was constructed along with the Monterey Park subdivision to the north that was designed to serve this Site based on the existing zoning. A sewer pump station capacity analysis was submitted (Exhibit 11) to analyze if upgrades to the pump station would be required if the rezone was approved, which there would be. This study was based off of the initial request of increased units under the R-20 zone, however, is still applicable to the revised request. What upgrades are needed to the pump station would be determined upon any future development proposals. A condition will be included with the rezone Ordinance addressing future upgrades. 12. A Critical Areas Memorandum (Exhibit 12) was prepared and shows a wetland along the southern border of a portion of the Site and another north/west of the Site adjacent to ‘I’ St. NE. The Memo shows the Exhibit 1a Page 161 of 465 Exhibit 1a – Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone – Page 6 of 12 wetland to the south as a “Category II” and the northern wetland as a “Category III”. Upon future development a full Critical Areas Report, consistent with Ch. 16.10 ACC, will be required. For reference, see the following image: 13. There is a portion of the eastern area of the Site that is shown on the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) as being located within the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) and the 500-Year Flood Hazard Area. Upon future development appropriate studies and possible floodplain permits will be required, consistent with Ch. 15.68 ACC. For reference, see the following image: 14. The purpose of the City’s Comprehensive Plan is to provide a policy basis for potential zoning changes to ensure that the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance are consistent, as required by the following City Code provision: “14.22.050 Conformance and consistency. The zoning, land division and other development codes contained or referenced within Auburn City Code shall be consistent with and implement the intent of the comprehensive plan. Capital budget decisions shall be made in conformity with the comprehensive plan.” Subject Properties SFHA 500-YR Exhibit 1a Page 162 of 465 Exhibit 1a – Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone – Page 7 of 12 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RELATED – CONCLUSIONS: The City Code provides certain criteria for decisions on amending the Comprehensive Plan under ACC 14.22.110. These criteria are listed below in bold, followed by a Staff Analysis. The Applicant’s responses to these criteria are included in Exhibits 4 and 5. 1. Criterion #1 – ACC 14.22.110(A)(1): The proposed change will further and be consistent with the goals and objectives of the plan and the plan will remain internally consistent. Staff Analysis: The Comprehensive Plan (Land Use Element, Page LU-9) provides the following explanation for the “Moderate Family Residential” Land Use Designation: “Moderate Family Designation Description Moderate Density Residential designated areas are planned to accommodate a variety of residential dwelling types. Varying intensities may be permitted to provide a transition between single-family residential and other more intensive uses or activities (such as arterial streets) based on adjacent density, intensity, and/or character. Appropriate densities in these areas generally range from 7 up to 20 dwelling units per acre. Dwelling types generally range from single-family dwelling to multiple-family dwellings, with larger structures allowed (within the density range) where offsetting community benefits can be identified. Designation Criteria 1. Previously developed moderate-density residential areas; or 2. Areas that provide a transition between single-family and multifamily, single-family and nonresidential, multifamily and nonresidential zones or development that are adjacent and meet the development parameters of the Moderate Density Residential designation. Implementing Zoning Designations Residential Transition R-10 Residential (Ten Dwelling Units Per Acre) R-16 Residential (Sixteen Dwelling Units Per Acre) Policies LU-19 Density bonuses and flexible development standards should be considered an incentive for innovative neighborhood design. LU-20 Carefully developed low-intensity office, or residentially related commercial uses (such as day care centers) can be compatible. LU-21 Accessory dwelling units should play an integral part of promoting infill development and affordable housing and are therefore encouraged within this land use category..” Per ACC 18.23.030(G), the intent of the R-16, Residential zoning district is: “…intended to provide for medium density multiple-family residential development as designated in the comprehensive plan, and is further intended as a residential zone of single, duplex and multiple-family residences, except as specifically provided elsewhere in this chapter.” As identified in the R-16 zone intent statement above, this zoning district is geared toward allowing a wide range of housing types including detached single-family homes and apartments. Also allowed are uses such as mixed-use projects, nursing homes, etc. The full list of uses allowed within the R-16 zone is attached as Exhibit 13. Although no specific use is proposed at this time, any future development will be governed by the codes and standards in place at that time. As shown and discussed above, there is an existing small-lot residential subdivision (Monterey Park) to the north and vacant Auburn School District property to the south. As noted in Designation Criteria 2 of Exhibit 1a Page 163 of 465 Exhibit 1a – Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone – Page 8 of 12 “Moderate Density Residential” above, this designation is intended to provide a transition between single- family areas and higher intensity uses. Although there is not an existing school, the property to the south may eventually develop as a school and development on this site would provide that transition. To ensure the transition is adequately implemented, all apartment housing will be limited to the southern half of the Site, allowing for the more ownership-style housing located next to the existing single-family subdivision to the north (Monterey Park). The existing single-family subdivision to the southwest of the site will be bordered on the north by the future extension of 40th St. NE. The proposed Rezone conditions include limits on the number of apartment units to ensure the entire site is not built-out as apartment buildings. Other conditions are proposed to require “for sale” units and promote greater diversity of unit types that are in the range between single-family detached housing and mid to high-rise apartment buildings and includes duplexes, townhomes, and other smaller scale multi-unit buildings. The greater diversity is a goal in the city’s Comprehensive Plan. The City has had many large apartment projects over the last several years, including the Copper Gate development currently under construction to the northwest of this Site with 500 apartment units. The type of development that the City hasn’t seen are projects that allow for housing ownership. This type of housing can be in many forms, such as single-family detached, but also in the form of townhomes or stacked multi-unit buildings (stacked referring to each unit being wholly contained on one floor). The Applicant has provided some drawings of what type of housing developers he has been in contact for this Site, those are attached as Exhibit 14. Note that these are included just for reference and do not represent actual development proposals associated with this Project. In the Comprehensive Plan Housing Element, there are several housing objectives that promote potential greater diversity of unit types and ownership that this project would help to implement. These include (summarized from Exhibit 5 – Housing Objectives and Tools, Page H-10 of the Comprehensive Plan): - Promote housing ownership through single-family dwellings on small lots, cottages, and townhomes. - Allow for a variety of housing types by way of encouraging multiplexes, cottages, townhomes, and small lot single-family dwellings - Increase ownership opportunities for lower-income households by potentially allowing for incentives such as permit and impact fee waivers. Housing Element Goals and Policies No. H-11 also further spells out the need for home ownership opportunities: “Promote opportunities for home ownership through single-family detached and semi-attached housing, fee-simple cottages and townhouses, and condominium apartments.” These types of housing units would not be allowed in the existing R-7 zoned areas (though would in the R- 20). Changing the Comprehensive Plan designation and Zoning classification to R-16, as conditioned, would not be out of character with the surrounding properties and would potentially provide further consistency with several goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The requested Comprehensive Plan amendment will remain internally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan through approval / adoption of the associated Rezone request. 2. Criterion #2 – ACC 14.22.110(A)(2): Whether the capacity to provide adequate services is diminished or increased. Staff Analysis: The proposed application for a change in the Comprehensive Plan designation has been reviewed by the City’s Utilities, Traffic division, and the Valley Regional Fire Authority. Based on these reviews, the change would potentially adversely affect the provision of services, specifically Sewer and Exhibit 1a Page 164 of 465 Exhibit 1a – Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone – Page 9 of 12 Traffic. As is typical with development in the City, adequate infrastructure improvements will be required to be provided concurrent with future development. As discussed under Conclusions, above, the existing sewer pump station located within the Monterey Park (formerly, Auburn 40) subdivision was designed to serve this Site at its current zoning densities. The Applicant commissioned a study to determine if the pump station would have upgrades required if the zoning density increased, and it would. A condition of the rezone will be that any future developments will need to analyze the system again and determine the necessary upgrades. Also as discussed under Conclusions, above, the intersection of ‘I’ St. NE and 40th St. NE would fall below the LOS minimum established in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan which for this portion of the ‘I’ Street corridor would be LOS D which is defined as: “LOS D borders on the range in which small increases in the number of vehicles may cause substantial increases in delay and decreases in travel speed. LOS D may be due to poor progression through the signalized intersections along a corridor, inappropriate signal timing, high traffic volumes, or a combination of these factors. Average travel speeds are about 40 percent of FFS [free-flow speeds].” Based on the existing zoning, this intersection would operate at LOS E upon development, and with the proposed zoning it would operate at LOS F, which would require improvements to the intersection (such as a roundabout or traffic signal). The detailed analysis is included in Exhibit 6. Note that the TIA is based off of the initial request which was for a change of the entire site to R-20, which the Applicant has since revised. The TIA was not required to be updated since the overall impacts will be lower. Also, project- specific TIA(s) will be required for future development(s). In addition to the future intersection deficiencies, adequate right-of-way (ROW) to connect the eastern end of Monterey Park through this Site to ‘I’ St. NE will be required, as conditioned below, and as discussed under Conclusions, above. The Condition for ROW dedication for the Rezone Ordinance will be general enough to provide the City Engineer with discretion to ensure all potential impacts are able to be addressed with any future development proposal(s). 3. Criterion #3 – ACC 14.22.110(A)(3): Assumptions upon which the comprehensive plan is based are found to be invalid. Staff Analysis: The policies of the Comprehensive Plan are not invalid. As discussed under Criterion #1, above, the Comprehensive Plan seeks to promote the types of housing that would be possible under the Moderate Density Residential Land Use Designation. The Applicant’s request to change six parcels to Moderate Density Residential is not out of character with the designations or uses in the immediate vicinity. The requested change is a logical request based on these existing surrounding uses and land use designations, and as discussed throughout this Staff Report, as conditioned. 4. Criterion #4 – ACC 14.22.110(A)(4): A determination of change or lack of change in conditions or circumstances has occurred since the adoption of the latest amendment to the specific section of the comprehensive plan that dictates the need for a proposed amendment. Staff Analysis: There have been changes in circumstances since the current land use designations were applied. The principal change would be the lack of affordable housing along with the lack of access to affordable home ownership throughout not only Auburn but in King County. The requested change to “Moderate Density Residential” and ‘R-16 zone”, as conditioned, provides the opportunity for home ownership for those with living wage incomes. 5. Criterion #5 – ACC 14.22.110(A)(5): If applicable, a determination that a question of consistency exists between the comprehensive plan and Chapter 36.70A RCW, the countywide planning policies for either King and/or Pierce County, as appropriate, and Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region. Exhibit 1a Page 165 of 465 Exhibit 1a – Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone – Page 10 of 12 Staff Analysis: The change, if approved, would continue to be consistent with the Growth Management Act (Chapter 36.70A RCW), the King County Countywide Planning Policies and Vision 2040. The proposal is consistent because upon future development it will provide land suitable for residential development and is focusing on providing higher-density housing on existing urban lands that are located near transit corridors. 6. Criterion #6 – ACC 14.22.110(A)(6): If the request is to change the land use designation of a specific property on the comprehensive plan land use map, the applicant must demonstrate one of the following: a. The current land use designation was clearly made in error or due to an oversight; b. The proposed land use designation is adjacent to property having a similar or compatible designation, or other conditions are present to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties; c. There has been a change in conditions since the current land use designation came into effect. Staff Analysis: The requested change is consistent with Item b in that adjacent parcels have similar land use designations. Specifically, the area to the north (Monterey Park) is a Planned Unit Development (PUD) that was developed with detached single-family dwellings on small (~3,500 sq.-ft.) lots as well as some duplex-style buildings on fee simple lots in the northwest portion of the subdivision. The area to the south is zoned R-7, although owned by the Auburn School District so residential development is unlikely, and to the southwest is an existing single-family neighborhood. The properties to the east are owned by the King County River and Floodplain Management Section and contain the Green River Trail, and therefore are not likely to be developed. To the west of the site is existing R-20 zoning and three single-family homes on large lots. Further west, across ‘I’ St. NE is designated Heavy Commercial and contains uses such as office and manufacturing uses. REZONE RELATED – CONCLUSIONS: Note that this application was submitted on May 7, 2020, and deemed a Complete Application on June 4, 2020, and is therefore vested to Ch. 18.68 ACC in place prior to Ordinance No. 6779 (updates to “Zoning Code and Map Amendments”, adopted July 20, 2020). The Applicant has requested a rezone from R-7, Residential and R-20, Residential to R-16, Residential. Per the previously codified ACC 18.68.030(B)(1)(b) if the rezone request also requires changes to the Comprehensive Plan, the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council. Chapter 18.68 ACC contains the intent and process for zoning code amendments, in this case a site-specific zoning map amendment has been requested. Auburn City Code does not contain any specific rezone criteria for City Staff to review; however, Case Law offers some rezone criteria (“A Little Bit Pregnant: The Multi-Personalities of Site Specific Rezones - Or - A Cheat Sheet for Everything You Need to Know about Site-Specific Rezones”, by Phil Olbrechts on mrsc.org, April 1, 2013) as follows: “…require that the proponents of a rezone must establish that conditions have substantially changed since the original adoption and that the rezone must bear a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, morals or welfare. If a rezone implements the comprehensive plan, a showing that a change of circumstances has occurred is not required.” With the change in City procedures by Ordinance No. 6655 to allow concurrent recommendations by the Planning Commission on both the Comprehensive plan and zoning map changes, the recommendations on each should be consistent and therefore does not need to show a change in circumstances has occurred. The requested rezone bears a substantial relationship to the public health, safety, morals and welfare. Adequate public facilities such as water, sewer, and electricity, are capable of being provided for the parcels upon future development and would therefore not be detrimental to public health. The rezone itself is not anticipated to allow any uses or acts that would pose any detrimental effects on the morals or welfare of the Exhibit 1a Page 166 of 465 Exhibit 1a – Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone – Page 11 of 12 public. No impacts to public safety outside of normal residential development are anticipated. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission to recommend approval of a map amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Map 1.1, Land Use Designation, changing the land use designation for parcels 000420-0013, 00420-0019, 000420-0025 and a portion of parcels 00420-0022 and 000420-0024 (approximately 5.3 acres) from "Multiple Family Residential" to "Moderate Density Residential" and the remainder of parcels 00420-0022, 000420-0024, and the entirety of parcel 000420-0003 (approximately 31.8 acres), from "Single Family Residential" to "Moderate Density Residential." Also, to recommend approval of a corresponding zoning map change (rezone) for parcels 000420-0013, 00420-0019, 000420-0025 and a portion of parcels 00420-0022 and 000420-0024 (approximately 6.4 acres) from "R-20" to "R-16 with Staff Recommended Conditions" and the remainder of parcels 00420-0022, 000420- 0024, and the entirety of parcel 000420-0003 (approximately 30.7 acres), from "R-7" to "R-16 with five (5) Staff Recommended Conditions." CONDITIONS These five conditions of the rezone require: 1. The maximum density over the entire 6 parcels shall not exceed 12 units per acre (the minimum of the R-16 zone), plus or minus 10% (density could range from 10.8 units/acre to 13.2 units/acre). 2. The maximum number of apartment units over the entire 6 parcels shall not exceed 128 units. This cap is based on the achievable number of apartment units for the pre-existing portion of the site zoned R-20 residential. Any apartment buildings and/or units would only be allowed to be located within the southern half of the six parcels. The “southern half” would be defined as an east-west line drawn at the midpoint of a line drawn north-south between the northern boundary of Parcel No. 000420-0022 and the southern boundary of Parcel No. 000420-0024. Development of any apartment units shall be done concurrently, or after, development of the housing types listed in the following condition. The number of apartment units shall be the same or less than the other housing types. For example, if an apartment development is proposed with 100 units, at least 100 units of the other housing types shall also be included in the development. 3. At least three types of ownership housing for the remainder of the six parcels shall be provided with each type of housing to represent a minimum of 15% of the housing units. Ownership housing shall be defined as townhouses, rowhouses, single-family detached, condominiums, multi-plexes (limited to duplex, triplex, or fourplex), or other similar types as approved by the Director of Community Development. For example, a development could include 15% triplex, 15% townhouses, and 70% single-family. 4. Right-of-way (ROW) shall be dedicated along with the first development proposal connecting, at a minimum, ‘L’ St. NE, ‘O’ Pl. NE, or ‘R’ St. NE through the site to the intersection of ‘I’ St. NE and 40th St. NE, as determined by the City Engineer. Improvements to this ROW will be as determined by the City Engineer for conformance with the City’s Engineering Design Standards. 5. Upon future development of any or all of the six parcels, a sewer pump station analysis shall be provided to the City for review and approval, the details as determined by the City Engineer, to determine what upgrades are needed to the “Auburn 40” sewer pump station to increase capacity to serve the development. Exhibit 1a Page 167 of 465 Exhibit 1a – Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment and Rezone – Page 12 of 12 EXHIBIT LIST Note that some items were included along with the materials for the October 20, 2020 meeting. Although all of the Exhibits are included in this packet, items in bold are new. Exhibit 1 Agenda Bill (cover page) Exhibit 1a Staff Report Exhibit 2 Completed Master Land Use Application Form, Owner Auth. Form, Legal Description, and Maps & Exhibits, Received May 7, 2020 Exhibit 3 Applicant’s Request to Review Application, dated September 28, 2020 Exhibit 4 Revised Comprehensive Plan Statement, originally dated July 17, 2020, revised October 14, 2020 Exhibit 5 Revised Rezone Statement, originally dated July 17, 2020, revised October 14, 2020 Exhibit 5a Applicant’s response proposed Rezone Conditions, dated October 14, 2020 Exhibit 6 Traffic Impact Analysis, originally dated April 2020, revised August 2020, prepared by Gibson Traffic Consultants Exhibit 7 Completed SEPA Checklist, originally dated April 26, 2020, revised August 18, 2020 and October 14, 2020 Exhibit 8 Combined Notice of Application, Notice of Public Hearing, and Determination of Non- Significance, issued October 19, 2020 Exhibit 9 Dept. of Commerce Review Letter, dated October 22, 2020 Exhibit 10 Comprehensive Plan and Rezone Map – showing changes Exhibit 11 Sewer Pump Station Analysis, dated June 24, 2020, prepared by Pace Engineers Exhibit 12 Critical Areas Report, dated April 2018, prepared by Shockey Planning Group Exhibit 13 R-16 Residential zone Land Uses Table Exhibit 14 Sample House Plans Exhibit 15 Public Comments with City Responses Exhibit 1a Page 168 of 465 Exhibit 2 Page 169 of 465 Exhibit 2 Page 170 of 465 Exhibit 2 Page 171 of 465 LEGAL DESCRIPTION (TAX PARCEL 000420-0003) THAT PORTION OF THE GEORGE E. KING DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 40 IN SECTIONS 31 AND 32, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WA SHINGTON AND SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WA SHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID KING DONATION LAND CLAIM, 651.53 FEET SOUTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF W.A COX DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 38 BEING A POINT ON THE LINE DESCRIBED IN THAT BOUNDARY LINE AGREEMENT RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 7903021118; THENCE SOUTH 88°46'00" EAST ALONG SAID LINE 2,167.39 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 01°47'59" WEST PARALLEL TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID KING DONATION LAND CLAIM, 673.63 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT ON THE LINE DESCRIBED IN THE BOUNDARY LINE AGREEMENT RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 7903190605; THENCE SOUTH 88°22'00" EAST ALONG SAID LINE 800.33 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE EAST LINE OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WA SHINGTON; THENCE NORTH 02°56'45" EAST ALONG SAID EAST LINE, 288.23 FEET TO THE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF AND ALSO BEING THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE SOUTH 88°53'11" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 32, 193.166 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE TAKE LINE DESCRIBED IN KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 7409060426; THENCE NORTH 02°53'33" EAST ALONG SAID LINE 159.73 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID LINE NORTH 26°49'36" WEST 261.79 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO A POINT WHICH BEARS SOUTH 88°46'00" EAST OF THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 88°46'00" WEST ALONG THE BOUNDARY LINE DESCRIBED IN THE BOUNDARY LINE AGREEMENT AND DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 7903021118, 876.908 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT ALL THAT PORTION OF THE HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED TRACT "X" LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31 AND THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, AND THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, KING COUNTY, WA SHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT "X", ALSO BEING THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE AFOREMENTIONED SECTION 6; THENCE SOUTH 02°56'47" WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SECTION 6 (AND SAID TRACT "X") A DISTANCE OF 288.23 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT "X"; THENCE NORTH 88°21 '58" WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT "X" A DISTANCE OF 43.4 7 FEET TO A POINT ON THE REDDINGTON LE VEE ALIGNMENT; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTH LINE AND ALONG SAID ALIGNMENT NORTH 01°37'47" EAST A DISTANCE OF 6.84 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID ALIGNMENT NORTH 22°19'3 l" WEST A DISTANCE OF 650.29 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 165.00 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID ALIGNMENT NORTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE AN ARC DISTANCE OF 67.85 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 23°33'33"; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID ALIGNMENT NORTH 01 °14'02" EAST A DISTANCE OF 9.47 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT "X"; Exhibit 2 Page 172 of 465 Exhibit 2 Page 173 of 465 King C oun ty, Eag le Vie w Tech n ol ogi es, In c. Westpo rt Capital Parcels Date: 4 /9/202 0 Notes: Th e infor matio n in clu de d on t his map has been comp ile d b y Kin g Count y staf f from a variety of source s an d is su bject to cha ng ewithout n otice. Kin g Co unt y makes no re present ations o r wa rra nties, exp re ss o r im plied , a s to accu ra cy, complet en ess, t ime lin ess,or rig hts to the use of such informa tion . This d ocu me nt is not intended for u se as a survey pr od uct. King Cou nty shall n ot be lia blefor a ny g en er al, sp ecial, indirect, incide ntal, o r conse qu en tial damag es including , but not limited to , lost revenu es or lo st profitsresulting from th e use or m isu se of t he info rmat ion cont aine d on this map . An y sale of this map or in formation o n t his map isprohibited except by written p er mission of King County.± Exhibit 2 Page 174 of 465 Exhibit 2 Page 175 of 465 Vacant R-20 Zoning Developed R-20 Zoning Vacant R-20 Zoning Underutilized R-7 Zoning Undeveloped R-7/Future School Site Developed/Re-developable Heavy Commercial Zoning C-4 Zoning, Developed as Mallard Pointe Apartments Developed Light Industrial Open Space Zoning Govt Owned PUD Exhibit 2 Page 176 of 465 Exhibit 2 Page 177 of 465 Exhibit 2 Page 178 of 465 Employment (1 mile radius) •Thyseen Krupp •TMX Aerospace •Fleenor Paper •Victory Packaging •Del Monte •FedEx •Exact Aerospace •FANUC Machining •A&G Machine •Spears Manufacturing •Wasser Corporation •Cascadia Metals •Conrad Manufacturing •International Belt •TTF Aerospace •Richards Packaging Exhibit 2 Page 179 of 465 Kin g C ounty, Ea gleVie w Te chn ologies, In c. North bou nd 1 /2 m ile fro m Tra nsit Date : 4/28/20 20 For Westport Cap ital The informat ion included on t his m ap has been compiled by King Count y staff f rom a v ariet y of s ources and is subjec t to changewithout not ice. K ing County mak es no representat ions or warranties, ex press or implied, as t o ac curacy, c ompleteness, t imeliness,or rights t o the use of s uch infor mation. This document is not int ended for use as a survey product . King Count y shall not be liablefor any general, special, indirec t, incidental, or c ons equent ial damages including, but not lim ited t o, los t revenues or lost prof it sresulting f rom the us e or misuse of the inf ormat ion contained on this map. A ny s ale of this map or inform ation on this map isprohibited except by writt en perm is sion of King Count y.± Exhibit 2 Page 180 of 465 Kin g C ounty, Ea gleVie w Te chn ologies, In c. South bou nd 1/2 mile fr om Tr ansit Date : 4/28/20 20 For Westport Cap ital The informat ion included on t his m ap has been compiled by King Count y staff f rom a v ariet y of s ources and is subjec t to changewithout not ice. K ing County mak es no representat ions or warranties, ex press or implied, as t o ac curacy, c ompleteness, t imeliness,or rights t o the use of s uch infor mation. This document is not int ended for use as a survey product . King Count y shall not be liablefor any general, special, indirec t, incidental, or c ons equent ial damages including, but not lim ited t o, los t revenues or lost prof it sresulting f rom the us e or misuse of the inf ormat ion contained on this map. A ny s ale of this map or inform ation on this map isprohibited except by writt en perm is sion of King Count y.± Exhibit 2 Page 181 of 465 Kin g C ounty Date : 4/28/202 0 For W est por t Cap it al The informati on i ncl uded o n this map has been compiled by King County staff from a variety of sources and issubject to cha nge wit hout notice. King County makes no representations or warranties, express or implied,as to a ccura cy, co mple teness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such information. This document is not intendedfor u se as a survey product. King County shall not be liable for any general, special, indirect, incidental, orconsequential damage s i ncluding, but not limited to, lost revenues or lost profits resulting from the use or misuseof the i nformatio n con taine d on this map. Any sale of this map or information on this map is prohibited except bywritten permi ssion of Ki ng County. Legend Pa rce ls Po ten tia llandslide h a za rdareas (2 01 6 , s eeexplanation--->) Se ismic h az ard(1 9 90 SAO) Coa l min e h az ard(1 9 90 SAO) Stre a m (19 9 0 SAO) clas s 1 clas s 2 p ere nn ial clas s 2 s almo nid clas s 3 un clas sifie d Wetlan d (1 99 0SAO) Se n sitive are anotice on title Wild life n e two rk FEMAprelimina ryfloodway FEMAprelimina ry 1 00 -yea r flo od p la in Flo od o the r ar ea s 0.2% an nu a lchance floo dhazard (50 0year) zon e X p rote ctedby lev ee Reg ulato ryfloodplain Floo d Plain M ap ± Exhibit 2 Page 182 of 465 “Missing Middle” Housing in the Region “Middle” housing refers to a range of housing types — from duplexes to townhomes to low-rise multifamily developments — that bridge a gap between single-family housing and more intense multifamily and commercial areas. PSRC’s analysis of King County assessor data finds that these development types tend to be more affordable than either single-family homes or higher density housing options. Middle housing can help promote housing diversity, give people greater housing choices, and produce urban densities that support walkable communities, local retail and commer- cial services, and efficient public transit. Yet availability of these housing options is often few and far in between in many communi- ties, hence the term “missing” middle housing. PSRC conducted an analysis using King County assessor data for residential sales trans- actions to confirm whether and to what degree middle housing types can offer more affordable homeownership options in the local market. King County was chosen as a case study area, given a broader array of available housing types and larger sample sizes represented in its assessor sales database. Residential sales transactions were categorized into four housing types — detached single family, townhomes (or attached single family), low/mid-rise condo, and high-rise condo. Mobile homes were excluded from the analysis. The distinction between low/mid-rise and high-rise condo was determined based on construction class (e.g., masonry, wood frame, and prefab steel was considered low/mid-rise; structural steel and reinforced concrete was considered high-rise). 1011 Western Ave., Suite 500 • Seattle, WA 98104-1035 • 206-464-7532 • info@psrc.org • https://www.psrc.org • November 7, 2018 Puget Sound Regional CouncilPUGET SOUND TRENDS Source: Opticos Design, Inc., MissingMiddleHousing.com Exhibit 2 Page 183 of 465 Middle housing is more affordable than single-family Over the past 10 years, the median sales prices of townhomes and low- to mid-rise condos were consistently and substantially lower than for single-family homes. Over the past calendar year, the median price for townhome sales recorded to date (through September 2018) was $448,000, 31 percent lower than the median price for sin- gle-family homes ($650,000). The median price for low- to mid-rise condos was $530,000 or 18 percent lower than for single-family homes. High-rise condos, which are some of the most cost-intensive projects to build, came in with the highest median price of $675,000. Unit square footage is a key factor behind these price differentials, as the typical town- home and especially condominium unit is smaller than the standard detached single-fam- ily home. But in many urban markets, demand is growing for affordable homeownership options within walkable neighborhoods well served by local retail and amenities. Middle housing is small share of region’s housing stock An analysis of American Community Survey data shows that these middle housing options are indeed limited or “missing” from the region’s homeownership market. The region’s ownership housing stock is dominated by traditional detached single-family housing. 1011 Western Ave., Suite 500 • Seattle, WA 98104-1035 • 206-464-7532 • info@psrc.org • https://www.psrc.org • November 7, 2018 Exhibit 2 Page 184 of 465 Detached single-family represents 81 percent of the ownership housing stock in King County, and 86 percent of the stock in Kitsap, Pierce and Snohomish counties combined. Two housing types that best approximate middle housing — attached single-family homes (or townhomes) and multifamily structures with 2-19 units — comprise just 6 percent and 5 percent of King County’s ownership stock, and even less (3 percent and 3 percent) across the balance of the region. Addressing housing affordability in the central Puget Sound region requires a variety of tools and strategies to ensure people of all incomes have access to housing that meets their needs — and middle housing is part of this work. Regional and local tools can help to promote and incentivize the development of more middle housing to provide more affordable homeownership opportunities. VISION 2050 provides an opportunity for the region to develop policies and actions to make sure middle housing won’t be “missing” in the future. 1011 Western Ave., Suite 500 • Seattle, WA 98104-1035 • 206-464-7532 • info@psrc.org • https://www.psrc.org • November 7, 2018 Exhibit 2 Page 185 of 465 TOYER STRATEGIC ADVISORS, INC. DAVID TOYER, PRESIDENT 3705 COLBY AVE | SUITE 1 EVERETT, WA 98201 425-344-1523 | toyerstrategic.com September 28, 2020 Community Development Attn: Thaniel Gouk City of Auburn 25 W. Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 RE: APPLICANT REVISION TO CPA 20-0002 and REZ20-0002 Dear Mr. Gouk: On behalf of our client, Westport Capital Investment, we are requesting that our application for a re-designation and rezone from R-7 to R-20 be amended to be proposed as being from R-7 to R-16. After a more extensive evaluation of the City’s land use code, we believe that the R-16 zone would be more appropriate for the type of attached single-family and multiple-family housing options our client anticipates will be developed on its parcels in the future. As you are aware, R-16 allows for duplex, attached townhome, and multiple-family uses, which mix of uses encourages the creation of missing middle housing that is owner and/or renter occupied. It is our client’s intent that future development of this site accommodates a range of housing options. More specifically, attached single-family housing types as permitted under the R-16 zone provide affordable home ownership opportunities for a broader market segment that is otherwise not able to afford ownership in Auburn. Attached you will find revised written statements (narratives) for the Applicant’s comprehensive plan amendment and rezone proposals. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at any time. Sincerely, David K. Toyer President Exhibit 3 Page 186 of 465 TOYER STRATEGIC ADVISORS, INC. DAVID TOYER, PRESIDENT 3705 COLBY AVE | SUITE 1 EVERETT, WA 98201 425-344-1523 | toyerstrategic.com WESTPORT CAPITAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICANT’S WRITTEN STATEMENT [REVISED JULY 17 SEPTEMBER 24 OCTOBER 14, 2020] LOCATION Applicant is the owner of six parcels, including 0004200013, 0004200019, 0004200025, 0004200024, 0004200022, and 0004200003 located adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Auburn Way North Corridor (I Street NE) and less than 1 mile east of the NW Auburn Manufacturing Village as shown in Figures 1 & 2: Figure 1 – General Location Map Figure 2 – Vicinity Map Exhibit 4 Page 187 of 465 Page 2 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement EXISTING CONDITIONS Applicant’s parcels have the following current land use designation, which is also shown in Figure 4: 0004200013 – multiple family 0004200019 – multiple family 0004200025 – multiple family 0004200024 – single-family 0004200022 – single-family 0004200003 – single family Figure 3 – Area Land Use Pattern Map Exhibit 4 Page 188 of 465 Page 3 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement Figure 4 – Existing Land Use Figure 5 – Existing Zoning LAND USE DESIGNATION REQUESTED Applicant is requesting the land use designation be amended from Single-Family to Moderate Density Residential Multiple- Family (comprehensive plan amendment) concurrent with a rezone from R-7 to R-20 R-16 (zoning map amendment) for all six of its parcels: 1. Re-designate 32.4 acres from “Single-Family” to Moderate Density Residential “Multiple-Family” which action will: • fix an inconsistency between the current single-family land use designation (Single-Family) and current zoning (R- 20) for R-20 zoning that presently applied to 1.2 acres of Applicant’s property as indicated by the blue arrow in Figure 4 above. The R-20 zoning for this area was established as part of Ordinance 4299 in 1988; • create a more appropriate transition between the existing residential areas (for example the PUD) and areas with higher intensity designations (R-20, Heavy Commercial); • result in a condition that multi-family apartments units be limited to the southern half of any future development of these parcels; • establish a needed mixture of multi-family, single family detached, and attached single family housing options within 1 mile of a key commercial corridor (Auburn Way N) and a significant area for employment (NW Auburn Manufacturing District); and Exhibit 4 Page 189 of 465 Page 4 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement • create transit compatible densities within a half-mile of all-day transit services along Auburn Way N, which is consistent with local, county, and regional policies for land use, development patterns, etc. WRITTEN STATEMENT Applicant is required as part of its comprehensive plan application to submit a written statement to justify its proposal by demonstratinge its compliance with local, county, and regional comprehensive plan goals and policies. The following responds to the specific questions Applicant must answer in its written statement. 1. The proposed change will further and be consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan and the plan will remain internally consistent Applicant’s parcels are part of small pocket of single-family designated lands that border a key, planned commercial corridor (Auburn Way N. Corridor) and an important employment district (NW Auburn Manufacturing Village). This area of single family is The majority of Applicant’s parcels are surrounded by higher intensity land use designations, including Multiple-Family, Heavy Commercial, and Light Industrial. And the single-family designation land use immediately south of Applicant’s site is owned by the Auburn School District and most likely to be a school site, not a single-family residential neighborhood. Additionally, the The proposed re-designation to moderate density residential would create a better transition between the Planned Unit Development to the north and higher intensity residential and commercial uses to the west and southwest. northernmost portion of the area designated Single-Family is already developed with a high-density, single-family detached Planned Unit Development and a 1.2 acre portion of Applicant’s three single family designated parcels hasve been zoned R-20 zone despite having a land use designation of Single-Family. The following assists in demonstrating how Applicant’s the proposal furthers and is consistent with the comprehensive plan: ► Applicant’s proposal is consistent with the description and designation criteria for Moderate Density Residential Multiple-Family as follows: Description. Moderate Density Residential designated areas are planned to accommodate a variety of residential dwelling types. Varying intensities may be permitted to provide a transition between single-family residential and other more intensive uses or activities (such as arterial streets) based on adjacent density, intensity, and/or character. Appropriate densities in these areas generally range from 7 up to 20 dwelling units per acre. Dwelling types generally range from single-family dwelling to multiple-family dwellings, with larger structures allowed (within the density range) where offsetting community benefits can be identified. Designation Criteria 1. Previously developed moderate-density residential areas; or 2. Areas that provide a transition between single-family and multifamily, single-family and nonresidential, multifamily and nonresidential zones or development that are adjacent and meet the development parameters of the Moderate Density Residential designation. Applicant Discussion The area features a mix of zoning ranging from R-7 to R-20 to Heavy Commercial. Existing multiple-family designated properties are located adjacent to single family properties, which does not promote appropriate density transitions. Applicant’s proposal would improve the transition between the existing lower density residential uses and the surrounding higher intensity uses. Two of Applicant’s three parcels have split zoning of R-20 and R-7. The current R- 20 zone is the result of multiple-family zoning established pre-Growth Management Act (GMA)2,3 in 1988 by Ordinance 4299, which zoning was carried forward in the City’s subsequent GMA plans and zoning maps. The allowance of R-20 (multiple family) zoning in this area was based on planning for uses that transition from more intense to less intense uses, as well as recognizing that areas designated for commercial and light industrial uses benefit from adjacent residential development. In the 25 years since the first GMA comprehensive plan was adopted, the growth and employment targets in Auburn Exhibit 4 Page 190 of 465 Page 5 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement have increased and land use designations and zones have since been modified to reflect regional policies that seek to hold the present Urban Growth Area boundary in place. This has resulted in the need for more and higher densities based on specific principals which include planning for these higher intensity residential uses (multiple-family; R-20) to develop within one-half mile of transit routes, adjacent to major commercial or mixed-uses areas (centers), and/or close to employment centers (and industrial centers). Applicant’s parcels adhere to those planning principals as it is proximate to all-day transit, a commercial corridor, and an significant employment district. The extension of R-20 The redesignation to moderate density residential of the Applicant’s R-7 over the remaining portions of parcels 0004200022 and 0004200024, as well as 0004200003, is consistent with the comprehensive plan’s description and designation criteria for where moderate density multiple family uses should be placed. ► Applicant’s proposal is consistent with the comprehensive plan’s stated ‘Policies’ for the Multiple-Family land use designation and Applicant’s location can further result in consistency with the stated policy goals for the development regulations which implement the designation: LU-22 Development regulations should include density bonuses and flexible development standards that creation incentives for innovative site and building design, incorporation of open space and public art, nonmotorized connectivity to parks and commercial areas, proximity to transit services, supplemental natural resource protection, supplemental use of CPTED, and supplemental use of low-impact development techniques. Applicant Discussion: Re-designating the land use to multiple familymoderate density residential would promote and incentivize additional innovative site and building design techniques where such innovative design can be used to better incorporate open spaces that connect with and help supplement the adjacent natural resource areas around the Green River, as well as: • provide nonmotorized connectivity to both (North Green River Park and the Green River Trail) and commercial areas (the Auburn Way N Corridor) • locate affordable and accessible for sale detached and attached single-family units, as well as multiple-family housing options, including opportunities for workforce housing, within a half-mile proximity1,2 of all-day transit services (Route 180) Applicant emphasizes these points as they are key elements of successful, sustainable use of alternative modes of transportation and help overcome housing accessibility obstacles for workforce housing by reducing the combined housing + transportation costs as examined in detail within the Comprehensive Plan (Figure 24, Appendix B: City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment, Berk & Associates, 2014). LU-27 Provide a variety of housing typologies to suit the needs of various potential residents. Applicant Discussion: 1 The Puget Sound Regional Council’s (PSRC) “Growing Transit Communities Strategy” address the need to create thriving and equitable transit communities in the region (including Auburn), describing transit communities on page 4 as “generally the areas within a half mile radius of, or approximately ten-minute walking distance from, high-capacity transit stations, such as light rail, bus rapid transit, streetcar, and other major transit hubs.” Applicant’s parcels are within ½ mile all-day transit services via Route 180. 2 King County Metro Route 180 includes northbound stop (#57915) at 37th & Auburn Way N. and southbound stop (#58235) at 42nd & Auburn Way. This route provides frequent all-day service and includes night owl service, which specifically is critical to supporting transportation options for the workforce working shifts. Sidewalks within the future development can be extended to connect with existing sidewalks in the area to provide access to this service. Route 180 is an all-day route with "night owl" service and Route 180 is planned to convert to a RapidRide I line in 2023. Route 180 provides connections to Auburn Station, Kent Station, Burien, Sea-tac, and etc. And it can connecting connects riders to Sound Transit bus and commuter train services. Route 180 connects to both the Auburn and Kent Transit Stations, plus offers riders opportunities to connect with Sound Transit bus and train services. Route 180 is the type of transit route that supports businesses and workers throughout the Puget Sound. Exhibit 4 Page 191 of 465 Page 6 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement The Applicant’s proposed re-designation can support a variety of for sale single-family (attached and detached) and multiple-family housing typologies, including multi-plex (e.g. duplex, triplex and four-plex) units, detached single family homes, attached rowhouse/townhouse units, and multiple-family units, that could can meet the needs of a broad rangeseveral types of future (and existing) residents as the use matrix in Section 18.07.020 of the Auburn Municipal Code shows that the R-20 implementing zone permits both multiple family dwellings and attached townhomes. Multiple family dwellings, multi-plexes, single family homes and attached rowhouse/townhomes are flexible housing typologies that promote flexibility in design and help create that supply needed “missing middle” housing3 as identified by the PSRC – housing that can be renter or owner-occupied and which is affordable and accessible to a wide range of the existing and future population, including couples, young families, seniors, etc. ► The consistency of Applicant’s proposal with pages LU-2 and LU-3 of the comprehensive plan can be used in concert with the City’s implementing development regulations to further Policies LU-2 and LU-6 as follows: LU-2 As the market and availability of utilities enable denser development to occur, standards should be developed to maximize density while preserving open space and critical areas. Applicant Discussion: This proposal would encourage development at medium to higher densities in an area where attached single-family and multiple-family housing is needed in the marketplace to promote home ownership and affordable housing; existing infrastructure exists (and does not have to be extended long distances to serve less dense traditional development patterns); and the specific site design flexibility of the multiple-familymoderate density residential land use designation can promote greater connectivity and access to open space and preservation of natural areas along the Green River. LU-6 Cluster development is the preferred form of residential development in all residential designations with the goal of preserving natural areas, critical areas, and area that support low-impact development. Where clustering accomplishes these objectives, it should not come at the expense of lost development potential. Variances to lot size, lot dimensions, building height, and other bulk or dimensional standards should be utilized in order to create incentives that promote preservation. Applicant Discussion: By designating this proposal Applicant’s parcels as moderate density residential multiple-family, the City will be supporting greater site design flexibility that will promote the clustering of units and/or buildings in full recognition of the need to incentivize greater preservation of open space, natural areas, and critical areas. Secondarily this help to support and encourage improved access to the adjacent open space and trail corridors. ► Applicant’s proposal furthers and is consistent with the comprehensive plan, improve on the City’s ability to respond to housing trends and needs as identified in the Housing Element, including the following: Page H-2 Trends in household size indicate that Auburn will need to ensure the availability of a variety of housing types to match the needs of both small and large households. Applicant’s requested land use designation will add for sale housing typologies that are needed to match the needs of couples, empty-nesters, seniors, workers, single parent families, and more. Page H-2 Auburn’s housing stock is older than average, and much of its rental housing stock is in fair or poor condition. Though housing is affordable in Auburn, the City could lose some of its most affordable rental housing as structures approach the ends of their useful lives. Applicant’s requested land use designation will short- and long-term help address housing needs and reduce the redevelopment pressures that can result in the loss of the City’s most affordable rental housing. Adding attached single- 3 A copy of the PSRC “Puget Sound Trends” addressing “Missing Middle” Housing in the Region is attached. Exhibit 4 Page 192 of 465 Page 7 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement family and multiple-family housing options can help to reduce displacement cause by redevelopment of existing multiple- family areas as the market and economic conditions are expected to change over time. Page H-4 A variety of housing choices can meet the needs of Auburn’s residents of all ages and affordability levels, help residents maintain and retain their homes, and promote services and amenities that improve neighborhood livability. Applicant’s requested land use designation will increase housing choices for residents (and future residents) of all ages and affordability levels by expanding the overall “housing strata” that is required to allow supports residents to more easily transitioning between segments of the housing stock as they move up, down or laterally depending on their evolving needs and economic conditions. This change in the land use designation will also increase the availability of multi-plexes (e.g. duplex, tri-plex and four-plex), attached townhome, and multiple-family housing opportunities closer to areas where a variety of services (including access to commercial areas, public transit services, etc.) exists and where improved amenities can provide new and existing residents with greater access to trails, open space, etc. Many of the housing options to be available with this moderate density residential land use re-designation and concurrent request for R-16 zoning are more reasonably prices ownership options for a broader range of buyers in Auburn. Page H-4 Well-planned housing can support Auburn’s economic goals by making it attractive and possible for residents to live near their jobs and by serving as a source of customers to support commercial districts. Applicant’s requested land use designation will increase housing opportunities within one mile of a significant area for employment (NW Auburn Manufacturing Village) and within one-half mile of an identified commercial corridor (Auburn Way N. Corridor). Page H-4 Housing in proximity to transit or mixed use projects can help reduce the need for costly infrastructure such as roads and sewers. Housing in proximity to a variety of transportation modes can increase a household’s disposable income and savings by reducing household transportation costs. Applicant’s proposed land use designation would create housing within the “optimum” proximity (one-half mile) of all-day transit and reduce the need for more costly extensions of utilities to serve areas further out. This proposal would also help address the need to create housing opportunities in locations where the true cost of housing (housing + transportation costs) can be minimized. ► Applicant’s proposal furthers and is consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan’s Housing Element, including: H-4 Promote housing that meets the needs of Auburn’s workforce, is located and designed to support affordable multi- modal transportation options, and contributes to a regional jobs-housing balance. Applicant’s proposed land use designation would promote housing to a greater number of those in the workforce4,5 with housing needs that require access to non-motorized transportation options (including those for commuting). Doing this will further improve the region’s jobs-housing balance. H-10 Provide a land use plan and zoning that offers opportunities to achieve a variety of housing styles and densities for private and non-profit housing providers. 4 “Workforce housing” as defined in the King County Countywide Planning Policies, page 66: “Housing that is affordable to households with one or more workers. Creating housing in a jurisdiction implies the consideration of the wide range of income levels that characterize working households, from one person working at minimum wage to two or more workers earning the average county wage or above. There is a particular need for workforce housing that is reasonably close to the regional and sub-regional job centers and/or easily accessible by public transportation.” 5 See Comprehensive Plan Appendix B, Exhibit 24, Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment, Berk & Associates, October 2014. Exhibit 4 Page 193 of 465 Page 8 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement Applicant’s proposed land use designation would allow for zoning that can add to the variety of housing styles and densities available in the City, including creating new opportunities for duplexes and attached townhomes that provide more affordable owner occupiedfor sale housing choices. H-17 Allow manufactured housing parks, transitional housing, and multi-family housing in appropriately zoned but limited areas. Applicant’s proposed land use designation would apply a land use designation to an area that should be zoned for “multi- family” housing based on the characteristics within the comprehensive plan. This will reduce the pressure to expand multiple-family housing zoning in other areas of the City which would be less proximate to employment, city utility services, commercial corridors, and regional open space. H-23 Promote affordable housing that meets the changing demographic needs. Applicant’s proposed land use designation would enable the City to respond to housing demand with a greater range of affordable 6 for sale housing options, helping to address both changing demographic needs and changing economic circumstances (especially those expected as a result of the Pandemic). ► Applicant’s proposal is consistent with and will further the ‘Goals’ identified in the July 2014 “Community Vision Report” incorporated as Appendix A in the current comprehensive plan: 1.2 Provide a variety of housing types that support a high quality of life for current residents and attract new residents to Auburn neighborhoods. Applicant Discussion: Re-designating Applicant’s parcels to moderate density residential multiple-family will not negatively impact the quality of life for nearby, current residents as the area is presently adjacent to other higher intensity residential and non-residential uses. Further, this re-designation will: • comply with existing city development regulations and design standards, including landscaping/buffering standards between single-family and multiple-family zone; • provide greater access and connectivity to area commercial services and open spaces; • reduce motorized travel distances7 to commercial areas and employment opportunities and ease cumulative congestion for the greater area, as Applicant’s proposal is within one-half mile of a key commercial corridor (Auburn Way N) and 1 mile of a significant portion of a major employment district (NW Auburn Manufacturing District); and • create transit compatible densities within a half-mile of all-day transit services along Auburn Way N which will improve the sustainability of multi-modal transit options in the greater area 1.5 Ensure safe, well connected and accessible neighborhoods with healthy food, parks and local services in close proximity. Addressed in earlier Applicant Discussions. 2.I “Mid‐city” scale: Encourage higher density development that supports family living and mixed uses. Maintain height limitations that keep Downtown and other development to an appropriate scale. 6 “Affordable housing” as defined in the King County Countywide Planning Policies, page 63: “Housing that is affordable at 30% or less of a household’s monthly income. This is a general term that may include housing affordable to a wide range of income.” 7 It should also be pointed out that for non-transit travel, the area is within 1 mile of S. 277 Street and within 2 miles of SR 167 and the W. Valley Highway. Exhibit 4 Page 194 of 465 Page 9 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement Addressed in earlier Applicant Discussions. 3.1 Develop an efficient, well‐connected transportation system to support a variety of travel modes, including automobile, public transit, walking and biking. Addressed in earlier Applicant Discussions. 3.3 Improve the safety, connectivity and quality of the bicycle and pedestrian networks and related facilities. Addressed in earlier Applicant Discussions. 3.5 Improve public transit service throughout the City and better connect the City to the region for residents, visitors and businesses. Addressed in earlier Applicant Discussions. ► Applicant’s proposal will further the City’s efforts to capitalize on ‘Opportunities’ as identified in the July 2014 “Community Vision Report” incorporated as Appendix A in the current comprehensive plan: 1.A Controlled, well planned growth: Actively manage Auburn’s progression from a suburban to an urban community, focusing on planned growth and expansion. Give careful consideration to appropriate limits on density and building height, seeking community input along the way. Applicant Discussion: Applicant’s proposed land use designation is consistent with the evolving planning needs of Auburn, which require continuous review to determine how to best progress from a suburban to urban community and ensure more affordable home ownership opportunities as it plans for additional forecasted growth. Specific to building heights and scale, it is important to note that the area is presently bordered by more intense land use designations like Heavy Commercial, were building heights up to 75 feet are allowed. By contrast, a R-16 multiple-family zone would be limited to building heights up to 50 feet – the scale of which can be offset 8 by the separation required between, for example, the R-7 (single-family) and R-1620 (multiple-family) zones per the City’s landscaping and setback requirements. A multiple-family moderate density residential land use designation in this location can provide an appropriate transition (step-down) in building height and scale from the Heavy Commercial zone to the surrounding residential areas. 1.B Diverse housing types: Encourage a diverse mix of housing types throughout Auburn, including single family homes, multi‐family housing and mixed‐use development. Vary housing based on neighborhood context. Addressed further in earlier Applicant Discussions. 1.C Walkable neighborhoods: Create walkable neighborhoods with safe, continuous sidewalks and accessible shopping, parks, amenities and centers of community activity nearby. Addressed further in earlier Applicant Discussions. 1.E Senior housing: Encourage quality senior housing in town so residents are able to stay in the community. Addressed further in earlier Applicant Discussions. Multiple-familyModerate Density Residential is a flexible land use designation that can provide a more appropriate transition between land uses in this area and enable the creation of many 8 It is common in many jurisdictions to allow increased building heights based on increase setbacks, which is typically done based on 1 additional foot of height for each additional foot of setback. Although the zones in land use designations of multiple-family have increased heights, they are required to have landscape buffers between their zone and adjacent single-family zones. Such buffering accomplishes the same type of “offset” to the scale of the building height. Exhibit 4 Page 195 of 465 Page 10 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement types of senior housing, including single family units, mutli-plexes (e.g. duplexes, tri-plexes, four-plexes), attached rowhouse/townhomes, and multiple-family units. 1.F Homes for the middle class: Create opportunity for the development of homes for middle income families and individuals. Addressed in earlier Applicant Discussions. The need to create “Missing Middle” housing, which includes a variety of multiple-family housing types, is in response to the growing needs of middle income families and individuals who are seeking more affordable housing ownership options combined with reduced transportation (commute) costs. 3.F Bicycle network: Address the gaps and barriers in the bicycle network. Create an expanded network of safe, connected bicycle facilities to improve travel between neighborhoods and to and from schools and commercial areas. Where possible, separate bike lanes and paths from roads. Addressed further in earlier Applicant Discussions. 3.G Trail and park connections: Improve Auburn’s system of trails and better connect existing parks and recreation areas and amenities. Build a pedestrian bridge across the White River to provide greater access to Game Farm Wilderness Park Addressed further in earlier Applicant Discussions. 5.E Park and trails connectivity: Enhance accessibility to parks and open spaces (such as the greenbelt) through hiking and biking trails that provide recreation opportunities and connect to schools and neighborhoods. Close trail gaps and complete the Green River Trail. Addressed in earlier Applicant Discussion. This designation furthers and is consistent with creating access from/between adjoining residential areas, the commercial corridor, and the Green River and Interurban trails. ► Applicant’s proposal will positively benefit the City’s future economic development goals and strategies because of its location. Applicant Discussion: The proximity of Applicant’s proposed multiple-family land use designation will contribute toward the population density needed to encourage new investments in commercial development within the Auburn Way N. Corridor and along the future extension to I Street NE furthering several of the City’s economic development goals and strategies. Further, Applicant’s proposal will create housing options within 1 mile of the Northwest Auburn Manufacturing Village where Exact Aerospace, Thyssen Krupp Aerospace, and TMX Aerospace are among a cluster of dozens of manufacturing, production, and distribution businesses – shown on the next page in Figure 5. Exhibit 4 Page 196 of 465 Page 11 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement ► Applicant’s proposal will further and be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s Economic Development Element as follows: ED-1 City promotion of new industry shall be directed at attracting business that diversifies the City’s tax base, offers secure, quality employment opportunities, is sensitive to community values, and promotes the development of attractive facilities. Applicant’s Discussion: Applicant’s proposal will create new owner or renterfor sale housing opportunities adjacent to strategic economic development areas as identified above. It would also provide the same number of multiple family units allowed under the current designations and strategically locate them further from established, lower density residential areas. Added housing options will help the City attract a workforce to support future business investments and reinvestments in these locations. ED-16 Increasing the utilization of land for manufacturing and industrial land uses should be the City’s preferred economic development and land use priority for industrially zoned areas of the City that are currently dominated by warehouse and distribution land uses. The City should promote and create incentives for new manufacturing and light industrial uses, and for the gradual conversion of existing warehouse and distribution land uses to manufacturing and sales tax generating land uses. Applicant’s Discussion: Applicant’s proposed land use designation in such close proximity to one of its older manufacturing areas will support the City’s economic development strategy as the creation of more workforce housing can attract more skilled workers to the area, strengthening the core employers in the area and encouraging their expansion. Just prior to the Pandemic, Bank of America’s Global Research division released a report on global supply chains, which concluded that re-shoring of manufacturing was increasing at a faster pace due to a combination of global factors. However, it also pointed out that there were roughly 400,000 jobs unfilled in manufacturing nationwide – an economic development challenge that has catapulted workforce development and recruitment to top of list in many areas. This region’s manufacturing base is highly technical in nature and it requires a highly skilled workforce. Even with the impacts caused by the Pandemic there will be a long-term need in the region for communities to attract skilled workers – a workforce whose incomes and housing needs vary greatly. Exhibit 4 Page 197 of 465 Page 12 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement Thus, those communities with a greater range of housing types available in proximity to area industrial districts and centers will be positioned to achieve greater results in their Business Retention & Expansion (BRE) programs, as well as their business recruitment efforts. ED-17 To support continued sales tax revenue growth opportunities in the City, those areas currently dominated by existing warehouse land uses that abut existing commercial retail areas, and that could take advantage of this proximity to realize substantive value by changing to commercial retail uses, should be considered for changes in the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations that would facilitate the conversion of these properties to commercial retail use. Applicant’s Discussion: Applicant’s requested land use designation of moderate density residential multiple-family will lead a greater concentration of population density, which is a key supportive component to encouraging new retail within emerging and transforming commercial areas. ED-23 Utilize the future extension of I Street NE as an economic development opportunity. Development of I Street NE should establish it as a stand-alone corridor and not a “back side” to Auburn Way North. Conditional use permit applications for commercial uses and nursing homes along this corridor, whose impacts can be adequately mitigated, should be supported. Applicant’s Discussion: Applicant’s requested land use designation of moderate density residential multiple-family immediately east of I Street is consistent with and will further this economic development strategy by providing a greater density of missing middle housing to support commercial uses, as the housing that is would be within a very walkable distance of commercial development, and housing that can could support segments of the workforce that need multiple-family desire owner and renter housing options proximate to and access to the the nearby transit system. 2. Whether the capacity to provide adequate services is diminished or increased Applicant Discussion: Applicant’s proposal is not a development specific request and the action to re-designate and rezone the Applicant’s property is not the final decision. Any future development will require a separate land use process. As potential impacts from an increase in density are discussed it’s important to keep in perspective that that latter land use process is where the City applies regulations identify the impacts of the specific development impacts and require appropriate mitigation. In general, Applicant’s proposal would increase demand for services, including additional demand for sewer, water, transportation, and public services (such as emergency services). But any future development would also not be approved unless capacity was available at the time of development or the project’s impacts were mitigated. While the increased demand for services is often only viewed in the negative, the following points reflect on how the Applicant’s proposal furthers and is consistent with the portions of the City’s comprehensive plan referring to services. In sum, Applicant believes that its proposed land use designation will require increased services, but through the imposition of the City’s development regulations which require development to mitigate impacts, the capacity of the City to provide adequate services will not be diminished. ► Designating the Applicant’s property as multiple-family would support more efficient utility service delivery and improve the ratio of ratepayers per acre. Applicant Discussion: The Applicant’s parcels are already adjacent to existing water, sewer, natural gas, and fiber utilities. The designation of this location as moderate density residential multiple-family will allow for more efficient service delivery by reducing both the service area and the distance over which utility infrastructure must be placed. Additionally, increased density will improve the ratio of rate payers per lineal foot of infrastructure acre which can better support long-term maintenance and operations costs, plus reduce the total amount of infrastructure that will one day require replacement. The residential Exhibit 4 Page 198 of 465 Page 13 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement property adjacent to Applicant’s site (to the south) is owned by the School District and is anticipated to be a school. At least a portion of the potential students anticipated from a project like this could be accommodated by the additional of a future school to the south. The requested land use designation as implemented through the City’s development regulations furthers and can be consistent with Policy LU-1, H-4, CF-2, CF-4, CF-7 and CF-119 of the City’s comprehensive plan. ► Designating the Applicant’s property for multiple-family would contribute impact fees and result in an improved assessed value per acre. Applicant Discussion: Increased needs for fire and police can be mitigated through impact fees, as well as compliance with improved fire and building codes; site design and aesthetic techniques (lighting, landscaping, etc.) that promote safer neighborhoods; and a greater concentration of assessed value per square foot, which supports a more stable tax base over the long-term. The requested land use designation as implemented through the City’s development regulations furthers and can be consistent with Policy LU-1, H-4, CF-2, CF-4, CF-7 and CF-11 of the City’s comprehensive plan. ► Specific to transportation, a traffic impact analysis performed by Gibson Traffic Consultants (Gibson Analysis) was prepared and submitted with this application. This study concluded: Applicant Discussion: The existing land use designation and zoning for Applicant’s three parcels would allow for as many as 218 single-family detached homes. According to the Gibson Analysis, Applicant’s proposed re-designation and rezone of the three parcels currently zoned R-7 to the maximum density allowed by code (under an R-20 scenario) would allow for as many as 624 multi-family units resulting in an increase of 1,337 daily trips, 64 AM peak hour trips and 59 PM peak-hour trips. It is important to note that this is a worse-case analysis based on the maximum density allowed in the R-20 whereas Applicant’s proposal seeks R-16 zoning with a cap on the actual projects typically have less than the maximum density would be less due to the to encourage a broader range types of housing options allowed and the nature of more compatible to this site’s as a result of site constraints, infrastructure, open space, etc. and location to adjacent neighborhoods. 9 CF-2 Encourage development where new public facilities can be provided in an efficient manner. H-4: Promote housing that meets the needs of Auburn’s workforce, is located and designed to support affordable multi-model transportation options and contributes to a regional jobs-housing balance. CF-6 New connections to the City’s sanitary sewer, water and/or storm drainage systems, shall contribute their fair share toward the construction and/or financing of future or ongoing projects to increase the capacity of those systems. CF-7 The City shall encourage and approve development only where adequate public services including police protection, fire and emergency medical services, education, parks and other recreational facilities, solid waste collection, and other governmental services are available or will be made available at acceptable levels of service prior to project occupancy or use. CF-11 No new development shall be permitted unless the facilities specified in each facility plan are available or can be provided at a level adequate to support the development. The adequacy of facilities shall be determined by the following: 1. An adopted system plan 2. Policy guidance as provided in the City Capital Facilities Plan 3. Appropriate engineering design standards as specified in applicable City plans, codes, and manuals as approved by the City Engineer 4. Environmental Review standards (adequacy includes the absence of an unacceptable adverse impact on a public facility system) 5. Case-by-case evaluation of the impacts of a proposed development on public facilities systems, first to determine the minimum level of facilities necessary to support the development, and second to determine a proportionate share of the system to be developed or financially guaranteed before approving the development Exhibit 4 Page 199 of 465 Page 14 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement The proposed concurrent rezone to R-16 would allow up to 601 units for the entire 37.6 acres; however the Applicant has agreed with the rezone all six of its parcels to R-16 zoning with to a maximum density of 12 du/acre (+/- 10%) and duplexes, attached townhomes, and/or no more than 125 multiple-family units. This would be below the maximum impact analyzed by Gibson. The Gibson analysis found that the level of service analysis of the highest potential density (R-20) of 624 units showed that the intersection of I Street NE at 42nd Street NE will operate at acceptable LOS C with the existing and proposed rezone. However, the intersection of I Street NE at 40th Street NE is likely to require some level of improvement, but can operate at an acceptable level of service with the rezone and with improvements. More important to note the Gibson Analysis found that the proposed designation and zoning for multiple-family: • Only resulted in two intersections exceeding the threshold requiring a added analysis of PM peak-hour trips • That additional analysis showed both intersections could operate at an acceptable level of service with restriping • Average daily trips for I Street NE (classified as a minor arterial) fell within the acceptable range for minor arterials 3. Assumptions upon which the comprehensive plan is based are found to be invalid Applicant Discussion: Two of Applicant’s three R-7 parcels have split zoning as a result of resulting from a rezone that was granted by Ordinance 4299 in 1988. Therefore, the portions of the two parcels with R-20 zoning are presently not inconsistent the current single- family land use designation. To create consistency between the comprehensive plan and zoning map, the land use designation should be changed appropriately to reflect the zoning that has already been established. In looking at how best to resolve this inconsistency, the Applicant has identified objectives, policies, community visioning and more (see Applicant’s Discussion to questions #1 and #2 above) which strong suggests that the assumptions by which this area was designated single-family were incorrect. Further, since the single-family designatedion property to the south of Applicant’s parcels is owned by the Auburn School District and very likely to become a future school site, the assumptions within the existing comprehensive plan that this area would become single family residential housing is are not valid. Therefore, Applicant believes the City should review its requested change on the groundsin light of: • The requested change in land use designation to moderate density residential multiple-family would not be inconsistent with future single-family land use to the south, as this is very likely to become a school. • The development of a school south of the Applicant’s parcels would thus remove residential capacity from the City’s comprehensive plan, which could be made up by the designation of Applicant’s parcels as moderate density residential multiple-family. • This “reallocation” of housing density to Applicant’s parcel would further limit the need to account for added density in a different location where infrastructure may be less capable of handling such density. Applicant believes that applying the land use designation of multiple-family across all its parcels will correct an inconsistency and correctly support needed housing options plan for development in this in accordance with the broader policy direction of the Comprehensive Plan. 4. A determination of change or lack of change in conditions or circumstances has occurred since the adoption of the latest amendment to the specific section of the comprehensive plan that dictates the need for a proposed amendment; Several changes in conditions and circumstances have occurred since the adoption of the latest amendments to the Exhibit 4 Page 200 of 465 Page 15 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement Comprehensive Plan’s land use designations, including: • The continued, chronic lack of housing options to effectively create enough housing diversity to improve the area jobs-to-housing imbalance and provide housing options within closer proximities to employment districts • The passage of I-967 and the resulting impacts to transportation projects and transit services, which o heightens the need to re-examine opportunities to locate density near major transportation and transit corridors o creates a greater and more urgent need to emphasize housing density that is within one-half mile of major transit routes to provide stable ridership that can support transit operations o suggests more emphasis needs to be placed on creating diverse housing options near areas with a concentrated cluster of employment • A Pandemic that has dramatically impacted the economic condition of all businesses, individuals, and governments, which is likely to result (short and long term) in greater market demand for housing options that are more affordable, closer to places of employment, and near major recreation amenities (like regional and sub- regional trail systems). • The final stages leading to the adoption of a new regional plan (PSRC VISION 2050) which continues to emphasis a Regional Growth Strategy that recommends King County’s core cities like Auburn collectively accept 40% of the forecasted population growth to 2050 (up from 22% in VISION 2040) 5. If applicable, a determination that a question of consistency exists between the comprehensive plan and Chapter 36.70A RCW, the countywide planning policies for either King and/or Pierce County, as appropriate, and Vision 2040: Growth and Transportation Strategy for the Puget Sound Region; This is not applicable. The proposed change in land use designation does not result from a question of consistency between Auburn’s comprehensive plan and either RCW 36.70A, the countywide planning policies (King County) or Vision 2040. However, in reviewing the Countywide Planning Policies (King County), as well as the Multi-County Planning Policies (MPPs) within the existing Vision 2040 and the proposed Vision 2050, Applicant has identified significant policy support for its proposed land use change. ► Applicant’s proposal is consistent with and furthers the Vision & Framework for the year 2030 as identified in the Countywide Planning Policies (King County), including: Page 6 Vibrant, diverse and compact urban communities. Within the Urban Growth Area little undeveloped land now existing and urban infrastructure has been extended to fully serve the entire Urban Growth Area. Development Activity is focused on redevelopment to create vibrant neighborhoods where residents can walk, bicycle or use public transit for most of their needs. Improvements to infrastructure now focus on maintaining existing capacity as opposed to extending the infrastructure into previously unserved areas. Because of the innovations developed in public and private partnerships, there is still ample capacity to accommodate the planned population and employment growth targets within the Urban Growth Area. Applicant Discussion: Applicant’s proposed moderate density residential multiple-family land use designation furthers and is consistent with this county-wide vision, specifically as it will focus on “maintaining” existing utility capacity (as opposed to extensions of utilities, Exhibit 4 Page 201 of 465 Page 16 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement roads); providing connectivity and access to transit; and ensuring that existing Urban Growth Areas can support future population density allocations and not just current allocations – this latter policy directive is especially important as PSRC is considering the final draft of VISION 2050 and new allocations of forecasted growth. ► Applicant’s proposal is consistent with and furthers the following countywide planning policies for King County: EN-16 Plan for land use patterns and transportation systems that minimize air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, including: • Maintaining or exceeding existing standards for carbon monoxide, ozone, and particulates; • Directing growth to Urban Centers and other mixed use/high density locations that support mass transit, encourage non-motorized modes of travel and reduce trip lengths; • Facilitating modes of travel other than single occupancy vehicles including transit, walking, bicycling, and carpooling; • Encouraging new development to use low emission construction practices, low or zero net lifetime energy requirements and “green” building techniques; and • Increasing the use of low emission vehicles, such as energy efficient electric-powered vehicles. Applicant Discussion: Applicant’s parcels’ proximity to a commercial corridor and employment district, plus its location within one-half mile of all day transit service support would benefit from the moderate density residential multiple-family land use designation as such designation would create densities needed to support and sustain transit, and encourage the use of non-motorized modes of travel, including walking, bicycling, and carpooling. They would also locate owner-occupied housing options (such as duplexes and attached townhomes) within walking distance of transit options, providing the workforce with more opportunities to locate closer to employment areas or alternatives methods of commuting. DP-2 Promote a pattern of compact development within the Urban Growth Area that includes housing at a range of urban densities, commercial and industrial development, and other urban facilities, including medical, governmental, institutional, and educational uses and parks and open space. The Urban Growth Area will include a mix of uses that are convenient to and support public transportation in order to reduce reliance on single occupancy vehicle travel for most daily activities. Addressed in greater detail in earlier Applicant Discussions. DP-3 Efficiently develop and use residential, commercial, and manufacturing land in the Urban Growth Area to create healthy and vibrant urban communities with a full range of urban services, and to protect the long-term viability of the Rural Area and Resource Lands. Promote the efficient use of land within the Urban Growth Area by using methods such as: • Directing concentrations of housing and employment growth to designated centers; • Encouraging compact development with a mix of compatible residential, commercial, and community activities; • Maximizing the use of the existing capacity for housing and employment; and • Coordinating plans for land use, transportation, capital facilities and services Addressed in greater detail in earlier Applicant Discussions. Exhibit 4 Page 202 of 465 Page 17 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement H-4 Provide zoning capacity within each jurisdiction in the Urban Growth Area for a range of housing types and densities, sufficient to accommodate each jurisdiction’s overall housing targets and, where applicable, housing growth targets in designated Urban Centers. Addressed in greater detail in earlier Applicant Discussions. H-9 Plan for housing that is accessible to major employment centers and affordable to the workforce in them so people of all incomes can live near or within reasonable commuting distance of their places of work. Encourage housing production at a level that improves the balance of housing to employment throughout the county. Addressed in greater detail in earlier Applicant Discussions. H-10 Promote housing affordability in coordination with transit, bicycle, and pedestrian plans and investments and in proximity to transit hubs and corridors, such as through transit oriented development and planning for mixed uses in transit station areas. Addressed in greater detail in earlier Applicant Discussions. T-5 Support countywide growth management objectives by prioritizing transit service to areas where existing housing and employment densities support transit ridership and to Urban Centers and other areas planned for housing and employment densities that will support transit ridership. Address the mobility needs of transit-dependent populations in allocating transit service and provide at least a basic level of service throughout the Urban Growth Area. Addressed in greater detail in earlier Applicant Discussions. ► Applicant’s proposed land use designation furthers and is consistent with the following Vision 2040 goals and policies: Vision 2040 Goals & Policies 10 Main Goal The region will promote the efficient use of land, prevent urbanization of rural and resource lands, and provide for the efficient delivery of services within the designated urban growth area. MPP-DP-2: Encourage efficient use of urban land by maximizing the development potential of existing urban lands, such as advancing development that achieves zoned density. MPP-DP-4: Accommodate the region’s growth first and foremost in the urban growth area. Ensure that development in rural areas is consistent with the regional vision. MPP-DP-14: Preserve and enhance existing neighborhoods and create vibrant, sustainable compact urban communities that provide diverse choices in housing types, a high degree of connectivity in the street network to accommodate walking, bicycling, and transit use, and sufficient public spaces. MPP-DP-35: Develop high quality, compact urban communities throughout the region’s urban growth area that impart a sense of place, preserve local character, provide for mixed uses and choices in housing types, and encourage walking, bicycling, and transit use. MPP-DP-36: Provide a wide range of building and community types to serve the needs of a diverse population. 10 VISION 2040 addresses the benefits of density on page 48 of the plan, “Both high urban density and low-density development have costs and impacts. Low-density development, especially urban sprawl, is costly to serve, can fragment and covert resources lands and environmentally significant areas, and is challenge to serve with transportation beyond driving along. While higher density areas can experience more localized pollution and noise, compact built environments, where businesses, housing, shopping, and entertainment are in closer proximity, produce a number of benefits. These benefits include reducing demand on services (including water and energy supply), having fewer impervious surfaces (which is a factor in reducing the amount of urban run-off), and providing opportunities for economic development through infill and redevelopment. Exhibit 4 Page 203 of 465 Page 18 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement MPP-H-1: Provide a range of housing types and choices to meet the housing needs of all income levels and demographic groups within the region. MPP-H-2: Achieve and sustain — through preservation, rehabilitation, and new development — a sufficient supply of housing to meet the needs of low-income, moderate-income, middle-income, and special needs individuals and households that is equitably and rationally distributed throughout the region. MPP-H-4: Develop and provide a range of housing choices for workers at all income levels throughout the region in a manner that promotes accessibility to jobs and provides opportunities to live in proximity to work. ► Applicant’s proposed land use designation furthers and is consistent with the following Vision 2050 goals and policies that are awaiting the Executive Board’s final approval: MPP-RGS-5 Ensure long-term sustainability of the urban growth area consistent with the regional vision. MPP-RGS-6 Encourage the efficient use of urban land by optimizing the development potential of existing urban lands and increasing density in the urban growth areas in locations consistent with the Regional Growth Strategy. MPP-DP-1 Develop high-quality, compact urban communities throughout the region’s urban growth area that impart a sense of place, preserve local character, provide for mixed uses and choices in housing types, and encourage walking, bicycling, and transit use. MPP-DP-2 Reduce disparities in access to opportunity for the region’s residents through inclusive community planning and targeted public and private investments that meet the needs of current and future residents and businesses. MPP-DP-54 Tailor concurrency programs for centers and other subareas to encourage development that can be supported by transit. MPP-H-1 Plan for housing supply, forms, and densities to meet the region’s current and projected needs consistent with the Regional Growth Strategy and to make significant progress towards the jobs/housing balance. MPP-H-2 Provide a range of housing types and choices to meet the housing needs of all income levels and demographic groups within the region. MPP-H-5 Promote homeownership opportunities for low-income, moderate-income, and middle-income families and individuals while recognizing historic inequalities in access to homeownership opportunities for communities of color. MPP-H-6 Develop and provide a range of housing choices for workers at all income levels throughout the region that is accessible to job centers and attainable to workers at anticipated wages. MPP-H-8 Promote the development and preservation of long-term affordable housing options in walking distance to transit by implementing zoning, regulations, and incentives. MPP-T-14 Increase the proportion of trips made by transportation modes that are alternatives to driving alone, especial to and within centers and along corridors connecting centers, by ensuring the availability of reliable and competitive transit options. MPP-T-15 Prioritize investments in transportation facilities and services in the urban growth area that support compact, pedestrian- and transit-oriented densities and development. 6. If the request is to change the land use designation of a specific property on the comprehensive land use map, the applicant must demonstrate one of the following: Exhibit 4 Page 204 of 465 Page 19 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement a. The current land use designation was clearly made in error or due to an oversight; Yes. Applicant believes it was an oversight to have a portion of its parcels zoned for R-20 (multi-family) without a consistent land use designation in the comprehensive plan. Thus, Applicant believes this and other factors justify considering re-designation to Applicant’s six parcels to a land use designation of moderate density residential multiple- family from Single-Family with a concurrent rezone of all six of its parcels to R-16. b. The proposed land use designation is adjacent to property having similar or compatible designation, or other conditions are present to ensure compatibility with surrounding properties; Yes. Surrounding properties to the immediately to the west and southwest are already designated multiple-family and other more intense designations, including . Additional sites to the west that are designated as Heavy Commercial and Light Industrial. An existing development to the north is designated as single-family and has been developed as a Planned Unit Development (PUD), a higher intensity single family use, which PUD is already partially surrounded on its west, north and south property lines by parcels designatedion multiple-family. The property immediately south of the Applicant’s is designated for single-family use, but is owned by the Auburn School District and highly likely to be a future school (institutional/public use) and not lower density single-family uses. Thus, the designation of Applicant’s parcels as moderate density residential multiple-family would be consistent with adjacent land uses, provide a more appropriate transition between land uses, and further the comprehensive plan. See Figure 3, page 2. c. There has been a change in conditions since the current land use designation came into effect. Yes. See earlier answer to Question 4 regarding the change in conditions since these parcels’ land use designation become effective. This includes, among other things, Initiative 967, the Pandemic, and the forthcoming Vision 2050. 7. Identify anticipated impacts from the proposed change. The change to the multiple-family land use designation from single-family could allow as many as 406 additional housing units over the existing designation. Potential impacts of this change include increased demands for utilities, city services, schools11, and transportation infrastructure. However, the City’s existing development regulations, concurrency programs, and SEPA would require the identification of project specific impacts and, if necessary, require any impacts be mitigated provide to development to ensure adequate services. Any future development of this site as moderate density residential multiple-family (R-16 zone) would be required to contribute system improvement charges (water/sewer) and impact fees (traffic, parks and schools) to offset impacts to services. Additional density at this location would ultimately provide a greater concentration of these contributions to the services and utilities specific to this area. Parcel 0004200003 (furthest parcel easteast of Applicant’s parcels) has portions of the site within the 100-year floodplain (see attached map). Regardless of whether or not this parcel is developed in the future as single- or multiple-family, this area will need to comply with the City’s regulations for flood zones, which changes are being considered presently to comply with the latest FEMA requirements. 8. Identify the implementing zoning designation to be requested R-20 R-16 zone 11 In general student generation rates for multiple-family developments are lower than single-family developments. Specifically, the most current Six Year Capital Facility Plan we found online (2017 to 2023) confirms that the Auburn School District experiences a lower student generation rate from multiple- family developments. Exhibit 4 Page 205 of 465 Page 20 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement 9. Discuss how the proposed change is consistent with the comprehensive plan designations of surrounding properties The applicant’s proposal to designate the site moderate density residential multiple-family is consistent with the surrounding land uses and serves as an appropriate transition between other higher density residential uses and adjacent heavy commercial development land use designation for the Auburn Way N. Corridor, extending to the west side of I Street NE. Designation as moderate density residential multiple-family will ensure this site is developed consistent to adjacent uses and consistent with providing a transition between residential and non-residential uses. The existing Planned Unit Development immediate north of Applicant’s parcels already shares approximately 30% of its border with the parcels that have the Multiple-Family land use designation Further itTh proposed re-designation to moderate density residential will provide more transit supportive densities for the transit service within one-half mile of the site, encourage new commercial development along Auburn Way N. and I Street NE, and provide owner and/or renterfor sale and rental housing options that can encourage support additional economic development activity within the NW Auburn Manufacturing Village. 10. Discuss how the adopted City of Auburn utility plans and capital improvement programs support the change. Based on a review of the City’s interactive capital improvements map, there do not appear to be any pending capital improvement needs in this area, but there was a stormwater replacement project (CP1823) south of I Street NE at 35th which was completed in 2018. Police Based on a review of information available from the City’s website there were not any level of service issues identified. Some additional police services may be required to serve an increase in population, but needs are likely to be based on multiple projects over a wide area. Fire & EMS Valley Regional Fire Authority (VFRA) recently adopted a Strategic Plan for 2020-2025, which has prioritized an update to its capital facilities plan. Based on a review of information available online from VFRA no immediate level of service issues were identified. The re-designation of this property in 2020 may potentially be completed before the final adoption of that plan. If not, future updates to the VFRA Capital Facilities Plan would be able to identify capital needs related to potential new development. In Auburn, impact fees are charged per housing unit for Fire and EMS. Based on the current impact fee schedule, development under a moderate density residential multiple-family land use designation would generate as much as $125,000 more in impact fees than development under the existing Single-Family designation. Water The applicant’s site is served by water and only developer extensions of the system would be required. Based on a review of the City’s October 2015 Water Comprehensive Plan on page 4-23: Valley Service Area: SFR is not expected to increase substantially in the Valley Service Area. All population growth was allocated to MFR. The majority of MFR development is expected to occur in the Valley floor, especially in the urban center/Downtown Auburn. The City expects limited SFR infill on the Valley, however, the magnitude and timing of the infill is unknown and therefore not considered in the demand projections. Subsequently there does not appear to be any level of service issues or deficiencies in the Valley water service area, which is planned to support nearly 29,000 equivalent residential units (ERUs) by 2035. Further, according to the water Exhibit 4 Page 206 of 465 Page 21 of 21 Westport Capital CP Amendment: Written Statement comprehensive plan, water PSI in the area is greater than 80 and a 10”-16” water line is in I Street NE. Sewer Sewer for this site is planned to connect to the City’s system to the north. The City requested a preliminary feasibility analysis of the Auburn 40 pump station, which analysis revealed that if developed at the maximum rezoned density, the pump station would not be able to handle the additional peak flows and upgrades were likely needed to the pump, gensat, controls and electrical equipment. Future development of this site would be required to complete a more specific analysis based on its proposal, as well as be required to complete improvements, if necessary, prior to build out.This site is in the Valley Sewer Basin. Unlike development in other areas is would not require large capital investments in costly new sewer extensions and/or pump stations. Sewer exists in I Street NE and would be extended east to the development and future served by a gravity line. The area is served by gravity sewers that directionally flow south on I Street NE to the gravity sewers in 37th ST NE to the main conveyance for King County. Based on a review of 2015 Sewer Comprehensive Plan there do not appear to be any level of service issues or future capacity issues in this area. Also, this area has only a moderate I/I rating and is not located in one of the areas more prone to be impacted by flooding. Transportation An extension of I Street NE from 45th Street NE to S. 277th Street has been identified within the current Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). This project is schedule for 2022 and is funded by $6.76 million in developer contributions. Applicant’s proposed land use designation change may result in new development that can further contribute to these and other localized improvements in the road system. For example, based on current traffic fees, a plat of 218 single family detached homes would generate $1.17 million in impacts fees while a multiple family development would generate $1.5 million. The existing zoning of Applicant’s three parcels would allow for as many assix parcels would allow up to 125 multiple-family units and 218 single-family detached homes. At the request of the City, an analysis was completed by Gibson Traffic Consultants to identify a worse-case scenario. According to Gibson, the a proposed re-designation and rezoning of Applicant’s project would allow for as many as 624 multi-family units if the current R-7 area were rezoned to R-20, which would resulting in an increase of 1,337 daily trips, 64 AM peak hour trips and 59 PM peak-hour trips. It is important to note that this is a worse-case analysis based on the maximum density allowed whereas actual projects typically have less than the maximum density as a result of site constraints, infrastructure, open space, etc. The Gibson analysis found that at the highest potential density (the R-20 scenario) the level of service at the intersection of I Street NE at 42nd Street NE will operate at acceptable LOS C with the existing and proposed rezone. However, the intersection of I Street NE at 40th Street NE is likely to require some level of service improvement, but it can operate at an acceptable level of service with the rezone and with subject to improvements. More important to note the Gibson Analysis found that the proposed designation and zoning for multiple-family: • Only resulted in two intersections exceeding the threshold requiring a added analysis of PM peak-hour trips • That additional analysis showed both intersections could operate at an acceptable level of service with restriping • Average daily trips for I Street NE (classified as a minor arterial) fell within the acceptable range for minor arterials Storm Drainage Based on a review of the 2015 Storm Drainage Comprehensive Plan, I Street NE would occasionally flood due to issues with the City’s infiltration system near 32nd Street NE. Identified within the plan as projects 4A and 4B improvements were completed in 2018 according to the City’s interactive CIP map. Atttachments – Maps Exhibit 4 Page 207 of 465 Page 1 of 12 Westport Capital Rezone: Written Statement TOYER STRATEGIC ADVISORS, INC. DAVID TOYER, PRESIDENT 3705 COLBY AVE | SUITE 1 EVERETT, WA 98201 425-344-1523 | toyerstrategic.com WESTPORT CAPITAL REZONE REQUEST APPLICANT’S WRITTEN STATEMENT [REVISED JULY 17 SEPTEMBER 24 OCTOBER 14, 2020] LOCATION Applicant is the owner of six parcels, including 0004200013, 0004200019, 0004200025, 0004200024, 0004200022, and 0004200003 located adjacent to the eastern boundary of the Auburn Way North Corridor (I Street NE) and less than 1 mile east of the NW Auburn Manufacturing Village as shown in Figures 1 & 2: Figure 1 – General Location Map Figure 2 – Vicinity Map Exhibit 5 Page 208 of 465 Page 2 of 12 Westport Capital Rezone: Written Statement EXISTING CONDITIONS Applicant’s parcels have the following current land use designation, which is also shown in Figure 4: 0004200013 – multiple family 0004200019 – multiple family 0004200025 – multiple family 0004200024 – single-family 0004200022 – single-family 0004200003 – single family Figure 3 – Area Land Use Pattern Map Exhibit 5 Page 209 of 465 Page 3 of 12 Westport Capital Rezone: Written Statement Figure 4 – Existing Land Use Figure 5 – Existing Zoning REZONE REQUESTED Applicant requests a rezone of 31.2 acres of its 32.4 37.6 acres (six parcels) from R-7 and R-20 to R-16R-20. The rezone would: • correct an inconsistency improve the compatibility between the zoning and future land use maps; • further and be consistent with Auburn’s comprehensive plan; • result in a logical extension of multiple-family zoning in an area adjacent to more intensive uses; • support the creation of a mix of for sale attached and detached single-family units, rowhouse/townhouse, and multiplex units (e.g. duplex, tri-plex and four-plex), as well as and multi-family housing options within 1 mile of a key commercial corridor (Auburn Way N) and a significant area for employment (NW Auburn Manufacturing Village); and • create transit compatible densities within a half-mile of all-day transit services along Auburn Way N, which is consistent with local, county and regional policies for land use, development patterns, etc. • encourage new, more affordable owner occupied missing middle housing options This rezone request is being made concurrent with a request to amend the comprehensive plan land use designation of these parcels from single family residential and multiple family residential to moderate density residential. Exhibit 5 Page 210 of 465 Page 4 of 12 Westport Capital Rezone: Written Statement WRITTEN STATEMENT Applicant is required as part of its rezone application to submit a written statement addressing how the rezone is consistent with the comprehensive plan and whether municipal services are available to serve the rezone. 1. Is the rezone consistent with the comprehensive plan? Applicant’s parcels are part of a small area of currently zoned a combination of R-7 and R-20, zoning that bordersbordering a key, planned commercial corridor (Auburn Way N. Corridor) and a significant employment district (NW Auburn Manufacturing Village). The R-7 zoning in this area is nearly surrounded by higher intensity land use zones, including the R-20, Heavy Commercial, Light Industrial, Planned Unit Development and Residential Manufactured Housing Community zones. Further, the Auburn School District is the owner of nearly all of the R-7 zoned parcels outside of what is owned by the Applicant and the R-7 zoned property immediately south of the Applicant is most likely to become a future school. The following demonstrates how the proposal furthers and is consistent with the comprehensive plan: ► Applicant’s proposed rezone would be consistent with the description and designation criteria for where multiple-family zoning moderate density residential (like the R-16R-20) should be located: Description. Moderate Density Residential designated areas are planned to accommodate a variety of residential dwelling types. Varying intensities may be permitted to provide a transition between single-family residential and other more intensive uses or activities (such as arterial streets) based on adjacent density, intensity, and/or character. Appropriate densities in these areas generally range from 7 up to 20 dwelling units per acre. Dwelling types generally range from single-family dwelling to multiple-family dwellings, with larger structures allowed (within the density range) where offsetting community benefits can be identified. Designation Criteria 1. Previously developed moderate-density residential areas; or 2. Areas that provide a transition between single-family and multifamily, single-family and nonresidential, multifamily and nonresidential zones or development that are adjacent and meet the development parameters of the Moderate Density Residential designation. Applicant Discussion Two of Applicant’s three parcels have split zoning of R-20 and R-7. The current R-20 zone is the result of multiple-family zoning established pre-Growth Management Act (GMA)2,3 in 1988 by Ordinance 4299, which zoning was carried forward in the City’s subsequent GMA plans and zoning maps. The area features a mix of zoning ranging from R-7 to R-20 to Heavy Commercial. Existing multiple-family designated properties are located adjacent to single family properties, which does not promote appropriate density transitions. Applicant’s proposal would improve the transition between the existing lower density residential uses and the surrounding higher intensity uses. The allowance of R-20 (multiple family) zoning in this area was based on planning for uses that transition from more intense to less intense uses, as well as recognizing that areas designated for commercial and light industrial uses benefit from adjacent residential development. In the 25 years since the first GMA comprehensive plan was adopted, the growth and employment targets in Auburn have increased and land use designations and zones have since been modified to reflect regional policies that seek to hold the present Urban Growth Area boundary in place. This has resulted in the need for more and higher densities based on specific principals which include planning for these higher intensity residential uses (multiple-family; R-20) to develop within one-half mile of transit routes, adjacent to major commercial or mixed-uses areas (centers), and/or close to employment centers (and industrial centers). Applicant’s parcels adhere to those planning principals as it is proximate to all-day transit, a commercial corridor, and an significant employment district. The extension of R-20 The rezone to R-16 of the Applicant’s R-7 over the remaining portions of parcels 0004200022 and 0004200024, as well as 0004200003, is consistent with the comprehensive plan’s description and designation criteria for where moderate density multiple family uses should be placed. ► Applicant’s proposal is consistent with how the Comprehensive Plan views the administration of development regulations in furtherance of comprehensive plan goals and policies: LU-22 Development regulations should include density bonuses and flexible development standards that creation incentives for innovative site and building design, incorporation of open space and public art, nonmotorized connectivity to parks and commercial areas, proximity to transit services, supplemental natural resource protection, Exhibit 5 Page 211 of 465 Page 5 of 12 Westport Capital Rezone: Written Statement supplemental use of CPTED, and supplemental use of low-impact development techniques. Applicant Discussion: This rezone to R-1620 would promote a greater level of innovative site and building design techniques in a location where such innovative design can be used to better incorporate open spaces that will connect with and help supplement the adjacent natural resource areas around the Green River, as well as: • provide nonmotorized connectivity to both (North Green River Park and the Green River Trail) and commercial areas (the Auburn Way N Corridor) • locate affordable and accessible owner occupied for-sale single family, multi-duplex, attached townhome, and multiple family housing options, including opportunities for workforce housing, within a half-mile proximity4,5 of all- day transit services (Route 180) 2 Prior comprehensive planning and land use documents have indicated the City’s first modern comprehensive plan was adopted in 1986, two years before Ordinance 4299. 3 The City’s first GMA-compliant comprehensive plan was adopted in 1995. 4 The Puget Sound Regional Council’s (PSRC) “Growing Transit Communities Strategy” address the need to create thriving and equitable transit communities in the region (including Auburn), describing transit communities on page 4 as “generally the areas within a half mile radius of, or approximately ten-minute walking distance from, high-capacity transit stations, such as light rail, bus rapid transit, streetcar, and other major transit hubs.” Applicant’s parcels are within ½ mile all-day transit services via Route 180. 5 King County Metro Route 180 includes northbound stop (#57915) at 37th & Auburn Way N. and southbound stop (#58235) at 42nd & Auburn Way. This route provides frequent all-day service and includes night owl service, which specifically is critical to supporting transportation options for the workforce working shifts. Sidewalks within the future development can be extended to connect with existing sidewalks in the area to provide access to this service. Route 180 is an all-day route with "night owl" service and Route 180 is planned to convert to a RapidRide I line in 2023. Route 180 provides connections to Auburn Station, Kent Station, Burien, Sea-tac, and etc. And it can connecting connects riders to Sound Transit bus and commuter train services. Route 180 connects to both the Auburn and Kent Transit Stations, plus offers riders opportunities to connect with Sound Transit bus and train services. Route 180 is the type of transit route that supports businesses and workers throughout the Puget Sound. INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK Exhibit 5 Page 212 of 465 Page 6 of 12 Westport Capital Rezone: Written Statement Applicant emphasizes these points as they are key elements of the successful, sustainable use of alternative modes of transportation and help overcome housing accessibility obstacles for workforce housing by reducing the combined housing + transportation costs as examined in detail within the Comprehensive Plan (Figure 24, Appendix B: City of Auburn Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment, Berk & Associates, 2014). LU-27 Provide a variety of housing typologies to suit the needs of various potential residents. Applicant Discussion: The Applicant’s proposed rezone to R-1620 can support a variety of housing typologies that could meet the needs of future (and existing) residents as the use matrix in Section 18.07.020 of the Auburn Municipal Code shows that the R- 1620 zone allows single family, multi-duplexes, attached townhomes, and multiple-family units. permits both multiple family dwellings and attached townhomes. Multiple family dwellings and attached townhomesThese types of housing options are flexible housing typologies that supply needed “missing middle” housing6 as identified by the PSRC – housing that can be renter or owner-occupied and which is affordable and accessible to a wide range of the existing and future population, including couples, young families, seniors, etc. LU-2 As the market and availability of utilities enable denser development to occur, standards should be developed to maximize density while preserving open space and critical areas. Applicant Discussion: This proposal would encourage additional density in an area (both locally and regionally) where multiple-family a broader range of more affordable for sale housing is needed in the marketplace; existing infrastructure exists (and does not have to be extended long distances to serve less dense traditional development patterns); and the specific site design flexibility of the R-1620 zone, along with its density, can promote and incentivize greater connectivity and access to open space and preservation of natural areas along the Green River. LU-6 Cluster development is the preferred form of residential development in all residential designations with the goal of preserving natural areas, critical areas, and area that support low-impact development. Where clustering accomplishes these objectives, it should not come at the expense of lost development potential. Variances to lot size, lot dimensions, building height, and other bulk or dimensional standards should be utilized in order to create incentives that promote preservation. Applicant Discussion: The rezone would support greater site design flexibility that will promote the clustering of units and/or buildings in full recognition of the need to incentivize greater preservation of open space, natural areas, and critical areas. Secondarily this rezone will help support and encourage improved access to the adjacent open space and trail corridors. ► The rezone would further and be consistent with the comprehensive plan’s Housing Element and would address specific, identified housing trends and needs as follows: Page H-2 Trends in household size indicate that Auburn will need to ensure the availability of a variety of housing types to match the needs of both small and large households. Applicant’s rezone will add owner and renter occupied attached and detached housing typologies that are needed to match the needs of couples, empty-nesters, seniors, workers, single parent families, and more. Page H-2 Auburn’s housing stock is older than average, and much of its rental housing stock is in fair or poor condition. Though housing is affordable in Auburn, the City could lose some of its most affordable rental housing as structures approach the ends of their useful lives. Applicant’s rezone provides both short- and long-term help to address housing needs and reduce redevelopment pressures that could result in the loss of the City’s most affordable rental and owner occupied housing that may otherwise be displaced by redevelopment. And multiple-family housing options can help to 6 A copy of the PSRC “Puget Sound Trends” addressing “Missing Middle” Housing in the Region is attached. Exhibit 5 Page 213 of 465 Page 7 of 12 Westport Capital Rezone: Written Statement reduce displacement as the market and economic conditions are expected to change over time. Page H-4 A variety of housing choices can meet the needs of Auburn’s residents of all ages and affordability levels, help residents maintain and retain their homes, and promote services and amenities that improve neighborhood livability. Applicant’s rezone will add to the housing choices of residents (and future residents) of all ages and affordability levels by expanding the overall “housing strata” that is required to allow residents to more easily transition between segments of the housing stock as they move up, down or laterally depending on their evolving needs and economic situations. The rezone to R-1620 will increase the likelihood of affordable, attached and detached owner-occupied housing opportunities in areas closer to services (including access to commercial areas, public transit services, etc.) and where improved amenities can provide new and existing residents with greater access to trails, open space, etc. Page H-4 Well-planned housing can support Auburn’s economic goals by making it attractive and possible for residents to live near their jobs and by serving as a source of customers to support commercial districts. Applicant’s rezone will increase housing opportunities within one mile of a significant area for employment (NW Auburn Manufacturing Village) and within one-half mile of an identified commercial corridor (Auburn Way N. Corridor). Page H-4 Housing in proximity to transit or mixed use projects can help reduce the need for costly infrastructure such as roads and sewers. Housing in proximity to a variety of transportation modes can increase a household’s disposable income and savings by reducing household transportation costs. Applicant’s rezone would create housing within the “optimum” proximity (one-half mile) of all-day transit and reduce the need for more costly extensions of utilities to serve areas further out. This rezone would also help address the need to create opportunities where the true cost of housing (housing + transportation costs) can be minimized. H-4 Promote housing that meets the needs of Auburn’s workforce, is located and designed to support affordable multi- modal transportation options, and contributes to a regional jobs-housing balance. Applicant’s rezone would promote housing to serve a greater number of those in the workforce7,8 with housing needs that require an area with access to non-motorized transportation options (including those for commuting). Doing this will further improve the region’s jobs-housing balance. H-10 Provide a land use plan and zoning that offers opportunities to achieve a variety of housing styles and densities for private and non-profit housing providers. Applicant’s rezone would support the addition of a variety of housing styles and densities in the City. H-17 Allow manufactured housing parks, transitional housing, and multi-family housing in appropriately zoned but limited areas. Applicant’s rezone expands multiple-family moderate density housing zoning in other areas of the City that are less proximate to available transit, employment, city utility services, commercial corridors, and regional open space. 7 “Workforce housing” as defined in the King County Countywide Planning Policies, page 66: “Housing that is affordable to households with one or more workers. Creating housing in a jurisdiction implies the consideration of the wide range of income levels that characterize working households, from one person working at minimum wage to two or more workers earning the average county wage or above. There is a particular need for workforce housing that is reasonably close to the regional and sub-regional job centers and/or easily accessible by public transportation.” 8 See Comprehensive Plan Appendix B, Exhibit 24, Housing Needs & Characteristics Assessment, Berk & Associates, October 2014. Exhibit 5 Page 214 of 465 Page 8 of 12 Westport Capital Rezone: Written Statement H-23 Promote affordable housing that meets the changing demographic needs. Applicant’s rezone would enable the City to respond to a range of affordable9 housing needs and changing demographic needs – some of which are being further impacted by Pandemic and will greater even greater attention going forward. ► Applicant’s proposal is consistent with and will further the stated ‘Goals’ identified in the July 2014 “Community Vision Report” incorporated as Appendix A in the current comprehensive plan: 1.2 Provide a variety of housing types that support a high quality of life for current residents and attract new residents to Auburn neighborhoods. Applicant Discussion: Applicant’s rezone will not negatively impact the quality of life for nearby, current residents as the area is presently adjacent to other higher intensity zones and outside of the Applicant’s parcels, the other major landowner of R-7 zoned property is the Auburn School District (future school site). Further, this rezone will: • promote flexible site and building design and require landscaping/buffering standards between single-family and multiple-family zone; • provide greater access and connectivity to area commercial services and open spaces; • reduce motorized travel distances10 to commercial areas and employment opportunities and ease cumulative congestion for the greater area, as Applicant’s proposal is within one-half mile of a key commercial corridor (Auburn Way N) and 1 mile of a significant portion of a major employment district (NW Auburn Manufacturing Village); and • create transit compatible densities within a half-mile of all-day transit services along Auburn Way N which will improve the sustainability of multi-modal transit options in the greater area 1.5 Ensure safe, well connected and accessible neighborhoods with healthy food, parks and local services in close proximity. Addressed in earlier Applicant Discussions. 2.I “Mid‐city” scale: Encourage higher density development that supports family living and mixed uses. Maintain height limitations that keep Downtown and other development to an appropriate scale. Addressed in earlier Applicant Discussions. 3.1 Develop an efficient, well‐connected transportation system to support a variety of travel modes, including automobile, public transit, walking and biking. Addressed in earlier Applicant Discussions. 3.3 Improve the safety, connectivity and quality of the bicycle and pedestrian networks and related facilities. Addressed in earlier Applicant Discussions. 3.5 Improve public transit service throughout the City and better connect the City to the region for residents, visitors 9 “Affordable housing” as defined in the King County Countywide Planning Policies, page 63: “Housing that is affordable at 30% or less of a household’s monthly income. This is a general term that may include housing affordable to a wide range of income.” 10 It should also be pointed out that for motorized commuting options, this area is located within 1 mile of S. 277 Street and within 2 miles of SR 167 and the W. Valley Highway. Exhibit 5 Page 215 of 465 Page 9 of 12 Westport Capital Rezone: Written Statement and businesses. Addressed in earlier Applicant Discussions. ► Applicant’s proposal will further the City’s efforts to capitalize on ‘Opportunities’ identified in the July 2014 “Community Vision Report” incorporated as Appendix A in the current comprehensive plan: 1.A Controlled, well planned growth: Actively manage Auburn’s progression from a suburban to an urban community, focusing on planned growth and expansion. Give careful consideration to appropriate limits on density and building height, seeking community input along the way. Applicant Discussion: Applicant’s rezone is consistent with the evolving planning needs of Auburn, which require continuous review to determine how to best progress from a suburban to urban community as it plans for additional forecasted growth. Specific to building heights and scale, it is important to note that the existing R7 zone is bordered by more intense land use designations like Heavy Commercial, were building heights up to 75 feet are allowed. By contrast, R-1620 zoning is limited to building heights up to 50 45 feet – the scale of which can be offset11 by the separation required between R-7 and R-1620 zones per the City’s landscaping and setback requirements. The R-1620 zone can provide appropriate transition (step-down) in building height and scale from the Heavy Commercial zone to the surrounding residential areas. And the R-16 zone requires, at a minimum, that 20% of the site be landscaped open space (the R-7 zone has no such requirement). 1.B Diverse housing types: Encourage a diverse mix of housing types throughout Auburn, including single family homes, multi‐family housing and mixed‐use development. Vary housing based on neighborhood context. Addressed further in earlier Applicant Discussions. 1.C Walkable neighborhoods: Create walkable neighborhoods with safe, continuous sidewalks and accessible shopping, parks, amenities and centers of community activity nearby. Addressed further in earlier Applicant Discussions. 1.E Senior housing: Encourage quality senior housing in town so residents are able to stay in the community. The R-1620 zone permits uses that are favorable for the creation of senior housing. 1.F Homes for the middle class: Create opportunity for the development of homes for middle income families and individuals. The rezone will help to create “Missing Middle” housing, which includes a variety of single-family attached and detached types and multiple-family housing types, is in response to the growing needs of middle income families and individuals who are seeking affordable housing options combined with reduce transportation (commute) costs. 3.F Bicycle network: Address the gaps and barriers in the bicycle network. Create an expanded network of safe, connected bicycle facilities to improve travel between neighborhoods and to and from schools and commercial areas. Where possible, separate bike lanes and paths from roads. Addressed further in earlier Applicant Discussions. 11 It is common in many jurisdictions to allow increased building heights based on increase setbacks, which is typically done based on 1 additional foot of height for each additional foot of setback. Although the zones in land use designations of multiple-family have increased heights, they are required to have landscape buffers between their zone and adjacent single-family zones. Such buffering accomplishes the same type of “offset” to the scale of the building height. Exhibit 5 Page 216 of 465 Page 10 of 12 Westport Capital Rezone: Written Statement 3.G Trail and park connections: Improve Auburn’s system of trails and better connect existing parks and recreation areas and amenities. Build a pedestrian bridge across the White River to provide greater access to Game Farm Wilderness Park Addressed further in earlier Applicant Discussions. 5.E Park and trails connectivity: Enhance accessibility to parks and open spaces (such as the greenbelt) through hiking and biking trails that provide recreation opportunities and connect to schools and neighborhoods. Close trail gaps and complete the Green River Trail. Addressed in earlier Applicant Discussion. The R-1620 zone furthers and is consistent with providing land use incentives that promote the creation of greater access from/between adjoining residential areas, the commercial corridor, and the Green River and Interurban trails. ► Applicant’s proposal will positively benefit the City’s broad economic development goals and strategies because of its location. Applicant Discussion: The proximity of Applicant’s rezone to adjacent employment and commercial areas will add the population density needed to begin to encourage new investments in commercial development within the Auburn Way N. Corridor and along the future extension to I Street NE, which furthers several of the City’s economic development goals and strategies. This rezone will create housing options within 1 mile of the Northwest Auburn Manufacturing Village where Exact Aerospace, Thyssen Krupp Aerospace, and TMX Aerospace are among a cluster of dozens of manufacturing, production, and distribution businesses – shown below in Figure 5. ► Applicant’s proposal will further and be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan’s Economic Development Element as follows: ED-1 City promotion of new industry shall be directed at attracting business that diversifies the City’s tax base, offers secure, quality employment opportunities, is sensitive to community values, and promotes the development of attractive facilities. Exhibit 5 Page 217 of 465 Page 11 of 12 Westport Capital Rezone: Written Statement Applicant’s Discussion: Applicant’s rezone will create new housing opportunities adjacent to strategic economic development areas. Adding these housing options will help the City attract a workforce to support future business investments and reinvestments in these strategic locations. ED-16 Increasing the utilization of land for manufacturing and industrial land uses should be the City’s preferred economic development and land use priority for industrially zoned areas of the City that are currently dominated by warehouse and distribution land uses. The City should promote and create incentives for new manufacturing and light industrial uses, and for the gradual conversion of existing warehouse and distribution land uses to manufacturing and sales tax generating land uses. Applicant’s Discussion: Applicant’s rezone is adjacent to one of the City’s manufacturing districts and will support the City’s economic development strategy by encouraging more workforce housing, which will in turn attract skilled workers to the area. Just prior to the Pandemic, Bank of America’s Global Research division released a report on global supply chains, which concluded that re-shoring of manufacturing was increasing at a faster pace due to a combination of global factors. However, it also pointed out that there were roughly 400,000 jobs unfilled in manufacturing nationwide – an economic development challenge that has catapulted workforce development and recruitment to top of list in many areas. This region’s manufacturing base is highly technical in nature and it requires a highly skilled workforce. Even with the impacts caused by the Pandemic there will be a long-term need in the region for communities to attract skilled workers – a workforce whose incomes and housing needs vary greatly. Thus, those communities with the greatest range of housing types available near area employment districts (villages) and centers will be positioned to achieve more immediate and longer term success in programs supporting Business Retention & Expansion (BRE) goals, as well as those seeking to recruit new employers to the area. ED-17 To support continued sales tax revenue growth opportunities in the City, those areas currently dominated by existing warehouse land uses that abut existing commercial retail areas, and that could take advantage of this proximity to realize substantive value by changing to commercial retail uses, should be considered for changes in the Comprehensive Plan and zoning designations that would facilitate the conversion of these properties to commercial retail use. Applicant’s Discussion: Applicant’s rezone will result in a greater concentration of population density which will further economic development strategies for the Auburn Way N. Corridor and the I-Street Corridor, enabling commercial areas to appropriately transform. ED-23 Utilize the future extension of I Street NE as an economic development opportunity. Development of I Street NE should establish it as a stand-alone corridor and not a “back side” to Auburn Way North. Conditional use permit applications for commercial uses and nursing homes along this corridor, whose impacts can be adequately mitigated, should be supported. Applicant’s Discussion: Applicant’s rezone located immediately east of I Street is consistent with and will further this economic development strategy by providing a greater density of housing to support commercial uses; housing that is within a very walkable distance of commercial development and housing that can support segments of the workforce that need multiple-family housing options with access to transit services. 2. The rezone’s impact on available municipal services: Based on a review of the City’s interactive capital improvements map, there do not appear to be any pending capital improvement needs in the rezone area, but there was a stormwater replacement project (CP1823) south of I Street NE at 35th to 32nd which was completed in 2018. Exhibit 5 Page 218 of 465 Page 12 of 12 Westport Capital Rezone: Written Statement Police Services Based on a review of information available from the City’s website there were not any level of service issues identified. Additional police services may be required to serve an increase in population, but needs are likely to be based on multiple projects over a wide area and would be supported by an improved ratio of assessed value per acre. Fire & EMS Services Valley Regional Fire Authority (VFRA) recently adopted a Strategic Plan for 2020-2025, which has prioritized an update to its capital facilities plan. Based on a review of information available online from VFRA no immediate level of service issues were identified. The rezone to R-1620 in 2020 may be completed before the final adoption of that plan. If not, future updates to the VFRA Capital Facilities Plan would be able to identify capital needs related to serving the additional future development. In Auburn, impact fees are charged per housing unit for Fire and EMS. Based on the current impact fee schedule, development under the R-1620 zone would generate as much as $125,000 more in impact fees than development under the existing zone. Water The applicant’s site is served by water and requires only developer extensions to the system to serve the immediate development. Based on a review of the City’s October 2015 Water Comprehensive Plan on page 4-23: Valley Service Area: SFR is not expected to increase substantially in the Valley Service Area. All population growth was allocated to MFR. The majority of MFR development is expected to occur in the Valley floor, especially in the urban center/Downtown Auburn. The City expects limited SFR infill on the Valley, however, the magnitude and timing of the infill is unknown and therefore not considered in the demand projections. Subsequently there does not appear to be any level of service issues or deficiencies in the Valley water service area, which is planned to support nearly 29,000 equivalent residential units (ERUs) by 2035. Further, according to the water comprehensive plan, water PSI in the area is greater than 80 and a 10”-16” water line is in I Street NE. Sewer Sewer for this site is planned to connect to the City’s system to the north. The City requested a preliminary feasibility analysis of the Auburn 40 pump station, which analysis revealed that if all 37.6 acres developed at the maximum rezoned density under the R-20 zone, the pump station would not be able to handle the additional peak flows and upgrades were likely needed to the pump, gensat, controls and electrical equipment. Future development of this site under the R-16 zone would still be required to complete a more specific analysis based on its proposal, as well as be required to complete improvements, if necessary, prior to build out.This site is in the Valley Sewer Basin. Unlike development in other areas is would not require large capital investments in costly new sewer extensions and/or pump stations. Sewer exists in I Street NE and would be extended east to the development and future served by a gravity line. The area is served by gravity sewers that directionally flow south on I Street NE to the gravity sewers in 37th ST NE to the main conveyance for King County. Based on a review of 2015 Sewer Comprehensive Plan there do not appear to be any level of service issues or future capacity issues in this area. Also, this area has only a moderate I/I rating and is not located in one of the areas more prone to be impacted by flooding. Transportation An extension of I Street NE from 45th Street NE to S. 277th Street has been identified within the current Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). This project is schedule for 2022 and is funded by $6.76 million in developer contributions. Applicant’s proposed land use designation change may result in new development that can further contribute to these and other localized improvements in the road system. For example, based on current traffic fees, a plat of 218 single family detached homes would generate $1.17 million in impacts fees while a multiple family development would generate $1.5 million. The existing zoning of Applicant’s three parcels would allow for as many assix parcels would allow up to 125 multiple-family units and 218 single-family detached homes. At the request of the City, an analysis was completed by Gibson Traffic Consultants. According to Gibson, the proposed re-designation and rezoning of Applicant’s project would allow for as many as 624 multi-family units if the current R-7 area were rezoned to R-20, which would resulting in an increase of 1,337 daily Exhibit 5 Page 219 of 465 Page 13 of 12 Westport Capital Rezone: Written Statement trips, 64 AM peak hour trips and 59 PM peak-hour trips. It is important to note that this is a worse-case analysis based on the maximum density allowed whereas actual projects typically have less than the maximum density as a result of site constraints, infrastructure, open space, etc. The Applicant has agreed to a establish a density limit 12 dwelling units to the acre (+/- 10%) consisting of no more than 125 multiple family units (no-change) and the balance being for-sale units consisting of at least three housing typologies. The Gibson analysis found that at the highest potential density (the R-20 scenario) the level of service at the intersection of I Street NE at 42nd Street NE will operate at acceptable LOS C with the existing and proposed rezone. However, the intersection of I Street NE at 40th Street NE is likely to require some level of service improvement, but it can operate at an acceptable level of service with the rezone and with subject to improvements. More important to note the Gibson Analysis found that the proposed designation and zoning for multiple-family: • Only resulted in two intersections exceeding the threshold requiring a added analysis of PM peak-hour trips • That additional analysis showed both intersections could operate at an acceptable level of service with restriping • Average daily trips for I Street NE (classified as a minor arterial) fell within the acceptable range for minor arterials Storm Drainage Based on a review of the 2015 Storm Drainage Comprehensive Plan, I Street NE would occasionally flood due to issues with the City’s infiltration system near 32nd Street NE. Identified within the plan as projects 4A and 4B improvements were completed in 2018 according to the City’s interactive CIP map. Maps Attached Exhibit 5 Page 220 of 465 TOYER STRATEGIC ADVISORS, INC. DAVID TOYER, PRESIDENT 3705 COLBY AVE | SUITE 1 EVERETT, WA 98201 425-344-1523 | toyerstrategic.com October 14, 2020 Community Development Attn: Thaniel Gouk City of Auburn 25 W. Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 RE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR CPA 20-0002 and REZ20-0002 Dear Mr. Gouk: On behalf of our client, Westport Capital Investment, we have submitted a revised application for redesignation of approximately 31.3 acres (out of our Client’s 37.6 acres) from the single family land use designation to the “Moderate Density Residential” land use designation with a concurrent rezone for all of the approximately 37.6 acres from R-7 and R-20 to R-16. We understand during discussions with the City of Auburn that this request could be supportable with appropriate conditions to ensure a mix of housing types, especially for-sale housing options not currently available in Auburn. We can agree with the following conditions expected to be imposed by the City: 1. A cap on density at 12 dwelling units to the acre (+/- 10%) 2. A limit of 125 multiple-family apartment units, which would be required to locate in the southern ½ of the six parcels 3. For-sale housing units (approximately 360) consisting of three housing typologies with no type less than 15% of the total 4. For-sale housing typologies include, but may not be limited to, single family detached homes, rowhouses, townhomes, multiplexes (duplex, tri-plex and four-plex) and like options Attached you will find the following: A. Revised SEPA Checklist dated October 14, 2020 B. Revised Comprehensive Plan Amendment Description and Narrative C. Revised Rezone Description and Narrative Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at any time. Sincerely, David K. Toyer President Exhibit 5a Page 221 of 465 GTC #20-113 Gibson Traffic Consultants 2813 Rockefeller Avenue Suite B Everett, WA 98201 425.339.8266 Westport Rezone Comment Response Jurisdiction: City of Auburn August 2020 Exhibit 6 Page 222 of 465 Westport Rezone Comment Response Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. August 2020 info@gibsontraffic.com i GTC #20-113 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. DEVELOPMENT IDENTIFICATION .................................................................................. 1  2. TURNING MOVEMENT CALCULATIONS ....................................................................... 1  3. INTERSECTION IMPACTS .................................................................................................. 6  4. CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................................................... 7  LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Existing Turning Movements – PM Peak-Hour .............................................................. 2  Figure 2: 2025 Baseline Turning Movements – PM Peak-Hour .................................................... 3  Figure 3: 2025 Future with Existing Zoning Turning Movements – PM Peak-Hour ..................... 4  Figure 4: 2025 Future with Proposed Zoning Turning Movements – PM Peak-Hour ................... 5  LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Intersection Level of Service Summary ........................................................................... 6  ATTACHMENTS Turning Movement Counts ............................................................................................................ A  Existing Zoning Turning Movement Calculations ......................................................................... B  Proposed Zoning Turning Movement Calculations ........................................................................ C  Level of Service Calculations ........................................................................................................ D  Exhibit 6 Page 223 of 465 Westport Rezone Comment Response Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. August 2020 info@gibsontraffic.com 1 GTC #20-113 1. DEVELOPMENT IDENTIFICATION Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. (GTC) completed the initial traffic impact analysis for the Westport Rezone in April 2020. This report addresses comments from City of Auburn staff requesting analysis of the intersection of I Street NE at 40th Street NE. The overall proposed rezone has not changed from the previous analysis completed in April 2020. Brad Lincoln, responsible for this report and traffic analysis, is a licensed professional engineer (Civil) in the State of Washington and member of the Washington State section of ITE. 2. TURNING MOVEMENT CALCULATIONS The intersections that have been analyzed as part of this comment response are: 1. I Street NE at 42nd Street NE 2. I Street NE at 40th Street NE The intersection of I Street NE at 42nd Street NE has been updated from the April 2020 report to use counts collected in February 2020 and published by the City of Auburn. This count was collected before the Covid-19 pandemic closures took affect. The count for the intersection of I Street NE at 40th Street NE is based on count collected by the independent count firm IDAX in July 2020. This count data was relatively similar to the count data for the intersection of I Street NE at 42nd Street NE, when accounting for the several commercial driveways between the two intersections. The existing turning movement volumes are shown in Figure 1 for the PM peak- hour. The 2025 future volumes are based on a 5-year horizon year. The 2025 baseline volumes are based on the 2024 future with development volumes for the Copper Gate development, which includes trips from pipeline developments, plus an additional year with 2% growth rate. The trips from the Copper Gate development includes a trip redirection due to the completion of the I Street extension between 45th Street NE and S 277th Street. Additionally, the growth has been applied to the trips on 42nd Place NE from the Monterey Park development even though additional growth is not anticipated. The 2025 baseline turning movements at the study intersections are shown in Figure 2 for the PM peak-hour. The 2025 future with development turning movements are calculated by adding the trips generated per the existing zoning and the proposed zoning to the 2025 baseline turning movements. The 2025 future with existing zoning turning movements are shown in Figure 3 for the PM peak-hour and the 2025 future with proposed zoning turning movements are shown in Figure 4 for the PM peak- hour. It is important to note that the turning movement calculations with the existing zoning and proposed zoning includes crossover between the existing Monterey Park development and the subject area since there will be connectivity. The turning movement calculations are included in the attachments. Exhibit 6 Page 224 of 465 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY CITY OF AUBURN G IBSON T RAFFIC C ONSULTANTS WESTPORT REZONE XXX GTC #20-113 N 40TH ST NEAUBURN WAY N42ND ST NE I ST NE45TH ST NE42ND ST NE 43RD ST NE 37TH ST NE 49TH ST NW S 277TH ST C ST NE85TH AVE SB ST NW83RD AVE SD ST NESITEG ST NELEGEND PM PEAK-HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES #2 I ST NE @ 40TH ST NE#3 08/21/20 I ST NE @ 42ND ST NE#2 #3 FIGURE 1 EXISTING TURNING MOVEMENTS714929 23 336963680303 51 Exhibit 6 Page 225 of 465 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY CITY OF AUBURN G IBSON T RAFFIC C ONSULTANTS WESTPORT REZONE XXX GTC #20-113 N 40TH ST NEAUBURN WAY N42ND ST NE I ST NE45TH ST NE42ND ST NE 43RD ST NE 37TH ST NE 49TH ST NW S 277TH ST C ST NE85TH AVE SB ST NW83RD AVE SD ST NESITEG ST NELEGEND PM PEAK-HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES #2 I ST NE @ 40TH ST NE#3 08/21/20 I ST NE @ 42ND ST NE#2 #3 FIGURE 2 2025 BASELINE TURNING MOVEMENTS3537623337 56 5436132 25 36622Exhibit 6 Page 226 of 465 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY CITY OF AUBURN G IBSON T RAFFIC C ONSULTANTS WESTPORT REZONE XXX GTC #20-113 N 40TH ST NEAUBURN WAY N42ND ST NE I ST NE45TH ST NE42ND ST NE 43RD ST NE 37TH ST NE 49TH ST NW S 277TH ST C ST NE85TH AVE SB ST NW83RD AVE SD ST NESITEG ST NELEGEND PM PEAK-HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES #2 I ST NE @ 40TH ST NE#3 08/21/20 I ST NE @ 42ND ST NE#2 #3 2025 FUTURE WITH EXISTING ZONING TURNING MOVEMENTS FIGURE 350346630 21 23 36614336 35 56 7941146 17 26641Exhibit 6 Page 227 of 465 TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY CITY OF AUBURN G IBSON T RAFFIC C ONSULTANTS WESTPORT REZONE XXX GTC #20-113 N 40TH ST NEAUBURN WAY N42ND ST NE I ST NE45TH ST NE42ND ST NE 43RD ST NE 37TH ST NE 49TH ST NW S 277TH ST C ST NE85TH AVE SB ST NW83RD AVE SD ST NESITEG ST NELEGEND PM PEAK-HOUR TURNING MOVEMENT VOLUMES #2 I ST NE @ 40TH ST NE#3 08/21/20 I ST NE @ 42ND ST NE#2 #3 2025 FUTURE WITH PROPOSED ZONING TURNING MOVEMENTS FIGURE 462346640 27 29 43614336 43 56 8442351 17 26651Exhibit 6 Page 228 of 465 Westport Rezone Comment Response Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. August 2020 info@gibsontraffic.com 6 GTC #20-113 3. INTERSECTION IMPACTS The operations of the study intersections during the PM peak-hour are summarized in Table 1. Table 1: Intersection Level of Service Summary Intersection Existing Conditions 2025 Baseline Conditions 2025 Future with Project Conditions – Existing Zoning 2025 Future with Project Conditions – Proposed Zoning LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay 2 I Street NE at 42nd Street NE A 9.6 sec C 20.4 sec C 20.1 sec C 20.5 sec w Copper Gate Phase I Only --- --- --- --- C 17.6 sec C 18.0 sec 3 I Street NE at 40th Street NE A 9.0 sec B 12.7 sec E 46.4 sec F 70.0 sec w Signal --- --- --- --- A 6.9 sec A 7.4 sec w Roundabout A 7.0 sec 0.704 v/c A 7.4 sec 0.728 v/c w Copper Gate Phase 1 Only --- --- --- --- D 33.0 sec E 44.1 sec w Copper Gate Phase 1 & Signal --- --- --- --- --- --- A 7.1 sec w Copper Gate Phase 1 & Roundabout A 7.2 sec 0.659 v/c The level of service analysis shows the intersection of I Street NE at 42nd Street NE will operate at acceptable LOS C with the existing zoning and the proposed rezone. The intersection of I Street NE at 40th Street NE will operate at deficient levels of service with the existing zoning or the proposed zoning. This is primarily due to the diversion of trips to I Street NE from Auburn Way N with the extension of I Street NE to S 277th Street with the Copper Gate development. The level of service results for the intersection of I Street NE at 42nd Street NE are slightly different from the April 2020 report since new count data was used for the intersection and the analysis in this comment response report assumes an access to 40th Street NE, as opposed to all the trips from the rezone site utilizing the 42nd Street NE intersection. There are improvements to the intersection of I Street NE at 40th Street NE that could be performed to mitigate the impacts of development, either under the existing zoning or proposed zoning. It is important to note that the need for improvements will be driven by several factors other than the rezone. These include the amount of traffic that shifts from Auburn Way N to I Street NE with an extension to S 277th Street and the number of trips generated by the Copper Gate development at the intersection. The analysis as part of the project specific development will fully analyze if these assumptions are valid and what level of improvement is necessary for the intersection. A general condition to improve the intersection should be included in the rezone conditions, but a specific condition for channelization improvements, a signal or a roundabout should be part of the project specific conditions and not the rezone. Exhibit 6 Page 229 of 465 Westport Rezone Comment Response Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. August 2020 info@gibsontraffic.com 7 GTC #20-113 4. CONCLUSIONS The level of service analysis shows that the intersection of I Street NE at 42nd Street NE will operate at acceptable LOS C with the existing and proposed rezone. The intersection of I Street NE at 40th Street NE is likely to require some level of improvement, but can operate at an acceptable level of service with the rezone and with improvements. Additional analysis of the intersection will be necessary at the time of any future development application to evaluate the trips generated by the Copper Gate development, the amount of traffic that would shift to I Street NE from Auburn Way S with the extension to S 277th Street, the impacts of any proposed development on the site and potential improvements. A general condition to make improvements to the intersection of I Street NE at 40th Street NE for the rezone should be appropriate for this rezone application. Exhibit 6 Page 230 of 465 A Turning Movement Counts Exhibit 6 Page 231 of 465 Prepared for: City of Auburn Traffic Count Consultants, Inc. Phone: (253) 770-1407 FAX: (253) 770-1411 E-Mail: Team@TC2inc.com WBE/DBE Intersection:I St NE & 42nd St NE Date of Count:Thu 02/27/2020 Location:Auburn, Washington Checked By:Jen Time From North on (SB) From South on (NB) From East on (WB) From West on (EB) Interval Interval I St NE I St NE 42nd St NE 0 Total Ending at TL S RTL S R T L S R T L SR 4:15 P21319000 11 10 0 4 0 7 0 0 00 64 4:30 P11323010 7 8 0 6 0 100 0 00 67 4:45 P3921020 22 9 0 9 0 6 0 0 00 76 5:00 P01714030 16 9 1 2 0 8 0 0 00 66 5:15 P01013000 24 7 1 6 0 5 0 0 00 65 5:30 P01216000 15 9 0 3 0 5 0 0 00 60 5:45 P11314020 16 8 0 11 0 110 0 00 73 6:00 P01312000 21 8 0 7 0 3 0 0 00 64 6:15 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:30 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6:45 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:00 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Survey 7 100 132 0 8 0 132 68 2 48 0 55 0 0 0 0 535 Peak Hour: 4:15 PM to 5:15 PM Total44971060 69 33 2 23 0 290 0 00 274 Approach 120 102 52 0 274 %HV 3.3%5.9%3.8%n/a 4.4% PHF 0.83 0.82 0.81 n/a 0.90 I St NE 218 120 98 0 Bike 0 0 71 49 0Ped 42nd St NE 29 0 Ped 0 0 52 Bike 0 23 134 0 0 0 Bike 0 0 4:15 PM to 5:15 PM 8Ped 82 0 PEDs Across:NS EW Ped 2 0 69 33 304 1.0 PHF Peak Hour Volume INT 01 01102Bike0 PHF %HV INT 02 00000 EB n/a n/a INT 03 00404 94 102 Check WB 0.81 3.8% INT 04 01203 In:274 NB 0.82 5.9% INT 05 01203 196 Out:274 SB 0.83 3.3% INT 06 02103 I St NE T Int.0.90 4.4% INT 07 20103Bicycles From: N S E W N U's S U's E U's W U's INT 08 00101 INT 01 01 1 02 INT 09 0 INT 02 00 0 00 5 INT 10 0 INT 03 00 0 00 INT 11 0 INT 04 00 0 00 INT 12 0 INT 05 00 0 00 2512019 INT 06 00 0 00 Special Notes INT 07 00 0 00 INT 08 00 0 00 INT 09 0 INT 10 0 INT 11 0 INT 12 0 01 1 02 0050 AUB20006M_151P A - 1 Exhibit 6 Page 232 of 465 www.idaxdata.com 2 to to Two-Hour Count Summaries Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count. Total 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 5 1 WB -- NB 0.0%0.83 Peak Hour: 4:00 PM 5:00 PM HV %:PHF EB 0.0%0.89 Date: Thu, Jul 09, 2020 Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM SB 0.0%0.72 TOTAL 0.0%0.91 TH RTUTLTTHRTUTLT Rolling One HourEastboundWestboundNorthboundSouthbound UT LT TH RT Interval Start 40TH ST NE 0 I ST NE I ST NE 15-min TotalUTLTTHRT 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 12 1 62 0 4:15 PM 0 1 0 13 0 0 11 22 0 04:00 PM 0 2 0 14 0 0 0 0 10 1 47 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 14 0 0 4 19 0 0 65 0 4:30 PM 0 3 0 10 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 22 2 62 236 5:00 PM 0 1 0 9 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 19 2000006 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 15 1 50 224 5:15 PM 0 2 0 14 0 0 3 21 0 0 0 11 1 48 224 5:45 PM 0 1 0 9 0 0 2 20 0 0 64 223 5:30 PM 2 1 0 11 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 26 0 40 20212000111000006 0 126 9 438 0 Interval Start Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total 0 6 0 0 0 45 151 0 0 6 236 0Peak Hour 30 80 0 0 0 63510 Count Total 2 0 0 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 West North South 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 EB WB NB SB Total East 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0000000 1 0 Peak Hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0000010 0 0 0 0 11 0 94 0 0 0 0 000 01 0N I ST NE 40TH ST NE I ST NEI ST NE40TH ST NE 236TEV: 0.91PHF:663698608030110114051 657 36 0 Mark Skaggs: (425) 250-0777 mark.skaggs@idaxdata.comA - 2 Exhibit 6 Page 233 of 465 B Existing Zoning Turning Movement Calculations Exhibit 6 Page 234 of 465 Existing Zoning 2 I St NE @ 42nd St NE Synchro ID: 2 Existing 120 218 98 Average Weekday 07149 06929 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 29 Year: 2/27/2020 0 0 0 52 0 23  Data Source:TCC 0 --- 274 42nd Street NE 134 North 0 49  0 0 0 82 0 I Street NE 33  07123 06933 94 196 102 Pipeline Trips 283 818 535 Average Weekday 0 283 0 0 535 0 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 --- 818 42nd Street NE 0 North 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 I Street NE 0  0 283 0 0 535 0 283 818 535 Baseline 415 1,058 643 Average Weekday 0 361 54 0 611 32 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 32 Year:2025 0 0 057 Growth Rate =2.0%0 25  Years of Growth = 5 0 ---1,119 42nd Street NE 147 North Total Growth = 1.1041 0 54  000 90 0 I Street NE 36  0 361 25 0 611 36 386 1,033 647 Development Trips 75 119 44 Average Weekday 05025 03014 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 14 0 0 0 6 0 -8  0 ---101 42nd Street NE 21 North 0 25  0 0 0 15 0 I Street NE -10  050-8 030-10 42 62 20 Future with Development 490 1,177 687 Average Weekday 0 411 79 0 641 46 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 46 0 0 063 0 17  0 ---1,220 42nd Street NE 168 North 0 79  000 105 0 I Street NE 26  0 411 17 0 641 26 428 1,095 667 Copper Gate (Full Dev.) includes Reassignment with I Street connection Includes 33% crossover between existing development and rezone area B - 1 Exhibit 6 Page 235 of 465 Existing Zoning 3 I St NE @ 40th St NE Synchro ID: 3 Existing 69 155 86 Average Weekday 6630 6800 PM Peak Hour  6 I Street NE 0 Year: 7/9/2020 36 0 0 0 30 0  Data Source:IDAX 93 40th Street NE 236 40th Street NE 0 North 6 0  57 0 0 0 51 I Street NE 0  51 63 0 30 80 0 114 224 110 Pipeline Trips 283 818 535 Average Weekday 0 283 0 0 535 0 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 40th Street NE 818 40th Street NE 0 North 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 I Street NE 0  0 283 0 0 535 0 283 818 535 Baseline 360 990 630 Average Weekday 7 353 0 7 623 0 PM Peak Hour  7 I Street NE 0 Year: 2025 40 0 00 Growth Rate = 2.0%33 0  Years of Growth =5 103 40th Street NE 1,079 40th Street NE 0 North Total Growth = 1.1041 7 0  63 0 0 0 56 I Street NE 0  56 353 0 33 623 0 409 1,065 656 Development Trips 42 62 20 Average Weekday -1 -7 50 -1 -9 30 PM Peak Hour  -1 I Street NE 30 20 21 21 74 0 23  54 40th Street NE 177 40th Street NE 195 North -1 50  34 35 35 121 0 I Street NE 36  0-723 0-936 16 43 27 Future with Development 402 1,052 650 Average Weekday 6 346 50 6 614 30 PM Peak Hour  6 I Street NE 30 60 21 21 74 33 23  157 40th Street NE 1,256 40th Street NE 195 North 6 50  97 35 35 121 56 I Street NE 36  56 346 23 33 614 36 425 1,108 683 Copper Gate (Full Dev.) includes Reassignment with I Street connection Includes trips reassigned due to cross-connectivity with existing development B - 2 Exhibit 6 Page 236 of 465 Existing Zoning Copper Gate Phase 1 Only 2 I St NE @ 42nd St NE Synchro ID: 2 Existing 120 218 98 Average Weekday 07149 06929 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 29 Year: 2/27/2020 0 0 0 52 0 23  Data Source:TCC 0 --- 274 42nd Street NE 134 North 0 49  0 0 0 82 0 I Street NE 33  07123 06933 94 196 102 Pipeline Trips 217 687 470 Average Weekday 0 217 0 0 470 0 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 --- 687 42nd Street NE 0 North 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 I Street NE 0  0 217 0 0 470 0 217 687 470 Baseline 349 927 578 Average Weekday 0 295 54 0 546 32 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 32 Year:2025 0 0 057 Growth Rate =2.0%0 25  Years of Growth = 5 0 ---988 42nd Street NE 147 North Total Growth = 1.1041 0 54  000 90 0 I Street NE 36  0 295 25 0 546 36 320 902 582 Development Trips 75 119 44 Average Weekday 05025 03014 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 14 0 0 0 6 0 -8  0 ---101 42nd Street NE 21 North 0 25  0 0 0 15 0 I Street NE -10  050-8 030-10 42 62 20 Future with Development 424 1,046 622 Average Weekday 0 345 79 0 576 46 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 46 0 0 063 0 17  0 ---1,089 42nd Street NE 168 North 0 79  000 105 0 I Street NE 26  0 345 17 0 576 26 362 964 602 Copper Gate (Phase 1) includes Reassignment with I Street connection Includes 33% crossover between existing development and rezone area B - 3 Exhibit 6 Page 237 of 465 Existing Zoning Copper Gate Phase 1 Only 3 I St NE @ 40th St NE Synchro ID: 3 Existing 69 155 86 Average Weekday 6630 6800 PM Peak Hour  6 I Street NE 0 Year: 7/9/2020 36 0 0 0 30 0  Data Source:IDAX 93 40th Street NE 236 40th Street NE 0 North 6 0  57 0 0 0 51 I Street NE 0  51 63 0 30 80 0 114 224 110 Pipeline Trips 217 687 470 Average Weekday 0 217 0 0 470 0 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 40th Street NE 687 40th Street NE 0 North 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 I Street NE 0  0 217 0 0 470 0 217 687 470 Baseline 294 859 565 Average Weekday 7 287 0 7 558 0 PM Peak Hour  7 I Street NE 0 Year: 2025 40 0 00 Growth Rate = 2.0%33 0  Years of Growth =5 103 40th Street NE 948 40th Street NE 0 North Total Growth = 1.1041 7 0  63 0 0 0 56 I Street NE 0  56 287 0 33 558 0 343 934 591 Development Trips 42 62 20 Average Weekday -1 -7 50 -1 -9 30 PM Peak Hour  -1 I Street NE 30 20 21 21 74 0 23  54 40th Street NE 177 40th Street NE 195 North -1 50  34 35 35 121 0 I Street NE 36  0-723 0-936 16 43 27 Future with Development 336 921 585 Average Weekday 6 280 50 6 549 30 PM Peak Hour  6 I Street NE 30 60 21 21 74 33 23  157 40th Street NE 1,125 40th Street NE 195 North 6 50  97 35 35 121 56 I Street NE 36  56 280 23 33 549 36 359 977 618 Copper Gate (Phase 1) includes Reassignment with I Street connection Includes trips reassigned due to cross-connectivity with existing development B - 4 Exhibit 6 Page 238 of 465 C Proposed Zoning Turning Movement Calculations Exhibit 6 Page 239 of 465 Proposed Zoning 2 I St NE @ 42nd St NE Synchro ID: 2 Existing 120 218 98 Average Weekday 07149 06929 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 29 Year: 2/27/2020 0 0 0 52 0 23  Data Source:TCC 0 --- 274 42nd Street NE 134 North 0 49  0 0 0 82 0 I Street NE 33  07123 06933 94 196 102 Pipeline Trips 283 818 535 Average Weekday 0 283 0 0 535 0 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 --- 818 42nd Street NE 0 North 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 I Street NE 0  0 283 0 0 535 0 283 818 535 Baseline 415 1,058 643 Average Weekday 0 361 54 0 611 32 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 32 Year:2025 0 0 057 Growth Rate =2.0%0 25  Years of Growth = 5 0 ---1,119 42nd Street NE 147 North Total Growth = 1.1041 0 54  000 90 0 I Street NE 36  0 361 25 0 611 36 386 1,033 647 Development Trips 92 151 59 Average Weekday 06230 04019 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 19 0 0 0 11 0 -8  0 ---133 42nd Street NE 31 North 0 30  0 0 0 20 0 I Street NE -10  062-8 040-10 54 84 30 Future with Development 507 1,209 702 Average Weekday 0 423 84 0 651 51 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 51 0 0 068 0 17  0 ---1,252 42nd Street NE 178 North 0 84  000 110 0 I Street NE 26  0 423 17 0 651 26 440 1,117 677 Copper Gate (Full Dev.) includes Reassignment with I Street connection Includes 33% crossover between existing development and rezone area C - 1 Exhibit 6 Page 240 of 465 Proposed Zoning 3 I St NE @ 40th St NE Synchro ID: 3 Existing 69 155 86 Average Weekday 6630 6800 PM Peak Hour  6 I Street NE 0 Year: 7/9/2020 36 0 0 0 30 0  Data Source:IDAX 93 40th Street NE 236 40th Street NE 0 North 6 0  57 0 0 0 51 I Street NE 0  51 63 0 30 80 0 114 224 110 Pipeline Trips 283 818 535 Average Weekday 0 283 0 0 535 0 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 40th Street NE 818 40th Street NE 0 North 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 I Street NE 0  0 283 0 0 535 0 283 818 535 Baseline 360 990 630 Average Weekday 7 353 0 7 623 0 PM Peak Hour  7 I Street NE 0 Year: 2025 40 0 00 Growth Rate = 2.0%33 0  Years of Growth =5 103 40th Street NE 1,079 40th Street NE 0 North Total Growth = 1.1041 7 0  63 0 0 0 56 I Street NE 0  56 353 0 33 623 0 409 1,065 656 Development Trips 54 84 30 Average Weekday -1 -7 62 -1 -9 40 PM Peak Hour  -1 I Street NE 40 26 27 27 96 0 29  68 40th Street NE 226 40th Street NE 244 North -1 62  42 43 43 148 0 I Street NE 43  0-729 0-943 22 56 34 Future with Development 414 1,074 660 Average Weekday 6 346 62 6 614 40 PM Peak Hour  6 I Street NE 40 66 27 27 96 33 29  171 40th Street NE 1,305 40th Street NE 244 North 6 62  105 43 43 148 56 I Street NE 43  56 346 29 33 614 43 431 1,121 690 Copper Gate (Full Dev.) includes Reassignment with I Street connection Includes trips reassigned due to cross-connectivity with existing development C - 2 Exhibit 6 Page 241 of 465 Proposed Zoning Copper Gate Phase 1 Only 2 I St NE @ 42nd St NE Synchro ID: 2 Existing 120 218 98 Average Weekday 07149 06929 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 29 Year: 2/27/2020 0 0 0 52 0 23  Data Source:TCC 0 --- 274 42nd Street NE 134 North 0 49  0 0 0 82 0 I Street NE 33  07123 06933 94 196 102 Pipeline Trips 217 687 470 Average Weekday 0 217 0 0 470 0 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 --- 687 42nd Street NE 0 North 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 I Street NE 0  0 217 0 0 470 0 217 687 470 Baseline 349 927 578 Average Weekday 0 295 54 0 546 32 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 32 Year:2025 0 0 057 Growth Rate =2.0%0 25  Years of Growth = 5 0 ---988 42nd Street NE 147 North Total Growth = 1.1041 0 54  000 90 0 I Street NE 36  0 295 25 0 546 36 320 902 582 Development Trips 92 151 59 Average Weekday 06230 04019 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 19 0 0 0 11 0 -8  0 ---133 42nd Street NE 31 North 0 30  0 0 0 20 0 I Street NE -10  062-8 040-10 54 84 30 Future with Development 441 1,078 637 Average Weekday 0 357 84 0 586 51 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 51 0 0 068 0 17  0 ---1,121 42nd Street NE 178 North 0 84  000 110 0 I Street NE 26  0 357 17 0 586 26 374 986 612 Copper Gate (Phase 1) includes Reassignment with I Street connection Includes 33% crossover between existing development and rezone area C - 3 Exhibit 6 Page 242 of 465 Proposed Zoning Copper Gate Phase 1 Only 3 I St NE @ 40th St NE Synchro ID: 3 Existing 69 155 86 Average Weekday 6630 6800 PM Peak Hour  6 I Street NE 0 Year: 7/9/2020 36 0 0 0 30 0  Data Source:IDAX 93 40th Street NE 236 40th Street NE 0 North 6 0  57 0 0 0 51 I Street NE 0  51 63 0 30 80 0 114 224 110 Pipeline Trips 217 687 470 Average Weekday 0 217 0 0 470 0 PM Peak Hour  0 I Street NE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0 40th Street NE 687 40th Street NE 0 North 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 I Street NE 0  0 217 0 0 470 0 217 687 470 Baseline 294 859 565 Average Weekday 7 287 0 7 558 0 PM Peak Hour  7 I Street NE 0 Year: 2025 40 0 00 Growth Rate = 2.0%33 0  Years of Growth =5 103 40th Street NE 948 40th Street NE 0 North Total Growth = 1.1041 7 0  63 0 0 0 56 I Street NE 0  56 287 0 33 558 0 343 934 591 Development Trips 54 84 30 Average Weekday -1 -7 62 -1 -9 40 PM Peak Hour  -1 I Street NE 40 26 27 27 96 0 29  68 40th Street NE 226 40th Street NE 244 North -1 62  42 43 43 148 0 I Street NE 43  0-729 0-943 22 56 34 Future with Development 348 943 595 Average Weekday 6 280 62 6 549 40 PM Peak Hour  6 I Street NE 40 66 27 27 96 33 29  171 40th Street NE 1,174 40th Street NE 244 North 6 62  105 43 43 148 56 I Street NE 43  56 280 29 33 549 43 365 990 625 Copper Gate (Phase 1) includes Reassignment with I Street connection Includes trips reassigned due to cross-connectivity with existing development C - 4 Exhibit 6 Page 243 of 465 D Level of Service Calculations Exhibit 6 Page 244 of 465 HCM 6th TWSC 2: I Street NE & 42nd Place NE Westport Rezone 2020 Existing Conditions PM Peak-Hour Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113] Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 23 29 69 33 49 71 Future Vol, veh/h 23 29 69 33 49 71 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 50 ---- Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 44444 Mvmt Flow 26 32 77 37 54 79 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 283 96 0 0 114 0 Stage 1 96 ----- Stage 2 187 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.44 6.24 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.44 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.44 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.536 3.336 - - 2.236 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 703 955 - - 1463 - Stage 1 923 ----- Stage 2 840 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 676 955 - - 1463 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 676 ----- Stage 1 923 ----- Stage 2 807 ----- Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 9.6 0 3.1 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 676 955 1463 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.038 0.034 0.037 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 10.5 8.9 7.6 0 HCM Lane LOS - -BAAA HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.1 0.1 0.1 - D - 1 Exhibit 6 Page 245 of 465 HCM 6th TWSC 3: I Street NE & 40th Street NE Westport Rezone 2020 Existing Conditions PM Peak-Hour Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113] Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 51 30 80 63 6 Future Vol, veh/h 6 51 30 80 63 6 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 ----- Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 00000 Mvmt Flow 7 56 33 88 69 7 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 227 73 76 0 - 0 Stage 1 73 ----- Stage 2 154 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.4 6.2 4.1 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.4 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.4 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 3.3 2.2 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 766 995 1536 - - - Stage 1 955 ----- Stage 2 879 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 748 995 1536 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 748 ----- Stage 1 933 ----- Stage 2 879 ----- Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 9 2 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1536 - 962 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.021 - 0.065 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.4 0 9 - - HCM Lane LOS A A A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0.2 - - D - 2 Exhibit 6 Page 246 of 465 HCM 6th TWSC 2: I Street NE & 42nd Place NE Westport Rezone 2025 Baseline Conditions PM Peak-Hour Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113] Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 25 32 611 36 54 361 Future Vol, veh/h 25 32 611 36 54 361 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 50 ---- Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 44444 Mvmt Flow 28 36 679 40 60 401 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1220 699 0 0 719 0 Stage 1 699 ----- Stage 2 521 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.44 6.24 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.44 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.44 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.536 3.336 - - 2.236 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 197 436 - - 873 - Stage 1 489 ----- Stage 2 592 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 180 436 - - 873 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 180 ----- Stage 1 489 ----- Stage 2 540 ----- Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 20.4 0 1.2 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 180 436 873 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.154 0.082 0.069 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 28.6 14 9.4 0 HCM Lane LOS - - D B A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.5 0.3 0.2 - D - 3 Exhibit 6 Page 247 of 465 HCM 6th TWSC 3: I Street NE & 40th Street NE Westport Rezone 2025 Baseline Conditions PM Peak-Hour Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113] Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1 Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 7 56 33 623 353 7 Future Vol, veh/h 7 56 33 623 353 7 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 ----- Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 - Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 91 91 91 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 00000 Mvmt Flow 8 62 36 685 388 8 Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1149 392 396 0 - 0 Stage 1 392 ----- Stage 2 757 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.4 6.2 4.1 - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.4 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.4 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 3.3 2.2 - - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 221 661 1174 - - - Stage 1 687 ----- Stage 2 467 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 210 661 1174 - - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 210 ----- Stage 1 653 ----- Stage 2 467 ----- Approach EB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 12.7 0.4 0 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBTEBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1174 - 534 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.031 - 0.13 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.2 0 12.7 - - HCM Lane LOS A A B - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0.4 - - D - 4 Exhibit 6 Page 248 of 465 HCM 6th TWSC 2: I Street NE & 42nd Place NE Westport Rezone 2025 future Conditions with Existing Zoning PM Peak-Hour Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113] Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 46 641 26 79 411 Future Vol, veh/h 17 46 641 26 79 411 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 50 ---- Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 44444 Mvmt Flow 19 51 712 29 88 457 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1360 727 0 0 741 0 Stage 1 727 ----- Stage 2 633 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.44 6.24 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.44 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.44 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.536 3.336 - - 2.236 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 162 421 - - 857 - Stage 1 475 ----- Stage 2 525 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 140 421 - - 857 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 140 ----- Stage 1 475 ----- Stage 2 453 ----- Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 20.1 0 1.6 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 140 421 857 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.135 0.121 0.102 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 34.7 14.7 9.7 0 HCM Lane LOS - - D B A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.5 0.4 0.3 - D - 5 Exhibit 6 Page 249 of 465 HCM 6th TWSC 3: I Street NE & 40th Street NE Westport Rezone 2025 future Conditions with Existing Zoning PM Peak-Hour Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113] Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 5.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 35 56 23 21 30 33 614 36 50 346 6 Future Vol, veh/h 6 35 56 23 21 30 33 614 36 50 346 6 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length ------100--100-- Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 92 91 92 92 92 91 91 92 92 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 20222002200 Mvmt Flow 7 38 62 25 23 33 36 675 39 54 380 7 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1287 1278 384 1309 1262 695 387 0 0 714 0 0 Stage 1 492 492 - 767 767 ------- Stage 2 795 786 - 542 495 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.52 6.2 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.1 - - 4.12 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4.018 3.3 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.2 - - 2.218 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 142 166 668 136 170 442 1183 - - 886 - - Stage 1 562 548 - 395 411 ------- Stage 2 384 403 - 525 546 ------- Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 109 151 668 93 155 442 1183 - - 886 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 109 151 - 93 155 ------- Stage 1 545 515 - 383 399 ------- Stage 2 325 391 - 415 513 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 27.8 46.4 0.4 1.1 HCM LOS D E Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1183 - - 262 164 886 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.031 - - 0.405 0.49 0.061 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 - - 27.8 46.4 9.3 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - D E A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 1.9 2.4 0.2 - - D - 6 Exhibit 6 Page 250 of 465 /DQHV9ROXPHV7LPLQJV,6WUHHW1( WK6WUHHW1(Westport Rezone2025 future Conditions with Existing Zoning with SignalPM Peak-HourGibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113]Lane GroupEBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 6 35 56 23 21 30 33 614 36 50 346 6Future Volume (vph) 6 35 56 23 21 30 33 614 36 50 346 6Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 100 0 100 0Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Frt 0.922 0.945 0.992 0.997Flt Protected 0.997 0.985 0.950 0.950Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1734 0 0 1734 0 1805 1883 0 1770 1894 0Flt Permitted 0.970 0.883 0.533 0.314Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1687 0 0 1554 0 1013 1883 0 585 1894 0Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes YesSatd. Flow (RTOR) 62 33 8 2Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30Link Distance (ft) 513 687 865 676Travel Time (s) 11.7 15.6 19.7 15.4Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.92 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.91 0.91Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 0% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 2% 2% 0% 0%Adj. Flow (vph) 7 38 62 25 23 33 36 675 39 54 380 7Shared Lane Traffic (%)Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 107 0 0 81 0 36 714 0 54 387 0Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NAProtected Phases 4826Permitted Phases4826Detector Phase 44882266Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0Total Split (%) 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 61.7% 61.7% 61.7% 61.7%Maximum Green (s) 18.5 18.5 18.5 18.5 32.5 32.5 32.5 32.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Recall Mode None None None None Min Min Min MinWalk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Act Effct Green (s) 7.2 7.2 26.6 26.6 26.6 26.6Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.18 0.68 0.68 0.68 0.68v/c Ratio 0.30 0.26 0.05 0.56 0.14 0.30Control Delay 10.9 12.9 3.9 7.1 4.9 4.7Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0/DQHV9ROXPHV7LPLQJV,6WUHHW1( WK6WUHHW1(Westport Rezone2025 future Conditions with Existing Zoning with SignalPM Peak-HourGibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113]Lane GroupEBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRTotal Delay10.912.93.9 7.14.9 4.7LOSB BAAAAApproach Delay10.912.96.94.7Approach LOS BBAAQueue Length 50th (ft)783 764 33Queue Length 95th (ft)454211 17716 76Internal Link Dist (ft)433607785596Turn Bay Length (ft)100100Base Capacity (vph)866785842 1568486 1576Starvation Cap Reductn000 00 0Spillback Cap Reductn000 00 0Storage Cap Reductn000 00 0Reduced v/c Ratio0.120.100.04 0.460.11 0.25Intersection SummaryArea Type:OtherCycle Length: 60Actuated Cycle Length: 39Natural Cycle: 60Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.56Intersection Signal Delay: 6.9Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 59.9%ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min) 15Splits and Phases: 3: I Street NE & 40th Street NED - 7 Exhibit 6 Page 251 of 465 INPUT VOLUMES Vehicles and pedestrians per 60 minutes Site: 3 [2025 Future w Existing Zoning] I Street NE at 40th Street NE Site Category: PM Peak-Hour Roundabout Volume Display Method: Total and % All MCs Light Vehicles (LV)Heavy Vehicles (HV) S: I Street NE (NB)683 683 0 E: Site Access (WB)74 74 0 N: I Street NE (SB)402 402 0 W: 40th Street NE (EB)97 97 0 Total 1256 1256 0 SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: GIBSON TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS | Created: Friday, August 21, 2020 10:01:31 AM Project: C:\Users\Brad Lincoln\Desktop\GTC Files\20-113\Comment Response #2\Sidra\3 I Street NE at 40th Street NE.sip8 D - 8 Exhibit 6 Page 252 of 465 SITE LAYOUT Site: 3 [2025 Future w Existing Zoning] I Street NE at 40th Street NE Site Category: PM Peak-Hour Roundabout SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: GIBSON TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS | Created: Friday, August 21, 2020 10:01:24 AM Project: C:\Users\Brad Lincoln\Desktop\GTC Files\20-113\Comment Response #2\Sidra\3 I Street NE at 40th Street NE.sip8 D - 9 Exhibit 6 Page 253 of 465 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 3 [2025 Future w Existing Zoning] I Street NE at 40th Street NE Site Category: PM Peak-Hour Roundabout Movement Performance - Vehicles Demand Flows 95% Back of QueueMov ID Turn Deg. Satn Average Delay Level of Service Prop. Queued Effective Stop Rate Aver. No. Cycles Average Speed Total HV Vehicles Distance veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph South: I Street NE (NB) 3 L2 36 0.0 0.704 10.2 LOS B 8.0 199.8 0.61 0.56 0.61 34.2 8 T1 675 0.0 0.704 6.6 LOS A 8.0 199.8 0.61 0.56 0.61 34.4 18 R2 40 0.0 0.704 6.4 LOS A 8.0 199.8 0.61 0.56 0.61 33.8 Approach 751 0.0 0.704 6.8 LOS A 8.0 199.8 0.61 0.56 0.61 34.4 East: Site Access (WB) 1 L2 25 0.0 0.148 14.1 LOS B 0.9 21.8 0.76 0.82 0.76 32.5 6 T1 23 0.0 0.148 10.5 LOS B 0.9 21.8 0.76 0.82 0.76 32.7 16 R2 33 0.0 0.148 10.3 LOS B 0.9 21.8 0.76 0.82 0.76 32.2 Approach 81 0.0 0.148 11.5 LOS B 0.9 21.8 0.76 0.82 0.76 32.4 North: I Street NE (SB) 7 L2 55 0.0 0.409 9.4 LOS A 3.0 75.7 0.37 0.53 0.37 34.7 4 T1 380 0.0 0.409 5.8 LOS A 3.0 75.7 0.37 0.53 0.37 35.0 14 R2 7 0.0 0.409 5.6 LOS A 3.0 75.7 0.37 0.53 0.37 34.3 Approach 442 0.0 0.409 6.2 LOS A 3.0 75.7 0.37 0.53 0.37 34.9 West: 40th Street NE (EB) 5 L2 7 0.0 0.141 11.8 LOS B 0.8 18.9 0.60 0.70 0.60 34.1 2 T1 38 0.0 0.141 8.2 LOS A 0.8 18.9 0.60 0.70 0.60 34.4 12 R2 62 0.0 0.141 7.9 LOS A 0.8 18.9 0.60 0.70 0.60 33.7 Approach 107 0.0 0.141 8.3 LOS A 0.8 18.9 0.60 0.70 0.60 34.0 All Vehicles 1380 0.0 0.704 7.0 LOS A 8.0 199.8 0.54 0.57 0.54 34.4 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & Degree of Saturation (SIDRA). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used). Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard. SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: GIBSON TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS | Processed: Friday, August 21, 2020 10:00:02 AM Project: C:\Users\Brad Lincoln\Desktop\GTC Files\20-113\Comment Response #2\Sidra\3 I Street NE at 40th Street NE.sip8 D - 10 Exhibit 6 Page 254 of 465 HCM 6th TWSC 2: I Street NE & 42nd Place NE Westport Rezone 2025 future Conditions with Existing Zoning (Only Copper Gate Phase 1)PM Peak-Hour Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113] Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 46 576 26 79 345 Future Vol, veh/h 17 46 576 26 79 345 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 50 ---- Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 44444 Mvmt Flow 19 51 640 29 88 383 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1214 655 0 0 669 0 Stage 1 655 ----- Stage 2 559 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.44 6.24 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.44 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.44 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.536 3.336 - - 2.236 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 199 463 - - 912 - Stage 1 513 ----- Stage 2 568 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 175 463 - - 912 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 175 ----- Stage 1 513 ----- Stage 2 498 ----- Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 17.6 0 1.7 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 175 463 912 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.108 0.11 0.096 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 28 13.7 9.4 0 HCM Lane LOS - - D B A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0.4 0.3 - D - 11 Exhibit 6 Page 255 of 465 HCM 6th TWSC 3: I Street NE & 40th Street NE Westport Rezone 2025 future Conditions with Existing Zoning (Only Copper Gate Phase 1)PM Peak-Hour Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113] Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 4.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 35 56 23 21 30 33 549 36 50 280 6 Future Vol, veh/h 6 35 56 23 21 30 33 549 36 50 280 6 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length ------100--100-- Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 92 91 92 92 92 91 91 92 92 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 20222002200 Mvmt Flow 7 38 62 25 23 33 36 603 39 54 308 7 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1143 1134 312 1165 1118 623 315 0 0 642 0 0 Stage 1 420 420 - 695 695 ------- Stage 2 723 714 - 470 423 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.52 6.2 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.1 - - 4.12 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4.018 3.3 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.2 - - 2.218 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 179 203 733 171 207 486 1257 - - 943 - - Stage 1 615 589 - 433 444 ------- Stage 2 421 435 - 574 588 ------- Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 142 186 733 124 190 486 1257 - - 943 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 142 186 - 124 190 ------- Stage 1 597 555 - 420 431 ------- Stage 2 361 422 - 462 554 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 22 33 0.4 1.3 HCM LOS C D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1257 - - 317 207 943 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.029 - - 0.335 0.389 0.058 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 - - 22 33 9.1 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - C D A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 1.4 1.7 0.2 - - D - 12 Exhibit 6 Page 256 of 465 HCM 6th TWSC 2: I Street NE & 42nd Place NE Westport Rezone 2025 future Conditions with Proposed Zoning PM Peak-Hour Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113] Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.8 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 51 651 26 84 423 Future Vol, veh/h 17 51 651 26 84 423 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 50 ---- Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 44444 Mvmt Flow 19 57 723 29 93 470 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1394 738 0 0 752 0 Stage 1 738 ----- Stage 2 656 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.44 6.24 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.44 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.44 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.536 3.336 - - 2.236 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 154 415 - - 849 - Stage 1 469 ----- Stage 2 513 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 131 415 - - 849 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 131 ----- Stage 1 469 ----- Stage 2 437 ----- Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 20.5 0 1.6 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 131 415 849 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.144 0.137 0.11 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 37.1 15 9.8 0 HCM Lane LOS - - E C A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.5 0.5 0.4 - D - 13 Exhibit 6 Page 257 of 465 HCM 6th TWSC 3: I Street NE & 40th Street NE Westport Rezone 2025 future Conditions with Proposed Zoning PM Peak-Hour Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113] Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 8.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 43 56 29 27 40 33 614 43 62 346 6 Future Vol, veh/h 6 43 56 29 27 40 33 614 43 62 346 6 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length ------100--100-- Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 92 91 92 92 92 91 91 92 92 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 20222002200 Mvmt Flow 7 47 62 32 29 43 36 675 47 67 380 7 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1325 1312 384 1343 1292 699 387 0 0 722 0 0 Stage 1 518 518 - 771 771 ------- Stage 2 807 794 - 572 521 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.52 6.2 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.1 - - 4.12 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4.018 3.3 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.2 - - 2.218 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 134 159 668 129 163 440 1183 - - 880 - - Stage 1 544 533 - 393 410 ------- Stage 2 378 400 - 505 532 ------- Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 94 142 668 81 146 440 1183 - - 880 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 94 142 - 81 146 ------- Stage 1 528 492 - 381 398 ------- Stage 2 306 388 - 383 492 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 34.4 70 0.4 1.4 HCM LOS D F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1183 - - 234 151 880 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.031 - - 0.491 0.691 0.077 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 8.1 - - 34.4 70 9.4 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - D F A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 2.5 4 0.2 - - D - 14 Exhibit 6 Page 258 of 465 /DQHV9ROXPHV7LPLQJV,6WUHHW1( WK6WUHHW1(Westport Rezone2025 future Conditions with Proposed ZoningPM Peak-HourGibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113]Lane GroupEBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 6 43 56 29 27 40 33 614 43 62 346 6Future Volume (vph) 6 43 56 29 27 40 33 614 43 62 346 6Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 100 0 100 0Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Frt 0.928 0.944 0.990 0.997Flt Protected 0.997 0.985 0.950 0.950Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1744 0 0 1732 0 1805 1879 0 1770 1894 0Flt Permitted 0.972 0.890 0.533 0.302Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1700 0 0 1565 0 1013 1879 0 563 1894 0Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes YesSatd. Flow (RTOR) 62 43 9 2Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30Link Distance (ft) 513 687 865 676Travel Time (s) 11.7 15.6 19.7 15.4Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.92 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.91 0.91Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 0% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 2% 2% 0% 0%Adj. Flow (vph) 7 47 62 32 29 43 36 675 47 67 380 7Shared Lane Traffic (%)Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 116 0 0 104 0 36 722 0 67 387 0Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NAProtected Phases 4826Permitted Phases4826Detector Phase 44882266Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0Total Split (%) 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 61.7% 61.7% 61.7% 61.7%Maximum Green (s) 18.5 18.5 18.5 18.5 32.5 32.5 32.5 32.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Recall Mode None None None None Min Min Min MinWalk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Act Effct Green (s) 7.5 7.5 25.7 25.7 25.7 25.7Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.19 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67v/c Ratio 0.31 0.31 0.05 0.57 0.18 0.31Control Delay 11.1 13.0 4.1 7.6 5.6 5.0Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0/DQHV9ROXPHV7LPLQJV,6WUHHW1( WK6WUHHW1(Westport Rezone2025 future Conditions with Proposed ZoningPM Peak-HourGibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113]Lane GroupEBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRTotal Delay11.113.04.1 7.65.6 5.0LOSB BAAAAApproach Delay11.113.07.45.1Approach LOS BBAAQueue Length 50th (ft)9103 805 34Queue Length 95th (ft)484911 19121 81Internal Link Dist (ft)433607785596Turn Bay Length (ft)100100Base Capacity (vph)883806855 1589475 1600Starvation Cap Reductn000 00 0Spillback Cap Reductn000 00 0Storage Cap Reductn000 00 0Reduced v/c Ratio0.130.130.04 0.450.14 0.24Intersection SummaryArea Type:OtherCycle Length: 60Actuated Cycle Length: 38.5Natural Cycle: 60Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.57Intersection Signal Delay: 7.4Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 62.5%ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min) 15Splits and Phases: 3: I Street NE & 40th Street NED - 15 Exhibit 6 Page 259 of 465 INPUT VOLUMES Vehicles and pedestrians per 60 minutes Site: 3 [2025 Future w Proposed Zoning] I Street NE at 40th Street NE Site Category: PM Peak-Hour Roundabout Volume Display Method: Total and % All MCs Light Vehicles (LV)Heavy Vehicles (HV) S: I Street NE (NB)690 690 0 E: Site Access (WB)96 96 0 N: I Street NE (SB)414 414 0 W: 40th Street NE (EB)105 105 0 Total 1305 1305 0 SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: GIBSON TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS | Created: Friday, August 21, 2020 10:01:46 AM Project: C:\Users\Brad Lincoln\Desktop\GTC Files\20-113\Comment Response #2\Sidra\3 I Street NE at 40th Street NE.sip8 D - 16 Exhibit 6 Page 260 of 465 SITE LAYOUT Site: 3 [2025 Future w Proposed Zoning] I Street NE at 40th Street NE Site Category: PM Peak-Hour Roundabout SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: GIBSON TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS | Created: Friday, August 21, 2020 10:01:41 AM Project: C:\Users\Brad Lincoln\Desktop\GTC Files\20-113\Comment Response #2\Sidra\3 I Street NE at 40th Street NE.sip8 D - 17 Exhibit 6 Page 261 of 465 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 3 [2025 Future w Proposed Zoning] I Street NE at 40th Street NE Site Category: PM Peak-Hour Roundabout Movement Performance - Vehicles Demand Flows 95% Back of QueueMov ID Turn Deg. Satn Average Delay Level of Service Prop. Queued Effective Stop Rate Aver. No. Cycles Average Speed Total HV Vehicles Distance veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph South: I Street NE (NB) 3 L2 36 0.0 0.728 10.6 LOS B 8.4 208.8 0.69 0.59 0.69 34.0 8 T1 675 0.0 0.728 7.0 LOS A 8.4 208.8 0.69 0.59 0.69 34.3 18 R2 47 0.0 0.728 6.8 LOS A 8.4 208.8 0.69 0.59 0.69 33.6 Approach 758 0.0 0.728 7.2 LOS A 8.4 208.8 0.69 0.59 0.69 34.2 East: Site Access (WB) 1 L2 32 0.0 0.195 14.3 LOS B 1.2 29.8 0.79 0.85 0.79 32.5 6 T1 30 0.0 0.195 10.7 LOS B 1.2 29.8 0.79 0.85 0.79 32.7 16 R2 44 0.0 0.195 10.4 LOS B 1.2 29.8 0.79 0.85 0.79 32.1 Approach 105 0.0 0.195 11.7 LOS B 1.2 29.8 0.79 0.85 0.79 32.4 North: I Street NE (SB) 7 L2 68 0.0 0.429 9.5 LOS A 3.3 81.3 0.41 0.54 0.41 34.6 4 T1 380 0.0 0.429 5.9 LOS A 3.3 81.3 0.41 0.54 0.41 34.8 14 R2 7 0.0 0.429 5.7 LOS A 3.3 81.3 0.41 0.54 0.41 34.2 Approach 455 0.0 0.429 6.5 LOS A 3.3 81.3 0.41 0.54 0.41 34.8 West: 40th Street NE (EB) 5 L2 7 0.0 0.157 12.0 LOS B 0.9 21.3 0.62 0.72 0.62 34.0 2 T1 47 0.0 0.157 8.4 LOS A 0.9 21.3 0.62 0.72 0.62 34.3 12 R2 62 0.0 0.157 8.1 LOS A 0.9 21.3 0.62 0.72 0.62 33.6 Approach 115 0.0 0.157 8.4 LOS A 0.9 21.3 0.62 0.72 0.62 33.9 All Vehicles 1434 0.0 0.728 7.4 LOS A 8.4 208.8 0.60 0.61 0.60 34.2 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & Degree of Saturation (SIDRA). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used). Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard. SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: GIBSON TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS | Processed: Friday, August 21, 2020 10:00:03 AM Project: C:\Users\Brad Lincoln\Desktop\GTC Files\20-113\Comment Response #2\Sidra\3 I Street NE at 40th Street NE.sip8 D - 18 Exhibit 6 Page 262 of 465 HCM 6th TWSC 2: I Street NE & 42nd Place NE Westport Rezone 2025 future Conditions with Proposed Zoning (Only Copper Gate Phase 1)PM Peak-Hour Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113] Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.8 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 17 51 586 26 84 357 Future Vol, veh/h 17 51 586 26 84 357 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - None - None - None Storage Length 0 50 ---- Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - 0 - - 0 Grade, % 0 - 0 - - 0 Peak Hour Factor 90 90 90 90 90 90 Heavy Vehicles, % 4 44444 Mvmt Flow 19 57 651 29 93 397 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1249 666 0 0 680 0 Stage 1 666 ----- Stage 2 583 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.44 6.24 - - 4.14 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.44 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.44 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.536 3.336 - - 2.236 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 189 456 - - 903 - Stage 1 507 ----- Stage 2 554 ----- Platoon blocked, % - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 164 456 - - 903 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 164 ----- Stage 1 507 ----- Stage 2 481 ----- Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 18 0 1.8 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)- - 164 456 903 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio - - 0.115 0.124 0.103 - HCM Control Delay (s) - - 29.8 14 9.4 0 HCM Lane LOS - - D B A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) - - 0.4 0.4 0.3 - D - 19 Exhibit 6 Page 263 of 465 HCM 6th TWSC 3: I Street NE & 40th Street NE Westport Rezone 2025 future Conditions with Proposed Zoning (Only Copper Gate Phase 1)PM Peak-Hour Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113] Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 43 56 29 27 40 33 549 43 62 280 6 Future Vol, veh/h 6 43 56 29 27 40 33 549 43 62 280 6 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 00000000000 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None Storage Length ------100--100-- Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - Peak Hour Factor 91 92 91 92 92 92 91 91 92 92 91 91 Heavy Vehicles, % 0 20222002200 Mvmt Flow 7 47 62 32 29 43 36 603 47 67 308 7 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1181 1168 312 1199 1148 627 315 0 0 650 0 0 Stage 1 446 446 - 699 699 ------- Stage 2 735 722 - 500 449 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.52 6.2 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.1 - - 4.12 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4.018 3.3 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.2 - - 2.218 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 168 193 733 162 199 484 1257 - - 936 - - Stage 1 595 574 - 430 442 ------- Stage 2 414 431 - 553 572 ------- Platoon blocked, % - - - - Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 124 174 733 109 179 484 1257 - - 936 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 124 174 - 109 179 ------- Stage 1 578 533 - 418 429 ------- Stage 2 341 419 - 429 531 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s 26.1 44.1 0.4 1.6 HCM LOS D E Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)1257 - - 283 192 936 - - HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.029 - - 0.406 0.543 0.072 - - HCM Control Delay (s) 7.9 - - 26.1 44.1 9.1 - - HCM Lane LOS A - - D E A - - HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - - 1.9 2.8 0.2 - - D - 20 Exhibit 6 Page 264 of 465 /DQHV9ROXPHV7LPLQJV,6WUHHW1( WK6WUHHW1(Westport Rezone2025 future Conditions with Proposed Zoning (Only Copper Gate Phase 1 w Signal)PM Peak-HourGibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113]Lane GroupEBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRLane ConfigurationsTraffic Volume (vph) 6 43 56 29 27 40 33 549 43 62 280 6Future Volume (vph) 6 43 56 29 27 40 33 549 43 62 280 6Ideal Flow (vphpl) 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900Storage Length (ft) 0 0 0 0 100 0 100 0Storage Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0Taper Length (ft) 25 25 25 25Lane Util. Factor 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Frt 0.928 0.944 0.989 0.997Flt Protected 0.997 0.985 0.950 0.950Satd. Flow (prot) 0 1744 0 0 1732 0 1805 1876 0 1770 1894 0Flt Permitted 0.971 0.879 0.569 0.346Satd. Flow (perm) 0 1698 0 0 1546 0 1081 1876 0 645 1894 0Right Turn on Red Yes Yes Yes YesSatd. Flow (RTOR) 62 43 10 3Link Speed (mph) 30 30 30 30Link Distance (ft) 513 687 865 676Travel Time (s) 11.7 15.6 19.7 15.4Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.92 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.91 0.91 0.92 0.92 0.91 0.91Heavy Vehicles (%) 0% 2% 0% 2% 2% 2% 0% 0% 2% 2% 0% 0%Adj. Flow (vph) 7 47 62 32 29 43 36 603 47 67 308 7Shared Lane Traffic (%)Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 116 0 0 104 0 36 650 0 67 315 0Turn Type Perm NA Perm NA Perm NA Perm NAProtected Phases 4826Permitted Phases4826Detector Phase 44882266Switch PhaseMinimum Initial (s) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Minimum Split (s) 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5 22.5Total Split (s) 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 37.0 37.0 37.0 37.0Total Split (%) 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 38.3% 61.7% 61.7% 61.7% 61.7%Maximum Green (s) 18.5 18.5 18.5 18.5 32.5 32.5 32.5 32.5Yellow Time (s) 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5All-Red Time (s) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0Lost Time Adjust (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Total Lost Time (s) 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5Lead/LagLead-Lag Optimize?Vehicle Extension (s) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0Recall Mode None None None None Min Min Min MinWalk Time (s) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0Flash Dont Walk (s) 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0Pedestrian Calls (#/hr) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Act Effct Green (s) 7.4 7.4 24.1 24.1 24.1 24.1Actuated g/C Ratio 0.20 0.20 0.65 0.65 0.65 0.65v/c Ratio 0.30 0.30 0.05 0.53 0.16 0.25Control Delay 10.5 12.3 4.2 7.2 5.4 4.9Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0/DQHV9ROXPHV7LPLQJV,6WUHHW1( WK6WUHHW1(Westport Rezone2025 future Conditions with Proposed Zoning (Only Copper Gate Phase 1 w Signal)PM Peak-HourGibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. [BJL #20-113]Lane GroupEBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBRTotal Delay10.512.34.2 7.25.4 4.9LOSB BAAAAApproach Delay10.512.37.05.0Approach LOS BBAAQueue Length 50th (ft)893 675 26Queue Length 95th (ft)464711 16321 65Internal Link Dist (ft)433607785596Turn Bay Length (ft)100100Base Capacity (vph)916828948 1646565 1661Starvation Cap Reductn000 00 0Spillback Cap Reductn000 00 0Storage Cap Reductn000 00 0Reduced v/c Ratio0.130.130.04 0.390.12 0.19Intersection SummaryArea Type:OtherCycle Length: 60Actuated Cycle Length: 36.9Natural Cycle: 55Control Type: Actuated-UncoordinatedMaximum v/c Ratio: 0.53Intersection Signal Delay: 7.1Intersection LOS: AIntersection Capacity Utilization 59.1%ICU Level of Service BAnalysis Period (min) 15Splits and Phases: 3: I Street NE & 40th Street NED - 21 Exhibit 6 Page 265 of 465 INPUT VOLUMES Vehicles and pedestrians per 60 minutes Site: 3 [2025 Future w Proposed Zoning & Copper Gate Phase 1 Only] I Street NE at 40th Street NE Site Category: PM Peak-Hour Roundabout Volume Display Method: Total and % All MCs Light Vehicles (LV)Heavy Vehicles (HV) S: I Street NE (NB)625 625 0 E: Site Access (WB)96 96 0 N: I Street NE (SB)348 348 0 W: 40th Street NE (EB)105 105 0 Total 1174 1174 0 SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: GIBSON TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS | Created: Friday, August 21, 2020 10:02:02 AM Project: C:\Users\Brad Lincoln\Desktop\GTC Files\20-113\Comment Response #2\Sidra\3 I Street NE at 40th Street NE.sip8 D - 22 Exhibit 6 Page 266 of 465 SITE LAYOUT Site: 3 [2025 Future w Proposed Zoning & Copper Gate Phase 1 Only] I Street NE at 40th Street NE Site Category: PM Peak-Hour Roundabout SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: GIBSON TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS | Created: Friday, August 21, 2020 10:01:55 AM Project: C:\Users\Brad Lincoln\Desktop\GTC Files\20-113\Comment Response #2\Sidra\3 I Street NE at 40th Street NE.sip8 D - 23 Exhibit 6 Page 267 of 465 MOVEMENT SUMMARY Site: 3 [2025 Future w Proposed Zoning & Copper Gate Phase 1 Only] I Street NE at 40th Street NE Site Category: PM Peak-Hour Roundabout Movement Performance - Vehicles Demand Flows 95% Back of QueueMov ID Turn Deg. Satn Average Delay Level of Service Prop. Queued Effective Stop Rate Aver. No. Cycles Average Speed Total HV Vehicles Distance veh/h % v/c sec veh ft mph South: I Street NE (NB) 3 L2 36 0.0 0.659 10.3 LOS B 6.6 164.5 0.60 0.58 0.60 34.2 8 T1 603 0.0 0.659 6.7 LOS A 6.6 164.5 0.60 0.58 0.60 34.5 18 R2 47 0.0 0.659 6.5 LOS A 6.6 164.5 0.60 0.58 0.60 33.8 Approach 687 0.0 0.659 6.9 LOS A 6.6 164.5 0.60 0.58 0.60 34.4 East: Site Access (WB) 1 L2 32 0.0 0.175 13.5 LOS B 1.0 25.8 0.74 0.81 0.74 32.9 6 T1 30 0.0 0.175 9.9 LOS A 1.0 25.8 0.74 0.81 0.74 33.1 16 R2 44 0.0 0.175 9.6 LOS A 1.0 25.8 0.74 0.81 0.74 32.5 Approach 105 0.0 0.175 10.9 LOS B 1.0 25.8 0.74 0.81 0.74 32.8 North: I Street NE (SB) 7 L2 68 0.0 0.360 9.4 LOS A 2.5 62.4 0.37 0.54 0.37 34.7 4 T1 308 0.0 0.360 5.9 LOS A 2.5 62.4 0.37 0.54 0.37 34.9 14 R2 7 0.0 0.360 5.6 LOS A 2.5 62.4 0.37 0.54 0.37 34.2 Approach 382 0.0 0.360 6.5 LOS A 2.5 62.4 0.37 0.54 0.37 34.8 West: 40th Street NE (EB) 5 L2 7 0.0 0.146 11.4 LOS B 0.8 19.5 0.57 0.68 0.57 34.3 2 T1 47 0.0 0.146 7.8 LOS A 0.8 19.5 0.57 0.68 0.57 34.6 12 R2 62 0.0 0.146 7.5 LOS A 0.8 19.5 0.57 0.68 0.57 33.9 Approach 115 0.0 0.146 7.9 LOS A 0.8 19.5 0.57 0.68 0.57 34.2 All Vehicles 1290 0.0 0.659 7.2 LOS A 6.6 164.5 0.54 0.60 0.54 34.4 Site Level of Service (LOS) Method: Delay & Degree of Saturation (SIDRA). Site LOS Method is specified in the Parameter Settings dialog (Site tab). Roundabout LOS Method: Same as Signalised Intersections. Vehicle movement LOS values are based on average delay and v/c ratio (degree of saturation) per movement. Intersection and Approach LOS values are based on average delay for all movements (v/c not used). Roundabout Capacity Model: SIDRA Standard. SIDRA Standard Delay Model is used. Control Delay includes Geometric Delay. Gap-Acceptance Capacity: SIDRA Standard (Akçelik M3D). HV (%) values are calculated for All Movement Classes of All Heavy Vehicle Model Designation. SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0 | Copyright © 2000-2019 Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd | sidrasolutions.com Organisation: GIBSON TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS | Processed: Friday, August 21, 2020 10:00:03 AM Project: C:\Users\Brad Lincoln\Desktop\GTC Files\20-113\Comment Response #2\Sidra\3 I Street NE at 40th Street NE.sip8 D - 24 Exhibit 6 Page 268 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 1 of 8 SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Date Received: Physical Address: Auburn City Hall Annex, 2nd Floor 1 E Main St Mailing Address: 25 W Main St Auburn, WA 98001 Webpage & Application Submittal: www.auburnwa.gov applications@auburnwa.gov Phone and Email: 253-931-3090 permitcenter@auburnwa.gov Project Name: Westport Capital Investments Comp Plan Amendment & Rezone Parcel Number(s): 0004200024, 0004200022, 0004200003, 0004200013, 0004200025, 0004200019 A. Background [help] 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Westport Capital Investments Comp Plan Amendment & Rezone 2. Name of Applicant: Westport Capital Investments, LLC Name of Agent (if applicable): David K. Toyer, President, Toyer Strategic Advisors, Inc. 3. Address and phone number of Applicant: 11269 NE 37th PL, Bellevue, WA 98004 425-417-8674 Address and phone number of Agent (if applicable): 3705 Colby Avenue, Suite 1, Everett, WA 98201 4. Date Checklist prepared: April 26, 2020 Date(s) Checklist Revised: August 18, 2020 October 14, 2020 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Auburn, Washington 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable). This is a non-project action to amend the comprehensive plan and zoning maps of the City of Auburn as part of the annual "docket" cycle. Applications are due in Jun 2020 and reviewed by staff, Planning Commission and Council. A decision is expected in Dec 2020. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. There are no current plans for future development of this site. After this process is complete, a development proposal could be submitted but would be required to complete its own project-level SEPA review. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Shockey Planning Group evaluated the site for sensitive areas in 2017. As part of this proposal's application requirements, Gibson Traffic Consultants has prepared a traffic analysis at the direction of the City. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None known. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. This proposal is a non-project action to amend the comprehensive plan land use designation and zoning for three parcels, which required approval by the City Council. No other government approvals are needed. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. This is a non-project action involving three six parcels totaling 37.6 32.4 acres which seeks to: - re-designate the parcels approximately 32.4 acres from the single family and multiple family land use designation to the moderate density residential multiple-familydesignation (comprehensive plan amendment); and - rezone approximately 31.2 37.6 acres from R7 and R20 to R1620 (zoning map amendment) The difference between the total acreage and acreage requested for rezoning recognizes that approximately 1.2 acres was already previously rezoned to multiple family in 1988 (Ordinance 4299) and is presently within the R20 zone. Exhibit 7 Page 269 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 2 of 8 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The parcels subject to the proposal can generally be described as being located north and east of I Street and 40th Street NE, including a portion located within the SE quarter of Section 31, Township 22N, Range 05E and the NE quarter of Section 06, Township 21N, Range 05E. B. Environmental Elements 1. Earth a. General description of the site: ■ flat,  rolling,  hilly,  steep slopes,  mountainous,  other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Less than 10% c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. Approximately 70% Oridia Silt Loam and 28% Renton Silt Loam with small percentages of Briscot Silt Loam and urban land. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None known. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. This proposal is a non-project action that would not directly result in any grading or filling. Any application for a future development proposal, unless exempt by WAC 197.11.800 or city code, will be required to complete a project level SEPA. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No. This proposal is a non-project action that would not directly result in any clear, grading, etc. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? This proposal is a non-project action and will not directly result in impervious surfaces. However, the change in applicable zoning from R7 and R20 to R1620 will result in increased allowances for lot coverage (up to 70%) and impervious surface under AMC 18.07.030. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: None. This proposal is a non-project action and no measures are proposed to reduce or control erosion. Any application for a future development proposal, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to complete a project level SEPA and comply with applicable city and state standards for surface water, drainage, low impact development and TESC. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. This proposal is a non-project action and would have no direct impact on emissions. Any future development, unless exempt under WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to complete a project level SEPA and comply with standards for air quality. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None. This proposal is a non-project action and would not directly result in any emissions. Any application for a future development proposal, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, will be required to complete a project level SEPA Exhibit 7 Page 270 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 3 of 8 3. Water a. Surface Water. 1. Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Small isolated wetlands were identified by Skockey Planning Group Brent on adjacent parcels that are not part of this proposal. Note that the Shockey Planning Group map report shows a 50ft buffer in accordance with the previous critical areas ordinances. Applicable buffers would be in accordance with Chapter 16.10 at the time of any future development application. Additionally, the Green River is located within 500 feet of the east property line of parcel 0004200003. 2. Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. This proposal is a non-project action and does not propose any work over, in, or adjacent to the wetlands or the river. Any future development proposal will require a critical areas delineation and a project level SEPA. 3. Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None. This proposal is a non-project action and would not result in any filling or dredging. Any future development proposal would be required to complete a project level SEPA if filling and/or dredging were proposed. 4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. This proposal is a non-project action and would not directly result in or require surface water withdrawls or diversions. Any future development proposal, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to complete a project level SEPA. 5. Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Yes. Attached is a map showing the FEMA preliminary 100-year floodplain. However, this is a non-project action. Any future development proposal would be required to address this and a project level SEPA. The City is currently updated flood regs per FEMA 6. Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. This proposal is a non-project action and would not directly result in any discharge of waste materials. Any future development proposal would be required, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to complete a project level SEPA. b. Ground Water. 1. Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. This proposal is a non-project action. Any future development, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to complete a project level SEPA and comply with applicable city and state standards. 2. Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals. . . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. This proposal is a non-project action. Any future development, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to complete a project level SEPA and comply with any applicable standards. c. Water runoff (including stormwater). 1. Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Unknown at this time. This proposal is a non-project action. Any future development proposal, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to complete a project level SEPA and provide analysis of storm and surface water runoff. 2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 3. Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No. This is a non-project action. Any future development proposal, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to submit a preliminary drainage report that analyzes drainage patterns pre- and post-development, as well as comply with all applicable city and state standards for the collection, treatment and release of storm and surface water. Exhibit 7 Page 271 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 4 of 8      4. Plants a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree:  alder,  maple,  aspen,  other evergreen tree:  fir,  cedar,  pine,  other Shrubs Grass  Pasture  crop or grain  orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops  wet soil plants:  cattail,  buttercup,  bullrush,  skunk cabbage,  other  water plants:  water lily,  eelgrass,  milfoil,  other  other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? No removal or alteration of vegetation is proposed as this is a non-project action. Any future development proposal, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to complete a project level SEPA and identify vegetation to be removed or altered. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None proposed. This proposal is a non-project action. Any future development proposal, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to complete a project level SEPA review and comply with any applicable landscaping standards. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. None known. 5. Animals a. Check any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Birds:  hawk,  heron,  eagle,  songbirds,  geese,  ducks,  crows,  other  Mammals:  deer,  bear,  elk,  beaver,  other  Fish:  bass,  salmon,  trout,  herring,  shellfish,  other b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. The sensitive area review by Shockey Planning Group discusses WDFW notes on failed heron reproduction due to eagle harrasment. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. None identified, except that the entire region is within the Pacific Fly-way. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None proposed. This is a non-project action. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. None known. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action that will not have any direct energy needs. Any future development proposal will be required to analyze its specific energy needs. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. This proposal is a non-project action and would not directly result in any changes that could impact the use of solar energy by adjacent properties. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: None. This proposal is a non-project action. Future development proposals may or may not include energy conservation features. Any future development proposal would be required to comply with current energy codes, etc. to control energy impacts. Exhibit 7 Page 272 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 5 of 8 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. None known. This proposal is a non-project action and it would not directly create any environmental health hazards. 1. Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. This site was historically used for agriculture and may have been affected by pesticide use. However, this is a non-project action and any future development proposal will be required to identify contamination, if any, as well as remediation, if required. 2. Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. None known. 3. Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. Any future development proposal, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to complete a project level SEPA and identify any chemicals that might be stored, used, etc. 4. Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. This proposal is a non-project action. No environmental health hazards are anticipated as a direct result of this proposal. 5. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None proposed. This is a non-project action. No environmental health hazards are anticipated as a direct result of this proposal. Any future development, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to completed a project level SEPA. b. Noise. 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None. This is a non-project action. However, the proposed location of the amendment is located within an urban environment with typical urban noises made by adjacent uses (commercial, high density residential), traffic, etc. 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. None. This proposal is a non-project action. Any future development proposal, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would need to identify its specific short-term and long-term noises, hours, etc. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None proposed. This proposal is a non-project action and would not directly result in any noises. Any future development proposal, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would need to complete a project level SEPA review. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. This site is undeveloped. Adjacent parcels are vacant land zoned R-20 (W and SW); a PUD development (N), developed heavy commercial zoning (W and SW); vacant land zoned R-7 (S), a residential manufactured/mobile home community (S) and open space/public use (E). This proposal shouldn't affect adjacent uses as it is consistent with the mix of higher density and intensity uses. The proposed re-designation to moderate density and rezone to R-16 would be conditioned to require that any multiple-family apartment units (allowed in the existing R-20 zone adjacent to the single family zones) would be limited to the southern portion of the site away from the single family neighborhood to the north. This will provide a more appropriate transition between uses in the area. b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? This site was at one time used for agricultural purposes, but it not working farmlands, nor is it an agricultural site of long-term significance. 1. Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: No. Exhibit 7 Page 273 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 6 of 8 c. Describe any structures on the site. None. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? None. This is a non-project action. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? R-7 and R-20 f. What is the current Comprehensive Plan designation of the site? Multiple Family and Single Family g. If applicable, what is the current Shoreline Master Program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area? If so, specify. No. A portion of the east side of the site is located within the identified 100-year floodplain (see attached map. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? This is a non-project action. However, the proposal could increase residential capacity by approx. 850 to 915 people (max build out). j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. This is a non-project action. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. This is a non-project action. L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: None. This proposal is a non-project action. If this proposal is approved and a future development proposal submitted, that proposal would be required to comply with city standards for development, including density, dimension and design standards. Further, future development allowed if this proposal were approved would be more consistent with the adjacent PUD, heavy commercial and R20 zoning and it would require the denser multiple family apartments be located on the southern portion of the site away from less intense existing residential areas as an alternative to where the R-20 zoning current abuts the single family neighborhood. m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: None. This is a non-project action and does not involve agricultural or forest lands of long-term commercial significance. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. If approved, this proposed change would increase the number of potential units from 218 single family units homes (R-7 zoned portion) and 125 multiple-family units (R-20 zoned portion) to no more than 12 units to the acre (+/- 10%) across the entire site. It would further come with a condition to limit the number of multiple-family units to 125 (same as current) and restrict those to the southern half of the site. as many as 624 multi-family units (depending on type of product). It is most likely that any future development proposal be for market rate units. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low- income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. This proposal is a non-project action. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? This proposal is a non-project action, but if approved the maximum building height would increase from 35ft to 4550ft. Future development, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to complete a project level SEPA review. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. The potential increase in building height would be consistent with the 50ft and 75 ft building heights allowed to the West and the 50ft building height allowed to the SW. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None proposed. This is a non-project action. Any future development proposal would be required to comply with applicable density, dimension and design standards at such time a development may be proposed. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None. This proposal is a non-project action that would not directly produce any light or glare. Any future development proposal, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to complete a project level SEPA and address light and glare. Exhibit 7 Page 274 of 465 Form Updated: March 2019 Page 7 of 8 b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not applicable. This is a non-project action. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None known/not applicable. This is a non-project action. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None proposed. This is a non-project action. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Recreation within 1 mile of this location include the interurban trail, the Mary Olson farm, North Green River Park, Riverpoint Park and the Issac Evans Park. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. This is a non-project action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None proposed. This is a non-project action. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers? If so, specifically describe. None known. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. None known. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the Department of Archeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP), archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. None. DAHP’s WISAARD Predictive Model shows the eastern portion of this site as “very high risk” and the remainder of the site as “high risk” for cultural resources. Shockey Planning Group conducted a desktop review of this information, which has been summarized in a memo to the City. DAHP considers this information sensitive and confidential, and it is protected from public disclosure per RCW 42.17.310(1)(k). This proposal is a non-project action. Any future development proposal, unless exempt, would be required to assess any potential impacts or otherwise comply with any comments received from DAHP in response to a notice of application or SEPA. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. None proposed. This is a non-project action. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The subject site is not presently served by a public street. However, it is located due east of the intersection of 40th Street NE and I Street NE. Future access points at the time of development of this site may will be include an the extension of 40th Street NE from I Street and the extension public road connections with L Street and O place, as well as an EVA at R Street. Road connections to the south will need to be coordinated with the Auburn School District., the addition of a 41st Place NE (east of I Street NE); the extension of L Street NE and/or the extension of O Place NE. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The site is located within one-half mile of King County Metro Route 180, including northbound stop #57915 (37th & Auburn Way) and southbound stop #58235 (42nd & Auburn Way). Sidewalks within the future development can be extended to connect with existing sidewalks in the area to provide access to this service. Route 180 is an all-day route with "night owl" service and Route 180 is planned to convert to a RapidRide I line in 2023. It Route 180 provides connections to Auburn Station, Kent Station, Burien, Sea-tac, and etc., And it can connecting riders to Sound Transit bus and commuter train services. Exhibit 7 Page 275 of 465 c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. Any future development proposal would be required to comply with local regulations for parking, including stall dimensions, stall size and etc. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No, this proposal will not directly require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, as itthis proposal is a non-project action. Any future development proposal would be required to complete a development specific traffic impact analysis (TIA) and, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, a project level SEPA review. Based on a traffic impact analysis by Gibson Traffic Consultants, any future development will need to evaluate the intersection at 40th Street NE and I Street, any shifts in traffic volumes to I Street NE from Auburn Way S with its extension to S 277th Street, and the impacts of the proposed development to determine what improvements, if any, are needed at this intersection. Additionally, any future development proposal would be required to submit a site plan for review, which would include plans for any new or improved roads, etc. Future development would be required to make a connection to I Street NE at 40th Street NE and provide half street improvements along I Street. Additional analysis will be required to determine if improvements are needed to the intersection of 40th Street NE and I Street NE. Public road connections will be required to L Street and O Place with an emergency vehicle access (EVA) at R Street. Site planning will need to be coordinated with the Auburn School District for purposes of providing public road stubs to their future school development (south). e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? A Traffic Impact Analysis was completed by Gibson Traffic Consultants to analyze a maximum density scenario if all 37.6 acres were zoned R-20. It concluded the this scenario proposed re-designation/rezone would result in 1,337 average daily trips (64 AM peak hour) and (59 PM peak hour). This would be passenger vehicles. The data was obtained from the City of Auburn and the model relied on both the current ITE and Highway Capacity Manuals. g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. No. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None proposed. This proposal is a non-project action. Any future development proposal for the site would be required to complete a traffic impact analysis and project level SEPA review to identify potential level of service (LOS) or other transportation impacts requiring mitigation. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Yes, eventually. Should this proposal be approved future development could have more units which would increase demands for certain public services. However, under GMA the impact of density on public services is preferred to that created by sprawl. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None proposed. This is a non-project action. Any future development proposal, unless exempt by WAC 197-11-800 or city code, would be required to complete a project level SEPA review to identify direct impacts and any required mitigation. 16. Utilities a. Check utilities currently available at the site: ■ electricity, ■ natural gas, ■ water, ■ refuse service, ■ telephone, ■ sanitary sewer, □ septic system, ■ other storm sewers b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. None proposed. This proposal is a non-project action and will not directly result in new demand for utilities. Future development will be required to coordinate with area utilities to evaluate development specific needs and available utility capacities, as well as coordinate and plan for development specific service needs, including connections, extensions, relocations, etc. At the request of the City, Applicant retained PACE Engineering to conduct an analysis of the Auburn 40 pump station. This analysis shows that any future development will need to further analyze the Auburn 40 pump station to determine if any improvements are required to support additional and peak flows. Exhibit 7 Page 276 of 465 Signature: ____________________________ Name of Signee: David K. Toyer Position and Agency/Organization: Toyer Strategic Advisors, Inc. Date Submitted: June 12, 2020 August 18, 2020 October 14, 2020 Exhibit 7 Page 277 of 465 NOTICE OF APPLICATION (NOA) NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING (NOH) and DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) Westport Capital Comprehensive Plan Map Change and Rezone SEP20-0006 / REZ20-0002 / CPA20-0002 The City of Auburn is issuing a Notice of Application (NOA), Notice of Public Hearing (NOH), and Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the following described project. The project application and listed studies may be reviewed by contacting the Department of Community Development at planning@auburnwa.gov or by visiting www.auburnwa.gov/landuse. Proposal: Request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation of approximately 31.8 acres from Single-Family Residential to Moderate-Family Residential, and approx. 5.3 acres from Multi-Family Residential to Moderate-Family Residential; and, rezone approx. 30.7 acres from R-7, Single-Family Residential, 5-7 Units per Acre, to R-16, Multi-Family Residential 12-16 Units per Acre, and approx. 6.4 acres from R-20, Multi-Family Residential, 15-20 Units per Acre, to R-16. The development is proposed to limit the density to 12 units per acre (plus or minus 10%), cap the number of apartment units at 128 (based off of the existing 6.4 acres of R-20 zoning), and require at least three types of ownership housing for the remainder of the property (approximately 382 dwelling units, plus or minus 10%) where each type of ownership housing must represent a minimum of 15% of the future units (e.g. 15% triplex, 15% townhomes, and 70% single-family). There is no development proposal associated with this request. The above stipulations would be memorialized through a contract rezone. Upon future development of the site access will be from ‘I’ St. NE, near the intersection of 40 th St. NE, as well as potential extensions of the existing roadways that currently end at the northern boundary of the site (‘L’ St. NE, ‘O’ Pl. NE, and ‘R’ St. NE). It should be noted that the Monterey Park subdivision, to the north, was designed such that these roadways would be extended upon development of this site. A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) was prepared and submitted along with the applications that looked at potential impacts to the City’s street network and is available on the City’s website at www.auburnwa.gov/landuse; a project-specific TIA will be required for any future development(s) meeting the City’s Engineering and Design Standards. Upgrades to the existing sewer pump station located at the southern end of ‘O’ Pl. NE will be required upon future development as the existing station was designed to serve this site at its current zoning designations. Location: The site is generally located east of ‘I’ St. NE at 40th St. NE and the Green River, south of the Monterey Park subdivision, see Vicinity Map below for reference. King Co. Parcel Nos. 000420- 0022 (portion of), 000420-0024 (portion of), and 000420-0003. Notice of Application: October 19, 2020 Application Complete: June 4, 2020 Permit Application: May 7, 2020 File Nos. SEP20-0006 REZ20-0002 CPA20-0002 Exhibit 8 Page 278 of 465 NOTICE OF APPLICATION, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING, and DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE SEP20-0006 / REZ20-0002 / CPA20-0002 (Continued) Page 2 of 3 Applicant/Owner: Rick Hathaway, Managing Member Westport Capital Investments, LLC 11269 NE 37th Pl. Bellevue, WA 98004 Applicant’s Representative: David Toyer, President Toyer Strategic Advisors, Inc. 3705 Colby Ave., Suite 1 Everett, WA 98201 Studies/Plans Submitted With Application:  Critical Areas Report, Shockey Planning Group (4/2018)  Traffic Impact Analysis, Gibson Traffic Consultants (4/2020, 7/2020)  Architectural, Historical, and Cultural Resources Report, Shockey Planning Group (6/20/2020)  Auburn 40 Pump Station Engineering Analysis and Feasibility Study, PACE Engineers, (6/24/2020) Other Permits, Plans, and Approvals Needed:  None for this proposal. Statement of Consistency and List of Applicable Development Regulations: This proposal is subject to and shall be consistent with the Auburn City Code, Comprehensive Plan, and Public Works Design and Construction Standards. Lead Agency: City of Auburn The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Public Comment Period: This may be your only opportunity to comment on the environmental impact of the proposal. All persons may comment on this application. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date issued below. Comments must be in writing and submitted by 5:00 p.m. on November 3, 2020 to the mailing address of 25 W Main St., Auburn, WA, 98001 or to the email address below. Any person wishing to become a party of record, shall include in their comments that they wish to receive notice of and participate in any hearings, if relevant, and request a copy of decisions once made. Any person aggrieved of the City's determination may file an appeal with the Auburn City Clerk at 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001within 14 days of the close of the comment period, or by 5:00 p.m. on November 17, 2020. Public Hearing: The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing on the applications on November 4, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. The public hearing will be held virtually and telephonically. To attend the meeting virtually please enter the meeting ID into the ZOOM app or call into the meeting at the phone number listed below. Per City of Auburn Resolution No. 5533 the location for Planning Commission meetings will be virtual until King County enters into Phase 3 of the Governor's Safe Start Reopening Plan. Join the ZOOM meeting at the following web address: Exhibit 8 Page 279 of 465 NOTICE OF APPLICATION, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING, and DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE SEP20-0006 / REZ20-0002 / CPA20-0002 (Continued) Page 3 of 3 https://zoom.us/j/95038060198. Meeting ID: 950 3806 0198, or via one tap mobile: 253-215-8782, 95038060198# US (Tacoma). Written comments may be either emailed or mailed attention to the contact person below to 25 W Main St., Auburn WA, 98001 (please note, due to the current Governor’s Stay Home Stay Safe order, mailed comments may not be received by City Staff on time for inclusion in the packet provided to the Hearing Examiner), or submitted at the public hearing by email. For citizens with speech, sight, or hearing disabilities wishing to review documents pertaining to this hearing should contact the person below within 10 calendar days prior to the hearing. Each request will be considered individually according to the type of request, the availability of resources, and the financial ability of the City to provide the requested services or equipment. For questions regarding this project, please contact Thaniel Gouk, Senior Planner, at planning@auburnwa.gov or 253-804- 5031. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Jeff Tate POSITION/TITLE: Director of Community Development ADDRESS: 25 West Main Street Auburn, Washington 98001 253-931-3090 DATE ISSUED: SIGNATURE: Note: This determination does not constitute approval of the proposal. Approval of the proposal can only be made by the legislative or administrative body vested with that authority. The proposal is required to meet all applicable regulations. Vicinity Map October 19, 2020 40TH ST. SE ’L’ PL. NE 42ND PL. NE ‘R’ ST. NE ‘I’ ST. NE EXISTING SUBJECT VACANT R-20 VACANT AUBURN SCHOOL DISTRICT LAND THE RIVER MOBILE HOME PARK AUBURN WAY NORTH PROPERTIES Exhibit 8 Page 280 of 465 10/22/2020 Mr. Thaniel Gouk Senior Planner City of Auburn 25 W Main Street Auburn, WA 98001 Sent Via Electronic Mail Re: City of Auburn--2020-S-1942--60-day Notice of Intent to Adopt Amendment Dear Mr. Gouk: Thank you for sending the Washington State Department of Commerce (Commerce) the 60-day Notice of Intent to Adopt Amendment as required under RCW 36.70A.106.  We received your  submittal with the following description. Request to change the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation of approximately 31.8 acres from Single-Family Residential to Moderate-Family Residential, and approx. 5.3 acres from Multi-Family Residential to Moderate-Family Residential; and, rezone approx. 30.7 acres from R-7, Single-Family Residential, 5-7 Units per Acre, to R-16, Multi- Family Residential 12-16 Units per Acre, and approx. 6.4 We received your submittal on 10/22/2020 and processed it with the Submittal ID 2020-S-1942. Please keep this letter as documentation that you have met this procedural requirement. Your 60-day notice period ends on 12/21/2020. We have forwarded a copy of this notice to other state agencies for comment. Please remember to submit the final adopted amendment to Commerce within ten days of adoption. If you have any questions, please contact Growth Management Services at reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov, or call Gary Idleburg, (360) 725-3045.   Sincerely, Review Team Growth Management Services STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 1011 Plum Street SE Ÿ PO Box 42525 Ÿ Olympia, Washington 98504-2525 Ÿ (360) 725-4000 www.commerce.wa.gov Page: 1 of 1 Exhibit 9 Page 281 of 465 WESTPORT CAPITAL – COMP PLAN CHANGE AND REZONE ZONING COMP PLAN PUD R-7 R-20 CHANGE FROM R-7 TO R-16, WITH CONDITIONS CHANGE FROM R-20 TO R-16, WITH CONDITIONS SINGLE FAMILY MULTI- FAMILY CHANGE FROM SINGLE FAMILY TO MODERATE DENSITY CHANGE FROM MULTI-FAMILY TO MODERATE DENSITY SINGLE FAMILY Exhibit 10 Page 282 of 465 Exhibit 11 Page 283 of 465 Exhibit 11 Page 284 of 465 Exhibit 11 Page 285 of 465 Exhibit 11 Page 286 of 465 FAIRFIELD DEVELOPMENT SITE FEASIBILITY STUDY I STREET NE PROPERTIES AUBURN, WASHINGTON April 2018 Submitted by: Exhibit 12 Page 287 of 465 Site Feasibility Study – Fairfield Development, Inc. 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Fairfield Development, Inc. is exploring the development potential of six vacant parcels located east of I Street NE at 40th Street NE, within the City of Auburn. The site, which is currently owned by two different property owners, is approximately 37.6 acres and is vacant. The site is bordered on the north by a single family development, on the east by the Green River, the south by a vacant parcel and the west by single family homes, vacant parcels and I Street NE. There are no sensitive areas on-site. There are two potential wetlands off-site that have buffers that could extend onto Parcels B and D, see Figure 1 – Site Plan. All potential sensitive areas are off-site, so no filling or alteration would be allowed and buffers would need to be adhered to for future development. Extension of utilities would need to occur in order for site development to occur. In addition, sewer connection is also subject to a late connection charge. A Phase I Environmental Assessment was performed on the site to evaluate the presence of environmentally hazardous conditions on the site. The Assessment included an historic and cultural resources review for the site and adjacent properties. No other special reports were prepared. Based on the data gathered during the preparation of this report, the proposed site is feasible for development. However, one item that was found in the title report pertaining to Lots A, B and C should be reviewed and likely removed as zoning requirements have changed since adoption of Ordinance No. 4299. In addition, the Phase I Environmental Assessment noted that due to the past agricultural use of the property, the soils could contain amounts of pesticides above clean-up levels. Due to a possible wetland along the southern border of the site, there is a buffer that could extend onto the site. This reduces the total area for development from 37.6 acres to approximately 36.54 acres. Exhibit 12 Page 288 of 465 Site Feasibility Study – Fairfield Development, Inc. 19 SENSITIVE AREAS REVIEW On November 14, 2017, the site was evaluated for the presence of wetlands, streams, ditches and wildlife habitat. The subject property was vacant and contained no structures. The site is fairly level and does not contain any erosion or landslide hazard areas, see Figure 5 – Site Topography. No wetlands, streams, ditches or wildlife habitat areas were observed on the subject peroperty. Two potential wetlands were noted off-site; vegetation and some ponding that meet wetland criteria were noted from the subject property line. One potential wetland was found to the west of Parcel C and one to the south of Parcel B and D. Their approximate 50 foot buffers do extend onto the subject parcels. Access to these off-site wetlands were not granted, therefore, for pusposes of this report, it is assumed that they are wetlands. The Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife was contacted regarding the potential for priority habitat and species (PHS) areas in the vicinity of the project. Information received from WDFW dated February 14, 2018 revealed that there had been a Great Blue Heron colony south of the subject site (near the mobile home park at 37th Street NE and I Street NE). However, the notes that were received said that reproduction failed due to eagle harassment. The heron nests were not noted during the site walk over or during a subsequent drive by of the area on February 23, 2018. Figure 6 - Site Topography Exhibit 12 Page 289 of 465 50 ft buffer Potential Category III Wetland (approx)25ftb u ffer Potential Category II Wetland (approx) extends offsite E F DB C A 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000250 Feet Fairfield Development Auburn, WA Service Layer Credits: Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community King County. Source information may have been collected at different scales, times or definitions, resulting in inconsistencies among layers and features represented together on this map. Figure 1 Site Plan Legend Potential off-site wetlands 25 ft Buffer (minimum, Category III) 50 ft Buffer (minimum, Category II) Project Parcels ´ Map Date: 12/4/2017 Map ID Parcel Owner Address Use Size Buildable A 0004200013 Fairfield Dev. 921 40th Street NE Vacant 0.32 ac 0.32 ac B 0004200019 Westport Cap 923 40th Street NE Vacant 2.84 ac 2.73 ac C 0004200025 Westport Cap N/A Vacant 2.04 ac 2.04 ac D 0004200024 Westport Cap N/A Vacant 9.47 ac 8.52 ac E 0004200022 Westport Cap N/A Vacant 13.68 ac 13.68 ac F 0004200003 Westport Cap N/A Vacant 9.25 ac 9.25 ac Exhibit 12 Page 290 of 465 18.07.020 Uses | Auburn City Code Page 1 of 4 The Auburn City Code is current through Ordinance 6775, passed May 18, 2020. 18.07.020 Uses. Table 18.07.020. Permitted Use Table – Residential Zoning Designations P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 A. Residential Uses. Accessory dwelling units P P P P X1 X1 X1 Accessory use, residential P P P P P P P Adult family home P P P P P P P Bed and breakfast P P P P P P P Communal residence four or less individuals P P P P P P P Duplexes; provided, that minimum lot size of zoning designation is met and subject to compliance with Chapter 18.25 ACC (Infill Residential Development Standards) X X A P P P X Foster care homes P P P P P P P Group residence facilities (7 or more residents) X X X X C C C Group residence facilities (6 or fewer residents) P P P P P P P Keeping of animals4 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 Multiple-family dwellings X X X X A P P Neighborhood recreational buildings and facilities owned and managed by the neighborhood homeowners’ association A6 A6 A6 A6 A6 P P Use as dwelling units of (1) recreational vehicles that are not part of an approved recreational vehicle park, (2) boats, (3) automobiles, and (4) other vehicles X X X X X X X Renting of rooms, for lodging purposes only, to accommodate not more than two persons in addition to the family or owner occupied unit8 P P P P P P P Residential care facilities including but not limited to assisted living facilities, convalescent homes, continuing care retirement facilities P P X X A P P Single-family detached dwellings, new P P P P P P X Supportive housing, subject to the provisions of ACC 18.31.160 X X X X X P P Exhibit 13 Page 291 of 465 18.07.020 Uses | Auburn City Code Page 2 of 4 The Auburn City Code is current through Ordinance 6775, passed May 18, 2020. P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 Swimming pools, tennis courts and similar outdoor recreation uses only accessory to residential or park uses P P P P P P P Townhouses (attached) X X X X P P P B. Commercial Uses. Commercial horse riding and bridle trails A X X X X X X Commercial retail, included as part of mixed-use development and not a home occupation in compliance with Chapter 18.60 ACC X X X X A A A Daycare, limited to a mini daycare center. Daycare center, preschool or nursery school may also be permitted but must be located on an arterial X A A A A A A Home-based daycare as regulated by RCW 35.63.185 and through receipt of approved city business license P P P P P P P Home occupations subject to compliance with Chapter 18.60 ACC P P P P P P P Marijuana cooperative X X X X X X X Marijuana processor X X X X X X X Marijuana producer X X X X X X X Marijuana related business X X X X X X X Marijuana researcher X X X X X X X Marijuana retailer X X X X X X X Marijuana transporter business X X X X X X X Mixed-use development3 X X X X P P P Nursing homes X X X X C C C Private country clubs and golf courses, excluding driving ranges X X C C C X X Privately owned and operated parks and playgrounds and not homeowners’ association-owned recreational area X A A A A P P Professional offices, included as part of mixed-use development and not a home occupation in compliance with Chapter 18.60 ACC X X X X A A A C. Resource Uses. Agricultural enterprise:7 Exhibit 13 Page 292 of 465 18.07.020 Uses | Auburn City Code Page 3 of 4 The Auburn City Code is current through Ordinance 6775, passed May 18, 2020. P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 When 50 percent, or more, of the total site area is dedicated to active agricultural production during the growing season, and with 52 or less special events per calendar year A7 X X X X X X When less than 50 percent of the total site area is dedicated to active agricultural production during the growing season, or with more than 52 special events per calendar year C7 X X X X X X Agricultural type uses are permitted provided they are incidental and secondary to the single-family use: Agricultural crops and open field growing (commercial) P X X X X X X Barns, silos and related structures P X X X X X X Commercial greenhouses P X X X X X X Pasturing and grazing4 P X X X X X X Public and private stables4 P X X X X X X Roadside stands, for the sale of agricultural products raised on the premises. The stand cannot exceed 300 square feet in area and must meet the applicable setback requirements P X X X X X X Fish hatcheries C X X X X X X D. Government, Institutional, and Utility Uses. Civic, social and fraternal clubs X X X X A A A Government facilities A A A A A A A Hospitals (except animal hospitals) X X X X X C C Municipal parks and playgrounds A P P P P P P Museums X X X X A A A Religious institutions, less than one acre lot size A A A A A A A Religious institutions, one acre or larger lot size C C C C C C C Transmitting towers C C C C C C C Type 1-D wireless communication facility (see ACC 18.04.912(J)) P P P P P P P Utility facilities and substations C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 1 An accessory dwelling unit may be permitted with an existing single -family residence pursuant to ACC 18.31.120. 2 Please see the supplemental development standards for animals in ACC 18.31.220. Exhibit 13 Page 293 of 465 18.07.020 Uses | Auburn City Code Page 4 of 4 The Auburn City Code is current through Ordinance 6775, passed May 18, 2020. 3 Individual uses that make up a mixed-use development must be permitted within the zone. If a use making up part o f a mixed- use development requires an administrative or conditional use permit, the individual use must apply for and receive the administrative or conditional use approval, as applicable. 4 Proximity of pasture or livestock roaming area to wells, surface waters, and aquifer recharge zones is regulated by the King or Pierce County board of health, and property owners shall comply with the provisions of the board of health code. 5 Excludes all public and private utility facilities addressed under ACC 18.02.040(E). 6 Administrative use permit not required when approved as part of a subdivision or binding site plan. 7 Agricultural enterprise uses are subject to supplemental development standards under ACC 18.31.210, Agricultural enterprises development standards. 8 An owner occupant that rents to more than two persons but no more than four persons is required to obtain a city of Auburn rental housing business license and shall meet the standards of the International Property Maintenance Code. (Ord. 6642 § 4, 2017; Ord. 6600 § 9, 2016; Ord. 6565 § 2, 2015; Ord. 6560 § 9, 2015; Ord. 6477 § 8, 2013; Ord. 6369 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6363 § 3, 2011; Ord. 6269 § 3, 2009; Ord. 6245 § 5, 2009.) The Auburn City Code is current through Ordinance 6775, passed May 18, 2020. Disclaimer: The city clerk’s office has the official version of the Auburn City Code. Users should contact the city clerk’s office for ordinances passed subsequent to the ordinance cited above. Note: This site does not support Internet Explorer. To view this site, Code Publishing Company recommends using one of the following browsers: Google Chrome, Firefox, or Safari. City Website: www.auburnwa.gov Code Publishing Company Exhibit 13 Page 294 of 465 Exhibit 14Page 295 of 465 Exhibit 14Page 296 of 465 Page 297 of 465 Page 298 of 465 Page 299 of 465 Page 300 of 465 Page 301 of 465 Page 302 of 465 Page 303 of 465 Page 304 of 465 From: Thaniel Gouk Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 7:24 PM To: 'lissalou@aol.com' Cc: 'planning@auburnwa.gov' Subject: RE: Objection to SEP20-0006, REZ20-0002, CPA20-0002 Sorry about that, here is the image that I mentioned. From: Thaniel Gouk Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 7:23 PM To: lissalou@aol.com Cc: planning@auburnwa.gov Subject: RE: Objection to SEP20-0006, REZ20-0002, CPA20-0002 Good evening Ms. Child, thank you for providing the City with your comments relating to this proposal. Note that your comments and this response will be included in the packet that is provided to the Planning Commission and City Council. Regarding the presence of wetlands, yes, the Applicant had a wetland reconnaissance done and there does appear to be a large wetland located on mostly on the Auburn School District property east of your subdivision. This wetland also appears to extend slightly onto this site. There is also a small wetland located off-site to the north near I St. NE. Please see the image below for reference. As for any impacts to wetlands, any future development of the site would be subject to local and State standards relating to wetland and wetland buffer protections that include protection of wildlife habitat. If there is any disruption to the wetlands or their buffers they would be appropriately mitigated. Regarding traffic impacts, again, yes when the site develops in the future there will be impacts. The Applicant hired a Professional Traffic Engineer who performed an analysis on potential impacts to the Exhibit 15 Page 305 of 465 local road network in consultation with the City’s Senior Traffic Engineer. Based off of that analysis there will likely be improvements required for the intersection of I St. NE and 40th St. NE; what those improvements are is not known at this time as there is no development proposal associated with the applications. Also, to note, the traffic study that was done does include the Copper Gate development that is under construction to the north. The question about housing, I’m assuming that is referring to the Copper Gate development that is comprised of multiple apartment buildings. One of the proposed conditions for this request is to limit the number of apartment units to that which is already allowed based on the existing R-20 zoning which is approx. 128 units. Any impacts to schools, parks, utilities, etc. would be offset by paying impact fees and potentially dedication of park land. Thanks, Effective March 25, 2020, in response to Gov. Inslee’s Stay Home Stay Safe directive, the City of Auburn has closed City Hall and the Annex Customer Service Center until further notice. I am currently out of the office but working remotely from home. I have access to email and voicemail but will be responding to all inquiries by email only. Thaniel Gouk – Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Auburn | www.auburnwa.gov 253.804.5031 | tgouk@auburnwa.gov Mailing Address: 25 W Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001 Permit Center Address: 1 E Main Street, Auburn, WA 98002 Customer Service Survey Application Forms Zoning Maps From: lissalou@aol.com <lissalou@aol.com> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 4:51 PM To: Planning-1 <Planning@auburnwa.gov> Subject: RE: Objection to SEP20-0006, REZ20-0002, CPA20-0002 CAUTION: The following message originated from outside the City of Auburn. Be careful opening links and attachments To whom it may concern, We recently got notice from a neighbor in regards to plans for a rezoning proposal in Auburn at I St NE and 40th St NE (records listed in email subject). As a resident of I Pl NE, I am writing to object to this proposal, and frankly I am shocked and slightly dismayed that there is no requirement for an EIS, considering that surrounding areas consist of highly sensitive wetlands. Not only will additional residences disrupt the local area in terms of population increase, but the upheaval that will be required to install water, electric, and sewage, as well as streets for Exhibit 15 Page 306 of 465 the residences, will damage areas that will not be able to recover. Many species use these open areas as well as the wetlands and the river, and their habitats will be permanently altered. Rezoning will also allow for the building of housing that will create traffic that the area cannot tolerate. The site is on a narrow 2 way street, and is currently undergoing significant change due to the new complex being built on Auburn Way N at 277th. Traffic is already difficult to maneuver at that intersection and the new residences will create an even greater stress on the area. Adding more similar housing (which will ultimately occur should this rezoning proposal pass) will just create more impacts from resident vehicles, school buses, garbage trucks, delivery vehicles, etc. The impact studies that were performed were prior to the new development just up the street, and should be redone. What was once a neighborhood that had a beautiful greenbelt as a backdrop is quickly becoming a residential nightmare. Again, I object to the proposal for rezoning and believe that more studies need to be done on the impacts that will occur, including an EIS. Thank you, Melissa Child Exhibit 15 Page 307 of 465 From: Thaniel Gouk Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 11:00 AM To: Earl Weaver Cc: Anthony Avery; Dustin Lawrence; Steven Sturza; Jeff Dixon (jdixon@auburnwa.gov) Subject: RE: WAC-197-11-340{2} (CPA20-0002) Hello Mr. Weaver, thank you for expressing your concerns regarding any potential impacts to the floodplain. As there is no project associated with this request, there will be no impacts to the floodplain. The City is aware that the recently updated FEMA maps show areas of the subject properties as being located within potentially flooded areas. I can let you know that the City has a thorough process that any development proposals will need to go through for permitting, including elevation surveys to show where exactly any floodplain areas are located. Any future development will be subject to these regulations as necessary. Hopefully this answers your questions. If you would like any more technical details, please contact Steve Sturza, Development Engineer Manager, as ssturza@auburnwa.gov or 253-876-1969. Thanks, Effective March 25, 2020, in response to Gov. Inslee’s Stay Home Stay Safe directive, the City of Auburn has closed City Hall and the Annex Customer Service Center until further notice. I am currently out of the office but working remotely from home. I have access to email and voicemail but will be responding to all inquiries by email only. Thaniel Gouk – Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Auburn | www.auburnwa.gov 253.804.5031 | tgouk@auburnwa.gov Mailing Address: 25 W Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001 Permit Center Address: 1 E Main Street, Auburn, WA 98002 Customer Service Survey Application Forms Zoning Maps From: Earl Weaver <fatherearl@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2020 7:50 PM To: Dustin Lawrence <dlawrence@auburnwa.gov> Cc: Planning-1 <Planning@auburnwa.gov> Subject: Re: WAC-197-11-340{2} CAUTION: The following message originated from outside the City of Auburn. Be careful opening links and attachments Exhibit 15 Page 308 of 465 It concerns the rezone application for the property on I Street and 40th in NE Auburn. From: Dustin Lawrence <dlawrence@auburnwa.gov> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2020 2:36 PM To: Earl Weaver <fatherearl@hotmail.com> Cc: Planning-1 <Planning@auburnwa.gov> Subject: RE: WAC-197-11-340{2} Hi Mr. Weaver, Can you let me know what project your comment is associated with? That way, I can get this to the right person. Dustin Lawrence, AICP, CFM Senior Planner Department of Community Development City of Auburn | www.auburnwa.gov Office# 253.931.3092 | Cell# 253.561-2224 | dlawrence@auburnwa.gov Mailing Address: 25 W Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001 Permit Center Address: 1 E Main Street, Auburn, WA 98002 (Click Here for Map) Customer Service Survey | Application Forms | Zoning Maps From: Earl Weaver <fatherearl@hotmail.com> Sent: Friday, October 23, 2020 12:07 PM To: Planning-1 <Planning@auburnwa.gov> Cc: Earl Weaver <fatherearl@hotmail.com> Subject: WAC-197-11-340{2} CAUTION: The following message originated from outside the City of Auburn. Be careful opening links and attachments I am concern that not enough flood mitigation will be incorporated into a rezone of this size. I have observed the project northwest of this proposed rezone and there was a significant increase in the elevation of the property these units were built upon. I want to know what surface water and flood mitigation efforts will be required to protect the neighboring properties. FEMA has recently updated their 100 year flood maps and a significant amount of The River Mobile Home Park is now in the flood zone. I fear this rezoned property and subsequent development will endanger all the surrounding properties to a much greater flood Exhibit 15 Page 309 of 465 risk. Adequate flood mitigation must be required for this rezone and development to go forward Thank You Earl Weaver The River Mobile Home Park The information contained in this electronic communication is personal, privileged and/or confidential information intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) to which it has been addressed. If you read this communication and are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication, other than delivery to the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail. Thank you. Exhibit 15 Page 310 of 465 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM Agenda Subject: Public Hearing for Zoning Code Amendments for Wireless Communication Faciities Date: October 26, 2020 Department: Community Development Attachments: Staff Report for ZOA20-0005 WCF Code Update Doct. PC Title 17 and 18 only Franchis e Wireles s Code Checklist SEP20-0017 NOH/DNS Signed SEP20-0017 Request to Publis h Submittal Receipt -Email-WA Commerce Verizon Comment Received 10.22.20 Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrativ e Recommendation: na Background Summary: The purpose of the changes are to modernize the code in response to changes in federal regulations that affect the permitting of expansion of existing wireless communication facilitities. Rev iewed by Council Committees: Councilmember:Staff:Dixon Meeting Date:November 4, 2020 Item Number:PH.3 Page 311 of 465 AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Subject/Title: ZOA20-0005, Proposed Code Amendments related to Wireless Telecommunications Regulations Date: October 22, 2020 Department: Community Development Budget Impact: Current Budget: $0 Proposed Revision: $0 Revised Budget: $0 Administrative Recommendation: Planning Commission to conduct public hearing and recommend to City Council approval of Proposed Code Amendments related to Wireless Telecommunications Regulations and more specifically the changes to Title 17, ‘Land Adjustments & Divisions’ and Title 18, ‘Zoning’. BACKGROUND/SUMMARY: The City is systematically initiating changes to various city code sections to address consistency with changes in federal law requirements and to reflect changes in wireless communication technology among other changes. Due to the highly technical and litigious nature of the subject, the City hired a legal consultant specializing in the subjects of wireless communication and right-of-way (ROW) permitting and franchises and that is familiar with the results of relevant court decisions. The City Legal Dept., Public Works Dept., and Community Development Dept. staff has been working with this consultant over the last year on drafting code changes. Based on this code drafting, the City is simultaneously proposing to amend code sections affecting public ROW franchises, and ROW use permits among others and these changes are not the subject of Planning Commission consideration since they primarily address the subject of city rights-of-way (ROW). However, the city is proposing to amend city code section, Title 17 ‘Land Adjustment and Divisions’ (the subdivision code) and Title 18 ‘Zoning’ which are subject to review and recommendation by the Planning Commission. For context for the Planning Commissioners, what follows is a list of the seven city code titles that are proposed to be changed simultaneously. It is necessary to change these simultaneously since there are cross references to definitions that are found in a different portion of the code. These cross references avoid duplication and aid future internal consistency of terms and facilities that are common to ROW and non-ROW locations. A listing of the Code Titles to be changed and a brief summary of the proposed changes is provided below: The following is not subject to Planning Commission Review: (copy not provided) ------ • Title 3, REVENUE AND FINANCE o Chapter 3.42, Cable Television Utility Tax o Chapter 3.84, Telephone Business o Chapter 3.88, Utility Services Page 312 of 465 Staff Member: Dixon Date: October 22, 2020 Page 2 of 10 The key changes to Title 3, are:  Align definitions with those of Title 20 for utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process.  Repeal of ACC 3.84.110 as annexation notification is addressed by applicable state law.  Repeal of ACC 3.88.030 as the provision is outdated and duplicative of requirements in Title 5. • Title 5, BUSINESS LICENSES AND REGULATIONS o Chapter 5.84, Licensing of Telecommunications Carriers, Operators, Providers, and Other Utilities The key changes to Title 5, are:  Remove purpose statement of business licensing as it is duplicative.  Align definitions with those of Title 20 for utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process. • Title 12, STREETS, SIDEWALKS AND PUBLIC WORKS o Chapter 12.24, Construction Permits o Chapter 12.32, Sidewalk Obstructions The key changes to Title 12, are:  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process.  Ensure that any construction work performed under this title is done per the City’s Engineering Design and Construction Standards. • Title 13, WATER, SEWERS AND PUBLIC UTILITIES o Chapter 13.32A, Underground Wiring o Chapter 13.36, CATV Systems (Repealed) o Chapter 13.44, Electrical Franchise (Repealed) The key changes to Title 13, are:  Align definitions with those of Title 20 for utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process.  Ensure that any construction work performed under this title is done per the City’s Engineering Design and Construction Standards.  Update requirements, exemptions and process for undergrounding of utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Repeal of Chapter 13.36 ACC as the provisions are being moved to Title 20 and updated to reflect current federal requirements.  Repeal of Chapter 13.44 ACC as the provisions are outdated and addressed under the provisions of Title 20. Page 313 of 465 Staff Member: Dixon Date: October 22, 2020 Page 3 of 10 • Title 20, FRANCHISES, CABLE FRANCHISES, AND LEASES o Chapter 20.02, General Provisions o Chapter 20.04, Utility and Telecommunications Franchises o Chapter 20.06, Cable Franchise o Chapter 20.08, Facilities Lease o Chapter 20.10, Conditions of Public Way Agreements, Franchises and Facilities Leases (Repealed) o Chapter 20.12, Open Video Systems (Repealed) o Chapter 20.14, Small Wireless Facilities The key changes to Title 20, are:  Align definitions throughout the titles for utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Update City Code in conformance with current federal and state requirements for utilities, telecommunications and cable in the public ways and on city owned facilities and property.  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process.  Repeal of Chapter 20.10 ACC as the provisions of this chapter have been updated and moved to Chapter 20.02 ACC.  Repeal of Chapter 20.12 ACC as this chapter was empty. The following is subject to Planning Commission Review & Recommendation: (copy provided, see attachments) • Title 17, LAND ADJUSTMENTS AND DIVISIONS o Chapter 17.14, IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS – SUBDIVISIONS o Chapter 17.28, Infrastructure Conduit (Repealed) The key changes to Title 17, are:  Minor changes to improve clarity and correct references.  Repeal of ACC 17.28 because addressed in ACC 13.32A. • Title 18, ZONING o Chapter 18.02, General Provisions o Chapter 18.04, Definitions o Chapter 18.07, Residential Zones o Chapter 18.23, Commercial and Industrial Zones o Chapter 18.31, Supplemental Development Standards o Chapter 18.35, Special Purpose Zones The key changes to Title 18, are:  Changes to be consistent with the requirements of federal legislation that provide the city must approve additions or modifications to existing wireless communication facilities that do not exceed a ”substantial increase” and that the city must approve within a specified timeframe. This requires new terminology, procedures, and regulations. Page 314 of 465 Staff Member: Dixon Date: October 22, 2020 Page 4 of 10  Also changes were made to accommodate the new technology of “small cell wireless communication” facilities when located on non-ROW property.  Other minor housekeeping or administrative changes were also made. The proposed changes are shown by strikeout (deletions) and underline (additions) in the city code attached to this report. The following sections summarize the effect of federal regulations and the key points affecting City code Titles 17 and 18. Wireless Antenna Facilities With the evolving technology and increased usage of wireless devices by the population, wireless antenna facilities have been given special consideration by federal regulations. Local jurisdictions across the country need to ensure that their regulations regarding wireless antenna facility siting are consistent with section 6409(a) of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, as set forth in the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC’s) October 2014 Acceleration of Broadband Deployment Order. Regulating Wireless Antenna Facilities Local governments can develop ordinances and policies to provide opportunities for wireless communication facilities (WCF) consistent with the statutory rights of wireless communication service providers provided by the federal regulations while also providing for an orderly development of the city and protecting the health, safety, and general welfare of the city’s residents and property owners. A primary objective of these ordinances is to preserve the existing visual and aesthetic character of the jurisdiction and its neighborhoods, and minimize incompatibility, as well as minimizing the noise impacts generated by these facilities. The City has regulated WCFs located on public and private property by zoning regulations since Ordinance No. 5020 in 1997. Most recently the Planning Commission reviewed changes to these regulations in April 2019 as a result of the need to address construction of a unique category of wireless communication by Puget Sound Emergency Radio Network (PSERN) for an emergency response communications facility. These changes were adopted by Ordinance No. 6716 in 2019. Small Cell Communication Technology In recent years, the dramatic increase in use of wireless devices has triggered the need for new subcategory of wireless communication facility referred to as “small cell” technology to increase signal coverage. (The term: “small wireless facility” is used in the proposed city code changes.) The signal coverage is increased by use of smaller antennas (less than 3 cubic feet), not mounted as high, and more closely-spaced. A typical small cell is between 25-45 feet in height, attaches to existing utility poles or light/traffic pole within the right-of-way, and requires an aerial or underground line to access power and fiber in order to transmit cellular phone and data signals. Small cell facilities may also be installed on public or private property outside of the right-of-way and thus are also addressed in zoning code changes. As a result of the increased demand for this technology, there has been a substantial increase in applications from providers seeking to place small cell facilities in municipal rights- Page 315 of 465 Staff Member: Dixon Date: October 22, 2020 Page 5 of 10 of-way. In 2018, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued a 2-part Declaratory Ruling with the intent to streamline the deployment of Fourth Generation (4G) and Fifth Generation (5G) mobile communication system infrastructure. Regulating Small Cell Technology To meet rapidly increasing demand for wireless services and encourage investment in a national infrastructure for 5G, wireless communication providers must deploy infrastructure at significantly more locations using new, small cell facilities. This Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order is part of a national strategy to promote the timely buildout of this new infrastructure across the country by eliminating regulatory impediments, unnecessarily add delays and costs to bringing advanced wireless services to the public. The ruling was effective January 14, 2019. Title 18, Zoning refers to definition of “small wireless facilities” given in ACC 20.14, but does not contain the definition. To assist the Planning Commission in having a full understanding, the definition of “small wireless facilities” is provided here. ACC 20.14.010, Overview “For purposes of this chapter, “small wireless facilities” are defined as facilities that meet the following conditions: 1. The facilities: a. Are mounted on structures 50 feet or less in height, including their antennas as defined in 47 CFR 1.1320(d); or b. Are mounted on structures no more than 10 percent taller than other adjacent structures; or c. Do not extend existing structures on which they are located to a height of more than 50 feet or by more than 10 percent, whichever is greater; and 2. Each antenna associated with the deployment, excluding associated antenna equipment (as defined in the definition of antenna in 47 CFR 1.1320(d)), is no more than three cubic feet in volume; and 3. All other wireless equipment associated with the structure (including the wireless equipment associated with the antenna and any preexisting associated equipment on the structure) is no more than 28 cubic feet in volume; and 4. The facilities do not require antenna structure registration under Code of Federal Regulations, Title 47, Part 17; and 5. The facilities are not located on Tribal lands, as defined under 36 CFR 800.16(x); and 6. The facilities do not result in human exposure to radio frequency radiation in excess of the applicable safety standards specified in 47 CFR 1.1307(b); and 7. The facilities are currently located or are proposed to be located within the public right-of-way. For facilities currently located or proposed to be located on private property, please see Chapter 18.31 ACC. For facilities currently located or proposed to be located on public property or facilities, please see Chapter 20.08 ACC.“ Some key provisions of the federal legislation: • Clarify that federal regulations apply to support structures and to transmission equipment used in connection with any Commission-licensed or authorized wireless transmission. Page 316 of 465 Staff Member: Dixon Date: October 22, 2020 Page 6 of 10 • Define "transmission equipment" to encompass antennas and other equipment associated with and necessary to their operation, including power supply cables and backup power equipment. • Define "tower" to include any structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any Commission-licensed or authorized antennas and their associated facilities. • Clarify that the term "base station" includes structures other than towers that support or house an antenna, transceiver, or other associated equipment that constitutes part of a "base station" at the time the relevant application is filed with municipal authorities, even if the structure was not built for the sole or primary purpose of providing such support, but does not include structures that do not at that time support or house base station components. • Clarify that a modification "substantially changes" the physical dimensions of a tower or base station, as measured from the dimensions of the tower or base station inclusive of any modifications approved prior to the federal legislation, if it meets a defined set of criteria: o It increases the height of the tower by more than ten percent or by more than twenty feet, whichever is greater; o It involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the tower more than twenty feet, or more than the width of the tower structure at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is greater; o For any eligible support structure, it involves installation of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, but not to exceed four cabinets; or, for base stations, it involves installation of any new equipment cabinets on the ground if there are no preexisting ground cabinets associated with the structure, or else involves installation of ground cabinets that are more than ten percent larger in height or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the structure; o It entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site/lease area, as defined; o It would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support structure; and o It does not comply with original approval conditions unrelated to a “substantial change”. And thus is determined to be an “eligible facilities request” under the federal legislation. • Provide that localities may continue to enforce and condition approval on compliance with generally applicable building, structural, electrical, and safety codes and with other laws codifying objective standards reasonably related to health and safety. • Provide the following guidance for reviewing an application under federal legislation: o A local government may only require applicants to provide documentation that is reasonably related to determining whether the “eligible facilities request” meets the requirements; o Within 60 days from the date of filing, accounting for tolling, a local government shall approve an application meeting the “eligible facilities request”; o The running of the period may be tolled by mutual agreement or upon notice that Page 317 of 465 Staff Member: Dixon Date: October 22, 2020 Page 7 of 10 an application is incomplete provided in accordance with the same deadlines, but not by a moratorium; and o An application meeting the “eligible facilities request”; is deemed granted if a State or local government fails to act on it within the requisite time period. • Clarify that federal legislation applies only to State and local governments acting in their role as land use regulators and does not apply to such entities acting in their proprietary capacities. • Provide that parties may bring disputes-including disputes related to application denials and deemed grants-in any court of competent jurisdiction. • Establish new “presumptively reasonable” permit review timelines (referred to as shot clocks) applicable to small cell facilities. • Clarify the use of the term “collocation” in relation to small cell facilities. • Publishes fee limitation for the use of city-owned infrastructure (such as light and signal poles). • Establish guidelines for imposing aesthetic standards that must be: reasonable, no more burdensome than those applied to other types of infrastructure deployments, objective, and published in advance. • Interpret the term “effectively prohibit”. FINDINGS: 1. The City regulates land uses through establishment of zoning districts. The City of Auburn adopted Ordinance No. 4229 on June 1, 1987 repealing the previous Title 18 and enacting a new Title 18 entitled Zoning, which divides the City into zones wherein the location, height, use of buildings, land, and zoning development standards are established, regulated, and restricted in accordance with the comprehensive plan for the City. 2. The City has been regulating wireless communication facilities for several years, originally in response to the 1996 Federal Telecommunications Act. The City of Auburn adopted Ordinance No. 5020 on September 15, 1997, Ordinance No. 6245 on June 1, 2009, and Ordinance Nos. 6433 and 6434 on November 5, 2012, relating to the definition, siting and zoning of wireless communication facilities in Title 18, ‘Zoning’. 3. The City has periodically updated its regulations for wireless communication facilities. The City of Auburn has made updates and amendments as necessary within Title 17 and Title 18 for the regulation of wireless communication facilities since the adoption of Ordinance Nos. 4296, 4229; 5020, 6245, 6414, 6433, and 6434. 4. The industry and technology of wireless communication facilities continues to evolve as does the public’s reliance on this form of communication. Page 318 of 465 Staff Member: Dixon Date: October 22, 2020 Page 8 of 10 5. Due to evolution of the technology and increasing usage, new applicable federal regulations have been developed. And due to changes in Federal and State regulations that govern the regulation of such industries and their presence within the City, it is necessary to update the Auburn City Code in all titles, chapters and sections that authorize, regulate, affect or otherwise govern the review, construction, placement and siting of such tele- communications, cable and other utility facilities on public or on private property. 6. In reviewing the city code sections by city consultants and city staff, the City also seeks to clarify and update terms, procedural requirements, and approval processes for permits, for telecommunications, cable and other utility facilities placed on public and on private property. Changes are proposed to incorporate federal requirements into the framework and organization of city code. 7. The proposed amendments and changes to the Auburn City Code that are the subject of this proposal were sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce for state agency review under RCW 36.70A.106 and WAC 365-196-630. Receipt of the amendments was acknowledged by the Department of Commerce as received on October 9, 2020. See Exhibit #6. 8. The proposed amendments to the Auburn City Code are subject to State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review and a Determination of Non-Significance (DNS), File No. SEP20- 0017, was issued October 19, 2020. The issuance of the SEPA decision begins a 15-day public comment period which expires November 3. See Exhibit #4. 9. In response to the public comment period observed under SEPA, the city received one written comment by the time of preparation of this agenda bill/staff report. The comment was received October 22, 2020 from Kim Allen, Senior Vice President, Land Use Entitlements & Strategic Planning, Wireless Policy Group, LLC on behalf of Verizon Wireless. They indicate they commented on Chapter 20.14, ‘Small Wireless Facilities within the Public Way’, Title 17, ‘Land Adjustments & Divisions’ and Title 18, ‘Zoning’. These comments are Exhibit #7. 10. The City of Auburn Planning Commission reviewed staff’s recommended changes at a special meeting on October 20, 2020. 11. ACC 18.68.040, ‘Public hearing notice requirements’, requires notice of a public hearing shall be given by publication, in a newspaper, at least 10 days prior to the public hearing. A combined Notice of public hearing (ZOA20-0005) and Determination of Non-Significance (DNS), (SEP20-0017), was issued October 19, 2020. 12. ACC 18.68.030, ‘(Amendments) Public hearing process’, requires that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing on proposed code amendments and make a recommendation. Then, the city council may affirm, modify, or disaffirm any recommendation of the planning commission with regard to amendments of the text of this title. Page 319 of 465 Staff Member: Dixon Date: October 22, 2020 Page 9 of 10 13. The Planning Commission is scheduled to conduct a public hearing during a regular meeting at 7:00 pm on November 4, 2020. PUBLIC COMMENTS 1. As noted above, the city received one written comment by the time of preparation of this agenda bill/staff report. The comment was received October 22, 2020 from Kim Allen, Senior Vice President, Land Use Entitlements & Strategic Planning, Wireless Policy Group, LLC on behalf of Verizon Wireless. These written comments are provided as Exhibit #7. 2. The City really appreciates the time spent by Verizon on review, preparation, and provision of written comments in time to distribute to the Planning Commission prior to the meeting. However, this did not afford City staff opportunity to prepare and include responses. The City staff will proceed to review and evaluate the comments and have follow-up conversations with the commenter, as warranted. 3. Based on an initial review, staff noted that while the commenter indicates they commented on Title 17, ‘Land Adjustments & Divisions’, the city did not find comments in this section. However, this could be due to word processing software that makes it difficult to distinguish the city’s original strike through and underline changes, and the subsequent changes by Verizon. The city staff will double check. 4. The following is an attempt to generally categorize/characterize the comments received based on an initial review: Nature of comment Reply Formatting and syntax changes. Staff appreciates calling these out, however they do not merit review by the planning commission. Commenting on pre-existing code requirements that are not the subject of changes. The city will evaluate the comments and determine if changes are warranted based on the code intent and the best interests of the city. Some comments require further clarification from Verizon to understand requested nature of change, for example, there appear to be questions about the prevalence of microcell facilities. The city will seek clarification with commenter. Some comments suggest changes are warranted based on consistency with federal law and FCC rulings. The City will review the federal requirements to ensure we are working with the latest, since the rulings continue to evolve, and to ensure consistency with those required. 5. Additional comments from wireless carriers/companies may be provided before or at the public hearing. City staff appreciates receiving these comments from wireless carrier Page 320 of 465 Staff Member: Dixon Date: October 22, 2020 Page 10 of 10 companies and their investment of time to share their perspective, as ultimately that will result in a better, more workable set of regulations for the city. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Commission to conduct public hearing and recommend to City Council approval of Proposed Code Amendments related to Wireless Telecommunications Regulations and more specifically, the changes to Title 17, ‘Land Adjustments & Divisions’ and Title 18, ‘Zoning’. EXHIBIT LIST Exhibit 1 Staff Report Exhibit 2 Strike though & underline changes to Titles 17, ‘Land adjustments & divisions (Subdivisions)’, & 18, ‘Zoning’. Exhibit 3 Completed SEPA Environmental Checklist application Exhibit 4 Combined Notice of Public Hearing and Determination of Non-Significance (SEP20-0017 & ZOA20-0005) Exhibit 5 Request to Publish (Affidavit is pending) Exhibit 6 WA Dept. of Commerce Receipt for review Exhibit 7 Written comments received from Kim Allen, Senior Vice President, Land Use Entitlements and Strategic Planning, Wireless Policy Group, LLC on behalf of Verizon Wireless. Page 321 of 465 1 of 46  Title 17 Land Adjustments and Divisions 17.14.080 Underground utilities. A. Consistent with ACC Titles 12 and 13 ACC and the city’s design and construction standardsEngineering Design and Construction Standards, all utility lines serving the subdivision, including but not limited to power, telephone and television cables, shall be installed underground. Adequate easements shall be provided for all such utility lines which will not be located within public right-of-way. Television conduit and miscellaneous hardware shall be installed according to the requirements of Chapter 13.3620.06 ACC. B. Whenever an intersection of an arterial and any other street is constructed or improved under the requirements of this title, and when the city engineer has determined that traffic signalization of such intersection will be needed in the future, the city engineer may require the installation, at the subdivider’s applicant’s expense, of underground conduit which will be necessary for and will facilitate such future signalization. (Ord. 6239 § 1, 2009; Ord. 5164 § 1, 1998; Ord. 4296 § 2, 1988. Formerly 17.12.240.) Page 322 of 465 2 of 46  Chapter 17.28 INFRASTRUCTURE CONDUIT [Repealed] Sections: 17.28.010 Infrastructure conduit in streets. 17.28.010 Infrastructure conduit in streets. In addition to the other requirements set forth in this title, any time street improvements or right-of-way improvements are to be provided in connection with development activity governed hereby, the city review process shall determine in consultation with public works, police, parks, arts, and recreation, planning and development departments, information services, and with the local fire authority, whether conduit at least three inches in diameter should be included therein, in which cases, if so required, the applicant shall construct said improvement in conformance with the public facility extension requirements of Chapter 13.40 ACC. (Ord. 6414 § 3, 2012.) Page 323 of 465 3 pf 46  Title 18 Zoning 18.02.040 Applicability. A. The provisions of this title shall apply to both public and private use of land within the corporate limits of the city. B. Hereafter, no use shall be conducted, and no building, structure and appurtenance shall be erected, relocated, remodeled, reconstructed, altered or enlarged unless in compliance with the provisions of this title, and then only after securing all permits and approvals required hereby. It shall be unlawful to build or use any building or structure or to use premises in the city for any purpose or use other than the uses listed as being permitted in the zone in which such building, land, or premises is located. C. Any building, structure or use lawfully existing at the time of passage of this title, although not in compliance herewith, may continue as provided in Chapter 18.54 ACC. D. No division of land shall occur unless in compliance with the provisions of this title and ACC Title 17 ACC, Land Adjustments and Divisions. E. This title is not intended to regulate work of any kind conducted in or on the public ways as defined in ACC 20.02.020.the erection, construction, or reconstruction of public streets, power poles, street lights, utility facilities, utility conveyance or storage systems, transmission lines, or other public uses necessary to support the general public welfare, carried on by the city, or agents of the city working under the appropriate contract or franchise. (Ord. 6245 § 2, 2009; Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4773 § 1, 1995; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987. Formerly 18.02.030.) Page 324 of 465 4 of 46  18.04.912 Wireless communications - Definitions. “Wireless communications” means the provision of any personal wireless service, as defined in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and for the purposes of this title includes the following terms: A. “Antenna” means any devise used to transmit and/or receive radio or electromagnetic waves such as, but not limited to panel antennas, reflecting discs, microwave dishes, whip antennas, directional and non-directional antennas consisting of one or more elements, multiple antenna configurations, or other similar devices and configurations, and exterior apparatus designed for telephone, radio, or television communications through the sending and/or receiving of wireless communications signals.a device used in wireless communications which transmits and/or receives radio signals. Antennas include the following types: 1. Accessory: Antennas including, but not limited to, test mobile antennas and Global Positioning System (GPS) antennas which are less than 12 inches in height or width and do not directly provide personal wireless communication. 2. Directional or panel: An antenna or array of antennas designed to transmit a radio signal in a particular direction typically encompassing an arc of 120 degrees. Panel antennas, also called directional antennas, are typically flat, rectangular devices approximately six square feet in size. 3. Dish or parabolic: A bowl-shaped device for the reception and/or transmission of radio frequency communications signals in a specific directional pattern. 4. Whip, rod or omni-directional antenna: An antenna, tubular in shape, that transmits and receives signals throughout a 360-degree range. 5. Other: All other transmitting or receiving equipment not specifically described herein shall be regulated in conformity with the type of antenna defined herein which most closely resembles such equipment. B. “Antenna array” means one or more rods, panels, discs or similar devices attached to a support structure used for the transmission or reception of radio frequency signals. Page 325 of 465 5 of 46  CB. “Attached wireless communications facility (WCF)” means a wireless communication facility that is affixed to an existing structure other than a Tower. Examples of attached wireless communication facilities include antennas affixed to or erected upon existing buildings, water tanks, or other existing structures. an antenna array which is attached to an existing building or structure. C. “Base station” means the structure or equipment at a fixed location that enables wireless communications, licensed or authorized by the FCC, between user equipment and a communications network. By way of example, a building, ballfield structure or a utility pole outside of the public way, becomes a base station once wireless facilities are permitted and attached. The term does not encompass a wireless communication tower as defined in this title or any equipment associated with a wireless communication tower. D. “Camouflage”, “concealment”, or “camouflage design techniques” means that a wireless communication facility is camouflaged or utilizes camouflage design techniques when any measures are used in the design and siting of wireless communication facilities with the intent to minimize or eliminate the visual impact of such facilities to surrounding uses. A wireless communication facility site utilizes camouflage design techniques when it (1) is integrated in an outdoor fixture such as a flagpole, or (2) uses a design which mimics and is consistent with the nearby natural or architectural features (such as an artificial tree), or (3) is incorporated into (including, without limitation, being attached to the exterior of such facilities and painted to match it) (such as a belvedere or a dormer), or replaces existing permitted facilities (including without limitation, freestanding light standards) so that the presence of the wireless communication facility is minimized or not readily apparent. The terms do not include fencing and landscape screening that is used to enhance visual compatibility at ground level ED. “Carrier” means a company providing wireless communication services, also referred to as a wireless service provider. EF. “Co-location” means: (1) mounting or installing a WCF on a pre-existing structure, and/or (2) modifying a structure for the purpose of mounting or installing a WCF on that structure. Provided that, for purposes of Eligible Facilities Requests, “Co-location” means the mounting or installation of transmission equipment on an Page 326 of 465 6 of 46  Eligible Support Structure for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for communications purposes. the use of a common WCF or site by two or more wireless license holders, or by one wireless license holder for more than one type of communications technology. G. “Eligible facilities request” (EFR) means any request for modification of an existing wireless communication tower or base station that was previously authorized by the local permitting jurisdiction and that does not substantially change, as defined in this Section, the physical dimensions of such wireless communication tower or base station from the original authorization involving: (1) co-location of new transmission equipment, (2) removal of transmission equipment, or (3) replacement of transmission equipment. H. “Eligible Support Structure” means an existing wireless communication tower or base station as defined in this title and that has proposed alterations that meet the standards of an eligible facilities request FI. “Equipment facility” means a structure used to contain ancillary equipment for a WCF which may include cabinets, shelters, an addition to an existing structure, pedestals and other similar structures. J. “Emergency wireless communication facility (EWCF)” means any structure not entirely within an enclosed building or vehicle, including antennas, guy wires, microwave dishes or horns, structures or towers to support receiving and/or transmitting devices, accessory buildings, i.e., equipment storage buildings, energy power generating housing, and the leased or owned property surrounding the wireless communication tower and any access or utility easements, that is used for the transmission or reception of electromagnetic waves for emergency communication purposes, operated by a local public agency responsible for providing emergency services K. “Existing” means a constructed tower or base station if it has been reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or siting process, or under another State or local regulatory review process, provided that a tower that has not been reviewed and approved because it was not in a zoned area when it was built, but was lawfully constructed, is existing for purposes of this definition. Page 327 of 465 GL. “Microcells” are typically located in and exclusively benefit residential neighborhoods. Microcells consist of an antenna that is either: (1) a dish or parabolic antenna that is no more than four feet in height and with an area of not more than 580 square inches; or (2) a tubular antenna that is no more than four inches in diameter and no more than six feet in height; or (3) one or more panel antennas that are no more than six feet in height, and their width or depth is no more than six inches and the aggregate area of such panel antenna(s) would not exceed 580 square inches that would be visible from any one viewpoint; or (4) similar antennas that are of comparable size and shape. M. “Monopole” means a single, freestanding pole-type structure supporting one or more antennas. HN. “Separation” means minimum distance required by city regulation between the base of Towersprimary support structures. O. “Site” for purposes of this chapter means for wireless communication towers other than wireless communication towers in the public way, the current boundaries of the leased or owned property surrounding the wireless communication tower and any access or utility easements currently related to the site, and, for eligible support structures, is further restricted to that area in proximity to the structure and to other transmission equipment already existing on the ground. P. “Small wireless facilities” shall mean the definition contained in Chapter 20.14 ACC. Q. “Substantial change” for purposes of this chapter means a modification that alters the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure if, after the modification, the structure meets any of the following criteria: 1. For towers other than towers in the public way, it increases the height of the tower by more than ten percent or by the height of one additional antenna array with separation from the nearest existing antenna not to exceed twenty feet, whichever is greater; 2. For towers other than towers in the public way, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the 7 of 45  Page 328 of 465 8 of 46      tower more than twenty feet, or more than the width of the tower structure at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is greater; 3. For any eligible support structure, it involves installation of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, but not to exceed four cabinets; or, for base stations, it involves installation of any new equipment cabinets on the ground if there are no preexisting ground cabinets associated with the structure, or else involves installation of ground cabinets that are more than ten percent larger in height or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the structure; 4. It entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site as that term is defined in this section; 5. It would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support structure; or 6. It does not comply with conditions associated with the original approval of the construction or modification of the eligible support structure or base station equipment, unless noncompliance is only in a manner that would exceed the thresholds identified in subsections (1) through (4) of this definition. For purposes of determining whether a substantial change exists, changes in height are measured from the original support structure as it existed at the time the first Eligible Facilities Request was approved for that structure in cases where facilities are or will be separated horizontally, in other circumstances, changes in height are measured from the dimensions of the wireless communication tower or base station, inclusive of originally approved appurtenances and any modifications that were approved prior to February 22, 2012. IR. “Support structure” means a structure designed to support WCFs including, but not limited to, towers, alternative tower structures, replacement poles, and other freestanding self-supporting pole structures.the structure to which the antenna and other necessary associated hardware are attached. Support structures include but are not limited to the following: Page 329 of 465 9 of 46  1. Lattice tower: A structure of varying height that consists of a network of crossed metal braces forming a tower which is usually triangular or square in cross section. To be considered a primary support structure. 2. Monopole: A structure of varying height consisting of a single spire sunk into the ground and/or attached to a foundation. To be considered a primary support structure. 3. Other structures: This may include existing buildings, water towers, athletic field light poles, or other similar structures. To be considered a secondary support structure. S. “Toll” and “Tolling” means to delay, suspend or hold off on the imposition of a deadline, statute of limitations or time limit. T. “Tower” means any structure that is designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one or more antennas for telephone, radio, and similar communication purposes, including self-supporting lattice towers, guyed towers, or monopole towers. The term includes radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers, common-carrier towers, cellular telephone towers, alternative tower structures, and the like. The term includes the structure and any support thereto. U. “Wireless communications” means the provision of any personal wireless service, as defined in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended, or wireless information services provided to the public or to such classes of users as to be effectively available directly to the public via licensed or unlicensed frequencies; or wireless utility monitoring and control services. JV. “Wireless communications facility (WCF)” means a facility used to provide personal wireless services as defined at 47 U.S.C. Section 332 (c)(7)(C); or wireless information services provided to the public or to such classes of users as to be effectively available directly to the public via licensed or unlicensed frequencies; or wireless utility monitoring and control services. A WCF does not include a facility entirely enclosed within a permitted building where the installation does not require a modification of the exterior of the building; nor does it include an accessory wireless communications antenna, used for serving that building only and that is otherwise Page 330 of 465 10 of 46  permitted under other provisions of the ACC. A WCF includes an antenna or antennas, including without limitation, direction, omni-directional and parabolic antennas, support equipment, alternative tower structures, and wireless communication towers. It does not include the support structure to which the WCF or its components are attached if the use of such structures for WCFs is not the primary use. The term does not include mobile transmitting devices used by wireless service subscribers, such as vehicle or hand-held radios or telephones and their associated transmitting antennas, nor does it include other facilities specifically exempted from the coverage of this titleany nonstaffed facility for the transmission and/or reception of wireless telecommunications services, typically consisting of an antenna array, an equipment facility and/or a support structure. K. “Emergency wireless communication facility (EWCF)” means a wireless communications facility for the purpose of an emergency communication system operated by a local public agency responsible for providing emergency services. (Ord. 6716 § 1 (Exh. A), 2019; Ord. 6245 § 3, 2009; Ord. 5777 § 1, 2003; Ord. 5645 § 1, 2002; Ord. 5020 § 1, 1997.) Page 331 of 465 11 of 46  18.07 Residential Zones 18.07.020 Uses. Table 18.07.020. Permitted Use Table – Residential ZonesZoning Designations P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 A. Residential Uses. Accessory dwelling units P P P P X1 X1 X1 Accessory use, residential P P P P P P P Adult family home P P P P P P P Bed and breakfast P P P P P P P Communal residence four or less individuals P P P P P P P Duplexes; provided, that minimum lot size of zoning designation is met and subject to compliance with Chapter 18.25 ACC (Infill Residential Development Standards) X X A P P P X Foster care homes P P P P P P P Group residence facilities (7 or more residents) X X X X C C C Group residence facilities (6 or fewer residents) P P P P P P P Keeping of animals4 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 Multiple-family dwellings X X X X A P P Neighborhood recreational buildings and facilities owned and managed by A6 A6 A6 A6 A6 P P Page 332 of 465 12 of 46  P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 the neighborhood homeowners’ association Use as dwelling units of (1) recreational vehicles that are not part of an approved recreational vehicle park, (2) boats, (3) automobiles, and (4) other vehicles X X X X X X X Renting of rooms, for lodging purposes only, to accommodate not more than two persons in addition to the family or owner occupied unit8 P P P P P P P Residential care facilities including but not limited to assisted living facilities, convalescent homes, continuing care retirement facilities P P X X A P P Single-family detached dwellings, new P P P P P P X Supportive housing, subject to the provisions of ACC 18.31.160 X X X X X P P Swimming pools, tennis courts and similar outdoor recreation uses only accessory to residential or park uses P P P P P P P Townhouses (attached) X X X X P P P B. Commercial Uses. Commercial horse riding and bridle trails A X X X X X X Commercial retail, included as part of mixed-use development and not a X X X X A A A Page 333 of 465 13 of 46  P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 home occupation in compliance with Chapter 18.60 ACC Daycare, limited to a mini daycare center. Daycare center, preschool or nursery school may also be permitted but must be located on an arterial X A A A A A A Home-based daycare as regulated by RCW 35.63.185 and through receipt of approved city business license P P P P P P P Home occupations subject to compliance with Chapter 18.60 ACC P P P P P P P Marijuana cooperative X X X X X X X Marijuana processor X X X X X X X Marijuana producer X X X X X X X Marijuana related business X X X X X X X Marijuana researcher X X X X X X X Marijuana retailer X X X X X X X Marijuana transporter business X X X X X X X Mixed-use development3 X X X X P P P Nursing homes X X X X C C C Private country clubs and golf courses, excluding driving ranges X X C C C X X Privately owned and operated parks and playgrounds and not homeowners’ association-owned recreational area X A A A A P P Page 334 of 465 14 of 46  P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 Professional offices, included as part of mixed-use development and not a home occupation in compliance with Chapter 18.60 ACC X X X X A A A C. Resource Uses. Agricultural enterprise:7 When 50 percent, or more, of the total site area is dedicated to active agricultural production during the growing season, and with 52 or less special events per calendar year A7 X X X X X X When less than 50 percent of the total site area is dedicated to active agricultural production during the growing season, or with more than 52 special events per calendar year C7 X X X X X X Agricultural type uses are permitted provided they are incidental and secondary to the single-family use: Agricultural crops and open field growing (commercial) P X X X X X X Barns, silos and related structures P X X X X X X Commercial greenhouses P X X X X X X Pasturing and grazing4 P X X X X X X Public and private stables4 P X X X X X X Page 335 of 465 15 of 46  P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 Roadside stands, for the sale of agricultural products raised on the premises. The stand cannot exceed 300 square feet in area and must meet the applicable setback requirements P X X X X X X Fish hatcheries C X X X X X X D. Government, Institutional, and Utility Uses. Civic, social and fraternal clubs X X X X A A A Government facilities A A A A A A A Hospitals (except animal hospitals) X X X X X C C Municipal parks and playgrounds A P P P P P P Museums X X X X A A A Religious institutions, less than one acre lot size A A A A A A A Religious institutions, one acre or larger lot size C C C C C C C Transmitting towers C C C C C C C Type 1-D wireless communication facility (see ACC 18.04.912(VJ) and ACC 18.31.100) P P P P P P P Eligible facilities request (EFR) (Wireless communication facility – See ACC 18.04.912(G)) P P P P P P P Utility facilities and substations C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 Page 336 of 465 16 of 46  P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 Small wireless facilities (ACC 18.04.912(P)) P P P P P P P 1 An accessory dwelling unit may be permitted with an existing single-family residence pursuant to ACC 18.31.120. 2 Please see the supplemental development standards for animals in ACC 18.31.220. 3 Individual uses that make up a mixed-use development must be permitted within the zone. If a use making up part of a mixed-use development requires an administrative or conditional use permit, the individual use must apply for and receive the administrative or conditional use approval, as applicable. 4 Proximity of pasture or livestock roaming area to wells, surface waters, and aquifer recharge zones is regulated by the King or Pierce County board of health, and property owners shall comply with the provisions of the board of health code. 5 Excludes all public and private utility facilities addressed under ACC 18.02.040(E). 6 Administrative use permit not required when approved as part of a subdivision or binding site plan. 7 Agricultural enterprise uses are subject to supplemental development standards under ACC 18.31.210, Agricultural enterprises development standards. 8 An owner occupant that rents to more than two persons but no more than four persons is required to obtain a city of Auburn rental housing business license and shall meet the standards of the International Property Maintenance Code. (Ord. 6642 § 4, 2017; Ord. 6600 § 9, 2016; Ord. 6565 § 2, 2015; Ord. 6560 § 9, 2015; Ord. 6477 § 8, 2013; Ord. 6369 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6363 § 3, 2011; Ord. 6269 § 3, 2009; Ord. 6245 § 5, 2009.) Page 337 of 465 17 of 46  18.23 Commercial and Industrial Zones 18.23.030 Uses. A. General Permit Requirements. Table 18.23.030 identifies the uses of land allowed in each commercial and industrial zone and the land use approval process required to establish each use. B. Requirements for Certain Specific Land Uses. Where the last column in Table 18.23.030 (“Standards for Specific Land Uses”) includes a reference to a code section number, the referenced section determines other requirements and standards applicable to the use regardless of whether it is permitted outright or requires an administrative or conditional use permit. Table 18.23.030. Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone, Commercial and Industrial Zones. PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 INDUSTRIAL, MANUFACTURING AND PROCESSING, WHOLESALING Building contractor, light X X X P X P X P Building contractor, heavy X X X X X A X P Manufacturing, assembling and packaging – Light intensity X X X P X P P P ACC 18.31.180 Page 338 of 465 18 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Manufacturing, assembling and packaging – Medium intensity X X X A X P A P ACC 18.31.180 Manufacturing, assembling and packaging – Heavy intensity X X X X X X X A ACC 18.31.180 Marijuana processor X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana producer X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana researcher X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana retailer X X X C X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana transporter business X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Outdoor storage, incidental to principal permitted use on property X X X P X P P P ACC 18.57.020(A) Storage – Personal household storage facility (mini-storage) X P X P X P X P ACC 18.57.020(B) Page 339 of 465 19 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Warehousing and distribution X X X X X P P C ACC 18.57.020(C) Warehousing and distribution, bonded and located within a designated foreign trade zone X X X P X P P P Wholesaling with on- site retail as an incidental use (coffee, bakery, e.g.) X X X P X P P P RECREATION, EDUCATION AND PUBLIC ASSEMBLY USES Commercial recreation facility, indoor X P P P P P P A Commercial recreation facility, outdoor X X X A A P A A ACC 18.57.025(A) Conference/convention facility X X A A X A X X Library, museum X A A A X A P X Meeting facility, public or private A P P P X A P A Page 340 of 465 20 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Movie theater, except drive-in X P P P P X X X Private school – Specialized education/training (for profit) A A P P P P P P Religious institutions, lot size less than one acre A P P P A A A A Religious institutions, lot size more than one acre C P P P A A A A Sexually oriented businesses X X X P X P X P Chapter 18.74 ACC Sports and entertainment assembly facility X X A A X A X A Studio – Art, dance, martial arts, music, etc. P P P P P P A A RESIDENTIAL Caretaker apartment X P P P X P P P Live/work unit X X P P P P P X Page 341 of 465 21 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Work/live unit X P P P P P P X Marijuana cooperative X X X X X X X X Multiple-family dwellings as part of a mixed-use development2 X X P P P P P X ACC 18.57.030 Multiple-family dwellings, stand-alone X X X X X X X X Nursing home, assisted living facility X P P P C X X X Senior housing2 X X A A X X X X RETAIL Building and landscape materials sales X X X P X P X P ACC 18.57.035(A) Construction and heavy equipment sales and rental X X X X X A X P Convenience store A A P P X P P P Drive-through espresso stands A A A P A P A A Page 342 of 465 22 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Drive-through facility, including banks and restaurants A A A P P P X P ACC 18.52.040 Entertainment, commercial X A P P X A X A Groceries, specialty food stores P P P P P P P X ACC 18.57.035(B) Nursery X X X P A P X P ACC 18.57.035(C) Outdoor displays and sales associated with a permitted use (auto/vehicle sales not included in this category) P P P P P P P P ACC 18.57.035(D) Restaurant, cafe, coffee shop P P P P P P P P Retail Community retail establishment A P P P P P X P Neighborhood retail establishment P P P P P P X P Page 343 of 465 23 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Regional retail establishment X X X P P P X A Tasting room P P P P P P P P Tavern P P X P P P X A Wine production facility, small craft distillery, small craft brewery A P P P P P P P SERVICES Animal daycare (excluding kennels and animal boarding) A A A P A P X P ACC 18.57.040(A) Animal sales and services (excluding kennels and veterinary clinics) P P P P P P X P ACC 18.57.040(B) Banking and related financial institutions, excluding drive- through facilities P P P P P P P P Catering service P P P P A P A P Page 344 of 465 24 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Daycare, including mini daycare, daycare center, preschools or nursery schools A P P P P P P X Dry cleaning and laundry service (personal) P P P P P P P P Equipment rental and leasing X X X P X P X P Kennel, animal boarding X X X A X A X A ACC 18.57.040(C) Government facilities; this excludes offices and related uses that are permitted outright A A A A A A A A Hospital X P P P X P X P Lodging – Hotel or motel X P P P P A P A Medical – Dental clinic P P P P P P X X Mortuary, funeral home, crematorium A P X P X P X X Page 345 of 465 25 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Personal service shops P P P P P P X X Pharmacies P P P P P X X X Print and copy shop P P P P P P X X Printing and publishing (of books, newspaper and other printed matter) X A P P P P P P Professional offices P P P P P P P P Repair service – Equipment, appliances X A P P P P X P ACC 18.57.040(D) Veterinary clinic, animal hospital A P P P P P X X Youth community support facility X P X X X X X X ACC 18.57.040(E) TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS AND INFRASTRUCTURE Ambulance, taxi, and specialized transportation facility X X X A X P X P Broadcasting studio X P X P X P X P Heliport X X X C X C X C Page 346 of 465 26 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Motor freight terminal1 X X X X X X X X See Footnote No. 1 Parking facility, public or commercial, surface X P P P P P P X Parking facility, public or commercial, structured X P P P P P P X Towing storage yard X X X X X A X P ACC 18.57.045(A) Utility transmission or distribution line or substation A A A A A A A A Wireless communication facility (WCF) (See ACC 18.04.912(V) –* –* –* –* –* –* –* –* ACC 18.04.912, *See ACC 18.31.100 for use regulations and zoning development standards. Eligible facilities request (EFR) (Wireless communication facility (See ACC 18.04.912(G)) P P P P P P P P Page 347 of 465 27 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Small wireless facilities (ACC 18.04.912(P)) P P P P P P P P VEHICLE SALES AND SERVICES Automobile washes (automatic, full or self- service) X A X P P P X P ACC 18.57.050(A) Auto parts sales with installation services X A A P P P X P Auto/vehicle sales and rental X A X P X P X P ACC 18.57.050(B) Fueling station X A A P P P X P ACC 18.57.050(C) Mobile home, boat, or RV sales X X X P X P X P Vehicle services – Repair/body work X X A P X P X P ACC 18.57.050(D) OTHER Any commercial use abutting a residential zone which has hours of operation outside of the following: Sunday: 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. A A A A A A A A Page 348 of 465 28 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 or Monday – Saturday: 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Other uses may be permitted by the planning director or designee if the use is determined to be consistent with the intent of the zone and is of the same general character of the uses permitted. See ACC 18.02.120(C)(6), Unclassified Uses. P P P P P P P P 1 Any motor freight terminal, as defined by ACC 18.04.635, in existence as of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section, is an outright permitted use in the M-1 and M-2 zones. Any maintenance, alterations and additions to an existing motor freight terminal which are consistent with ACC 18.23.040, Development standards, are allowed. 2 Any mixed-use development or senior housing project vested prior to Resolution No. 5187 (December 7, 2015) is an outright permitted use in the C-1 zone. Subsequently, if a nonresidential use within a vested mixed-use development changes, then the nonresidential use shall maintain a minimum of 10 percent of the cumulative building ground floor square footage consisting of the uses permitted Page 349 of 465 29 of 46  outright, administratively, or conditionally, listed under “Recreation, Education, and Public Assembly,” “Retail,” or “Services” of the C-1 zone. (Ord. 6728 § 3 (Exh. C), 2019; Ord. 6688 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2018; Ord. 6644 § 2, 2017; Ord. 6642 § 9, 2017; Ord. 6508 § 1, 2014; Ord. 6433 § 26, 2012.) Page 350 of 465 30 of 46  18.31 Supplemental Development Standards 18.31.100 Wireless communications facilities siting standards. The following siting standards are intended to guide the location and development of wireless communications facilities (WCF as defined by ACC 18.04.912(V) but not including microcells) on properties regulated under this title. The siting of microcells shall be in accordance with siting of microcells found in ACC 18.31.110. A. Types of Wireless Communication Facilities (WCFs). For the purposes of determining in which zones wireless communications facilities are to be permitted, and which land use approval process applies, they will be classified pursuant to the following types. Refer to the table in subsection L of this section to determine which zones allow for the following types of facilities: 1. Type 1. Type 1 are new antennas erected on existing buildings or nonresidential structures.is a new wireless communication facility (WCF) that is affixed to an existing structure other than a “wireless communication support structure” (also known as, an “Attached wireless communication facility”). Examples of attached wireless communications facilities include antennas affixed to or erected upon existing buildings, water tanks, or other existing structures. There are four separate Type 1 categories described as follows: a. 1-A. The combined height of the antenna WCF together with the height of the existing building structure cannot be 25 percent greater than the existing building structure or exceed the height limitation of the zone in which the building structure is located. b. 1-B. The combined height of the antenna WCF together with the height of the existing building structure cannot be 50 percent greater than the existing building structure or exceed the height limitation of the zone in which the building structure is located. c. 1-C. The combined height of the antenna WCF together with the height of the existing building structure is 50 percent greater than the existing building structure or exceeds the height limitation of the zone in which the building structure is located. The height limitation of the zone can only be exceeded by 25 percent. Page 351 of 465 31 of 46  d. 1-D. Antenna The WCF is located on existing non-habitable structure such as water towers, athletic field light poles, or similar public utility infrastructure not located within a public street right-of-way. The height limitation of the WCF will be 10 percent of the existing structure height, but may be increased to a maximum of 20 percent with an administrative use permit and may be increased to a maximum of 30 percent with a conditional use permit. The height limitation of the zone may be exceeded relative to the above provisions allowed for a 1-D facility. Any increases in height above the limits of the zoning district, as permitted for Type1 facilities must include concealment techniques approved by the city. 2. Type 2. Type 2 are new antennas equipment erected on existing (primary) support structurestowers that have previous city approvals. There are two separate Type 2 categories described as follows: a. 2-A. Any request for modification of an existing wireless communication tower or base station that was previously authorized by the local permitting jurisdiction and that would exceed a “Substantial change”, and the combined height of the WCF and structure cannot be 20 percent greater than the existing structure and Must meet height requirements of previous approval and is limited to 50 percent total (cumulative) expansion of equipment area. b. 2-B. Any request for modification of an existing wireless communication tower or base station that was previously authorized by the local permitting jurisdiction and that that would exceed a “Substantial change”, and the combined height of the WCF and structure cannot be 50 percent greater than the existing structure and allow for more than 50 percent (cumulative) expansion of equipment area.Has greater height requirements than previous approval and allows for more than a 50 percent expansion of the equipment area. Any increases in height above the limits of a particular zone, as permitted for Type 2 facilities must include concealment techniques approved by the city. 3. Type 3. Type 3 is the erection of a new (primary) support structures “Tower”. There are three separate Type 3 categories described as follows: Page 352 of 465 32 of 46  a. 3-A. Monopoles “Towers” that are 75 feet or less in height. b. 3-B. Monopoles “Towers” that are more than 75 feet in height or lattice towers of any height. c. 3-C. Monopoles or lattice towers “Towers” that meet the definition of an EWCF Emergency wireless communication facility (EWCF) and are 185 feet or less in structure height. 4. Type 4. Type 4 are new antennas erected on existing EWCF (primary) support structures that have previous city approvals. There is one Type 4 category, which is described as follows: a. 4-A. Mounting of antennas cannot exceed the following thresholds:1 i. Increase the height of an existing primary support structure by 10 percent, or 20 feet (whichever is less). ii. Add an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the outside edge of the tower more than 20 feet. iii. Install more than four ancillary equipment facilities. 1 This section is intended to be interpreted consistent with 47 CFR 1.40001, as amended. B. Separation between Facilities. 1. New, Freestanding Primary Support StructuresTowers. a. The minimum separation, i.e., distance, between a proposed monopole tower (that is 75 feet or less in height) and any other existing primary support structuretower, of any height, shall be the height of the proposed monopoletower, including antenna, multiplied by a factor of 10. b. The minimum separation, i.e., distance, between a proposed monopole tower (that is more than 75 feet in height, or lattice towers of any height) and any other existing primary support structuretower, of any height, shall be the Page 353 of 465 33 of 46  height of the proposed monopoletower, including antenna, multiplied by a factor of 20. c. The Community Development director may exempt an applicant from these separation requirements if (1) the applicant demonstrates through technical network documentation that the minimum separation requirement cannot be satisfied for technical reasons, and failure to approve the exemption would be an effective prohibition of the applicant being able to provide wireless communications, or (2) the director determines, when considering the surrounding topography; the nature of adjacent uses and nearby properties; and, the height of existing structures in the vicinity, that placement of a WCF at a distance less than the minimum separation from another facility will reduce visibility and reduce visual clutter to a greater extent. 2. The distance between primary support structurestowers shall be measured by following a straight line, without regard to intervening buildings, from the base of one support structuretower to the base of the other support structuretower(s). 3. A primary support structuretower would be considered “existing” if it was reviewed, approved, and lawfully constructed in accordance with all requirements of applicable law as of the time it was built. For example, a tower that exists as a legal, non-conforming use and was lawfully constructed is existing. It shall be the applicant’s responsibility to provide evidence of lawful construction. Subsequent city permitted modifications of a tower that qualify as an Eligible Facilities Request and do not amount to a “Substantial Change”, do not make an existing tower non-conforming.a conditional use permit or administrative use permit has been issued and is still valid for sites which have not been built upon. C. Co-Location Requirements. 1. For monopoles towers that are more than 75 feet in height and lattice towers of any height (Type 3-B facilities), the owner of the property tower shall execute and provide evidence of a nonexclusive lease with the carrier underlying property owner, if the property owner is different, that allows for other carriers to place Page 354 of 465 antennas and equipment on the structure unless specific approval not to is provided in accordance with No. 3 below. 2. Any application for a Type 3-B or 3-C facility Towers that are more than 75 feet in height or lattice towers of any height or tower shall include technical justification that an existing Type 3-B or 3-C facilityWCF with a nonexclusive lease could not be used instead of constructing a new tower. 3. WCFs shall be designed and constructed to allow the facility to accommodate WCFs from at least two (2) carriers on the same WCF. No property owner or carrier shall unreasonably exclude another carrier from using the same facility or location. Design and construction for co-location shall not be required when it would materially compromise the camouflage design intent of the WCF, or when, in the reasonable discretion of the Community Development director, such construction is not technically feasible based upon construction, engineering and design standards of the industry, or based upon evidence provided, a site designed for co-location will not be commercially viable. An applicant, owner, or operator seeking Community Development director approval to waive the co- location requirements described herein shall provide evidence explaining why co- location is not possible at a particular facility or site. D. Height. 1. Unless otherwise provided for, the height of any primary support structure and/or antennatower with appurtenances shall not exceed the height limitations of the zone. 2. The maximum height of any primary support structuretower shall not exceed 120 feet except as an eligible facility request. 3. There shall be no variances allowed to the height limitations. 4. The carrier applicant shall provide evidence that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has approved the location of a primary support structureand any future increases in height or other modifications that would otherwise be permissible as an eligible facilities request (EFR) for any tower relative to the Auburn Municipal Airport. 34 of 46  Page 355 of 465 35 of 46      5. Unless otherwise restricted by this section, building- or structure-mounted antennas may extend a maximum of 15 feet above the maximum height permitted for structures within the zone except as an eligible facility request. 6. Antennas that are mounted on structures that do not otherwise have a height restriction may be allowed to increase the overall height of the structure by no more than 10 percent of the height of the structure unless additional approvals are obtained except as an eligible facility request. E. Setbacks. 1. All equipment shelters, cabinets, support structures or other above-ground facilities shall meet the setback requirements of the zone in which located except as follows. All equipment shelters, cabinets, or other above-ground facilities used to support primary support structurestowers shall be set back the same distance required of the primary support structuretower. All equipment shelters, cabinets, or other above-ground facilities within a nonresidential zone shall be set back a minimum of 50 feet from any adjacent R residential zone. 2. The minimum distance from any primary support structuretower, of any height, to any residentially zoned parcel of property, including mixed use zones that include residential uses shall be a distance equal to the overall height of the primary support structuretower (including antennas) multiplied by a factor of two. 3. Where possibletechnically feasible, roof-mounted antennas and equipment shelters and/or cabinets are to be placed towards the center of the building, or away from public views. Equipment shelters and/or cabinets shall be screened by a parapet or similar architectural feature. F. Fencing and Landscaping. 1. Fencing. Fencing is required to enclose all above-ground support equipment that is associated with primary support structurestowers. Fencing will be 100 percent sight-obscuring, as defined in ACC 18.31.020(C)(2), if visible from a public right-of-way or from a less intense zone. Equipment shelters and/or cabinets shall be enclosed by fencing a minimum of six feet in height. Fencing Page 356 of 465 36 of 46  shall meet the sight distance requirements of the city design and construction standardsEngineering Design and Construction Standards. 2. Landscaping. a. Where above-ground support equipment is visible from a public right-of- way, a minimum width of five feet of Type II landscaping as defined in ACC 18.50.040 will be provided on the exterior of the enclosing fence in order to effectively screen the equipment from the public right-of-way. The landscaping shall consist of evergreen and deciduous trees with no more than 50 percent being deciduous, and shrubs and groundcover shall be provided. Landscaping shall meet the sight distance requirements of the city design and construction standardsEngineering Design and Construction Standards. b. Where facilities are visible from adjacent residential or mixed use zoning districtsuses, a minimum width of five feet of Type I landscaping as defined in ACC 18.50.040 will be provided on the exterior of the enclosing fence in order to effectively screen the equipment from the adjacent residential uses. The landscaping shall consist of evergreen trees or tall shrubs, a minimum of six feet in height at planting which will provide a 100 percent sight-obscuring screen within three years from the time of planting; or a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees with no more than 30% being deciduous, backed with a 100 percent sight-obscuring fence, as defined in ACC 18.31.020(C)(2), with shrubs and groundcover provided. c. Existing mature tree growth and natural landforms on the site shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. Existing on-site vegetation may be used to meet the landscape requirements if approved by the planning Community Development director. G. Aesthetics. 1. Camouflage and Concealment, Design Techniques. All WCFs and any transmission equipment shall, to the extent technically feasible, use camouflage and concealment design techniques including, but not limited to the use of materials, colors, textures, screening, undergrounding, or other design options Page 357 of 465 37 of 46  that will blend the components of the WCF and the WCF to the surrounding natural setting and/or built environment. Design, materials, and colors of WCFs shall be compatible with the surrounding environment. Designs shall be compatible with structures and vegetation located on the site and parcel and on adjacent parcels. a. At a minimum, all tower-mounted WCF equipment shall be colored to match the tower color. b. Camouflage and concealment design may be of heightened importance where findings of particular sensitivity are made (e.g., proximity to historic or aesthetically significant structures and/or natural or community features). Should the Community Development director determine that WCFs are located in areas of high visibility, they shall (where possible) be designed (including but not limited to camouflaged, placed underground, depressed, or located behind earth berms) to minimize aesthetic impacts at the request of the Community Development director. c. The camouflage and concealment design may include the use of alternative tower structures should the Community Development director determine that such design meets the intent of this section and the community is better served. d. All WCFs, shall be constructed out of or finished with non-reflective materials (visible exterior surfaces only). 21. In order to minimize any potential negative aesthetic impacts from new primary support structurestowers including protecting views to and from residential neighborhoods, mitigation may be required to blend the facilities in with the adjacent development or environsnatural setting and/or built environment. Typical solutions for the support structurecamouflage and concealment design might include: an extension of the building, a component of a sign structure, disguising the facility as a tree, planting of tall trees, moving the location of the facility, painting or texturing the facility, etc. WCFs shall be additionally sited in a manner that is sensitive to the proximity of the facility to residential structures. When placed near a residential or mixed use Page 358 of 465 38 of 46  zoned property, the WCF shall be placed adjacent to the common side yard property line between adjoining residential properties, such that the WCF minimizes visual impacts equitably among adjacent properties. In the case of a corner lot, the WCF may be placed adjacent to the common side yard property line between adjoining residential or mixed use zoned properties, or on the corner formed by two intersecting streets. If these requirements are not reasonably feasible from a construction, engineering, or design perspective, the applicant may submit a written statement to the Community Development director requesting the WCF be exempt from these requirements using the procedure for an administrative waiver elsewhere is this chapter. 32. Building- or roof-mounted antennas will be painted or textured to blend with the adjacent surfaces. 43. No lettering, symbols, images or trademarks large enough to be legible to occupants of vehicular traffic on any adjacent street shall be placed on or affixed to any part of the WCF, unless required by the FCC or FAA. 54. Except as specifically required by the FAA (but must be approved by the city), freestanding primary support structurestowers shall be painted a color that best allows them to blend into the surroundings. The use of grays, blues and greens might be appropriate; however, each application shall be evaluated individually. 6. Camouflage and concealment Design Standards for Accessory Equipment and Transmission Equipment. Accessory equipment and transmission equipment for all WCFs shall meet the following requirements: a. All transmission equipment and accessory equipment shall be grouped as closely together as technically possible. b. Transmission equipment and accessory equipment shall be located out of sight whenever possible by locating within equipment enclosures. Where such alternate locations are not available, the transmission equipment and accessory equipment shall be camouflaged or concealed. Page 359 of 465 c. Transmission equipment and accessory equipment shall be of a neutral, non-reflective color that is identical to, or closely compatible with, the color of the supporting structure or uses other camouflage/concealment design techniques so as to make the equipment as visually unobtrusive as possible, including, for example, painting the equipment to match the structure. 7. Administrative Waiver. a. An administrative waiver of any of the above camouflage and concealment design standards may be requested of the Community Development director by filing a written application form provided by the city and payment of an application fee. The application will be evaluated for, and must demonstrate conformance with the following waiver criteria, for approval: i. The camouflage and concealment design standard prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless communication service through the proposed WCF at the location because the standard will not allow the technology to function at that location; and ii. There is no existing nearby alternate structure for collocation or attachment that will provide the technological functionality and which otherwise meets the design standard requested to be waived; and iii. The proposal for varying from the design standard represents a reasonable and best approximation of achieving the same objective as the specific standard sought to be waived; and iv. The proposed alternative does not and will not conflict with public health, safety, or welfare. b. If any camouflage and concealment design standard is approved for waiver, the WCF proposed shall nevertheless meet all other applicable design standards not approved for waiver. c. If a waiver request is denied for failure to meet any of the criteria specified above and there is no alternative for installation of the WCF at the particular 39 of 46  Page 360 of 465 40 of 46      location in a manner that meets the applicable design standards, then such application for the WCF for such specific location shall be denied. H. Lighting. 1. Freestanding support structures shall not be artificially lighted, unless required by the FAA or other applicable authority, or the WCF is mounted on a light pole or other similar structure primarily used for lighting purposes on property located outside of the public way. If lighting is required, the City may review lighting alternatives and approve the design that would cause the least illumination disturbance to the surrounding views. Any proposed lighting shall, at a minimum, comply with the standards of Chapter 18.55 ACC, (Outdoor Lighting) and shall be submitted at the time of the initial application. Any lighting must be reviewed and approved by the city. 2. Security lighting used to light the equipment facility shall be directed downward, shielded and kept within the boundaries of the site. I. Abandoned Facilities. 1. Any WCF which is not utilized for a period of nine months or more will be considered abandoned. 2. Any WCF which falls into a state of disrepair as determined by the Community Development planning director will be considered abandoned. 3. Any WCF considered to be abandoned must be removed completely within 90 days from the date of notification by the city to the owner, owner’s agent and/or the operator of the WCF, based upon the contact information that has previously been provided to the city’s code enforcement personnel. The citycode enforcement personnel may extend the 90-day period should a valid application for use of the facility be submitted to the city. The owner of such WCF shall remove the same within ninety (90) days of receipt of written notice from the city. If such WCF is not removed within ninety (90) days, the city may remove it at the owner’s expense and any approved permits for the WCF shall be deemed to have expired. Page 361 of 465 41 of 46  J. Noise. For the purposes of this section, WCF will be considered a Class B, commercial, noise source pursuant to WAC 173-60-040. K. Supplemental Information Required for Applications. In addition to the information that is otherwise required for an application for a permit for a WCF, the following is also required: 1. For all new WCFsa new primary support structure and related equipment, the applicant shall provide the carrier’s master network plan for the city showing the carrier’s existing WCF locations and narrative explaining the potential WCF locations over the next year, if known. The applicant shall also provide technical justification supporting the need for the height of the WCF and for any new towerprimary support structure and why a shorter support structure could not be utilized. Any application for a Type 3-B facility new tower greater than 75 feet in height shall provide technical justification as to why a Type 3-A facility could not be utilized instead to adequately serve the Auburn community. 2. Narrative description of the facility including whether there is capacity on the proposed structure for more antennas, methods for minimizing visual impacts of the facilities, etc. The applicant shall provide evidence of the ability to execute a non-exclusive lease between the carrier and the underlying property owner, if the property owner is different, that allows for other carriers to place antennas and equipment on the structure. This ability for co-location must be demonstrated, unless relief from this requirement is requested and ultimately approved in accordance with the administrative waiver provisions in this Chapter 3. A color swatch sample for the proposed primary support structuretower. 4. narrative description of proposed camouflage and concealment design techniques to minimize visual impacts of the facilities. Photographs, photo simulations, or similar illustrations that show a reasonable likeness of the proposed facility including the antennas arrays and above-ground support equipment. L. Zones in Which WCF Are Permitted. The following table illustrates which zones the types of facilities as defined by ACC 18.04.912(J) and (VK) and ACC 18.31.100(A) are allowed in and which land use approval process, if any is permits Page 362 of 465 42 of 46  are required. Microcells, as defined by ACC 18.04.912(GL) (not located in public ways), are allowed only in residential zones and shall be permitted outright pursuant to the provisions of ACC 18.04.912(GL). Type of Permit Required Zone Permitted Outright Administrative Use Permit Conditional Use Permit All Zones 1-D 1-D1 1-D2 RO RO-H 1-A 1-B 1-C C-N 1-A 1-B 1-C C-1 1-A 1-B 1-C C-2, DUC 1-A 1-B 1-C C-3 C-4 1-B, 2-A 1-C, 2-B, 3-A 3-B M-1, EP 1-B, 2-A 1-C, 2-B, 3-A 3-B M-2 1-B, 2-A 1-C, 2-B, 3-A 3-B P-1 1-B, 2-A 1-C, 2-B 3-A3 I 1-A 1-B 1-C LF 1-A 1-B 1-C 1 Allowance for the WCF to extend to a height of 20 percent of the supporting structure. 2 Allowance for the WCF to extend to a height of 30 percent of the supporting structure. 3 The maximum height allowed, including antennas, is 45 feet. M. Exemptions. Page 363 of 465 43 of 46  1. Unless otherwise provided for, the Mobile Testing Facilities/Equipment used to test network limitationsfollowing are exempt from the provisions of this section.: a. Microcells as defined by ACC 18.04.912(G). b. Mobile Testing Facilities/Equipment Used to Test Network Limitations. The facilities/equipment shall not be at any one location for more than 14 days and shall otherwise meet the requirements of any other ordinance, regulation or code provision. 2. EWCFs are exempt from the provisions of subsections B, Separation between Facilities; (C)(1), Co-Location Requirements; D, Height (except (D)(4)); and E, Setbacks, of this section. (Ord. 6716 § 1 (Exh. A), 2019; Ord. 6245 § 15, 2009.) N. Eligible Facilities Requests (EFR) 1. Application and Review Requirement for Eligible Facilities Requests. Applicants seeking approval of eligible facility requests must complete an application form furnished by the city and comply with any requirements set forth in applicable city ordinances. The application form shall be limited to the information necessary for the city to consider whether an application is an eligible facilities request. The application may not require the applicant to demonstrate a need or business case for the proposed modification or co-location. Such information may include, without limitation, whether the project: a. Would result in a substantial change, as defined in ACC 18.04.912(Q); b. Violates a generally applicable law, regulations, or other rule codifying objective standards reasonably related to public health, safety, and welfare. 2. Review Procedures for Eligible Facilities Requests. This section applies to any eligible facilities requests for co-location on, or modification to an existing tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station. Page 364 of 465 44 of 46  a. Review Required for Eligible Facilities. No co-location or modification to any existing tower or base station may occur except after a written request from an applicant is reviewed and approved by the director. Upon receipt of an application for an eligible facilities request pursuant to this section, the city shall review such application to determine whether the application so qualifies. b Review Criteria. Upon receipt of an application for an eligible facilities request pursuant to this section, the city shall administratively review such application to determine whether the application meets the following criteria for an eligible facilities request: i. Does not result in a substantial change, as defined in ACC 18.04.912(Q); ii. Does not violate a generally applicable law, regulation, or other rule reasonably related to public health, safety, and welfare and complies with generally applicable building, structural, electrical, and safety codes; iii. Complies with the original application camouflage and concealment design techniques or conditions of approval, including but not limited to colors, textures, surfaces, scale, character, and siting, or any approved amendments thereto, subject to the thresholds established in the definition of substantial change; and 3. Timeframe for Reviewing and Deciding Eligible Facilities Requests. Subject to the tolling provisions below, within sixty (60) days of the date on which an applicant submits a complete application, as determined by the director, the city shall approve the application unless it determines that the application does not qualify as an “eligible facility request”, or does not comply with other applicable code requirements. a. Tolling of the Timeframe for Review. The 60-day review period deadline begins to run when the application is filed and may be tolled (halted) only by mutual agreement of the city and the applicant, or in cases where the director determines that the application is “incomplete”. Page 365 of 465 45 of 46  b. To toll the timeframe for incompleteness, the city must provide written notice to the applicant within thirty (30) days of receipt of the application, specifically delineating all missing documents or information required in the application; c. The timeframe for review continues running again the following business day after the applicant makes a supplemental written submission in response to the city’s notice of incompleteness; and d. Following a supplemental submission, the city will notify the applicant within ten (10) days that the supplemental submission did not provide the information identified in the original notice delineating missing information. The timeframe is tolled in the case of second or subsequent notices pursuant to the procedures identified above in (a) and (b). In the case of a second or subsequent notice of incompleteness, the city may not specify missing information or documents that were not delineated in the original notice of incompleteness. 4. Interaction with Telecommunications Act Section 332(c)(7). If the city determines that the applicant’s request is not an eligible facilities request as delineated in this section of the Code, the presumptively reasonable timeframe under Section 332(c)(7), as prescribed by the FCC’s Shot Clock order in WT Docket No. 08-165 (Adopted November 18, 2009), will begin to run from the issuance of the city’s decision that the application is not a covered request. To the extent such information is necessary, the city may request additional information from the applicant to evaluate the application under Section 332(c)(7) reviews. Page 366 of 465 46 of 46  18.31.110 Siting of microcells. The following siting standards are intended to guide the location and development of microcells as defined by ACC 18.04.912(L) but not including other wireless communications facilities (WCF). The siting of other wireless communications facilities shall be in accordance with siting of wireless communication facilities found in ACC 18.31.100. A. Siting Criteria for Microcells (not located in public ways). 1. Panel antennas shall be incorporated into the design of the existing structure using painting, flush mounting or other concealment methods. 2. The equipment cabinets and other ground support equipment shall be located in an area that is no larger than 16 square feet. The height of the equipment shall be no more than four feet. The equipment shall be designed to be compatible with the residential neighborhood the project shall provide a minimum width of five feet of Type II landscaping as defined in ACC 18.50.040 or fencing or a combination of these or similar features. The landscaping shall consist of evergreen and deciduous trees with no more than 50 percent being deciduous, and shrubs and groundcover shall be provided. 3. There shall be a 300-foot separation between any microcells. 4. The antennas must be located on light poles, power poles or similar public utility poles that are either owned/operated by the city of Auburn or owned/operated by a utility provider operating with an appropriate franchise if approved by the city engineer. The equipment cabinets may be located on private property. 54. Anyone wishing to establish a microcell or associated components shall make application to the community developmentplanning director upon application forms provided by the planning director. The planning director shall review each application and may be empowered to approve, deny or modify the proposal. (Ord. 6245 § 15, 2009.) Page 367 of 465 47 of 46  18.35 Special Purpose Zones 18.35.030 Uses. A. General Permit Requirements. Table 18.35.030 identifies the uses of land allowed in each special purpose zone and the planning permit required to establish each use. B. Requirements for Certain Specific Land Uses. Where the last column in Table 18.35.030 (“Standards for Specific Land Uses”) includes a section number, the referenced section determines other requirements and standards applicable to the use regardless of whether it is permitted outright or requires an administrative or conditional use permit. Table 18.35.030. Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designations Standards for Specific Land Uses RO RO-H P-1 I OS MARIJUANA RELATED BUSINESSES Marijuana processor X X X X X Marijuana producer X X X X X Marijuana researcher X X X X X Marijuana retailer X X X X X Marijuana transporter business X X X X X PUBLIC Animal shelter, public X X P X X Government facilities, this excludes offices and related uses that are permitted outright A A P P C Page 368 of 465 48 of 46  Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designations Standards for Specific Land Uses RO RO-H P-1 I OS Municipal parks and playgrounds P P P P P RECREATION, EDUCATION AND PUBLIC ASSEMBLY Campgrounds X X X P P Recreational vehicle parks, private X X X P X Cemetery, public X X P A X Cemetery, private X X X A X College, university, public X X A A X Commercial recreation facility – Indoor X X X P X Commercial recreation facility – Outdoor X X X A C ACC 18.57.025(A) Conference/convention facility X X X A X Library, museum X X P P A Meeting facility, public or private A A P P A Private school – specialized education/training (for profit) P P X P X Public schools (K-12) X X P P X Page 369 of 465 49 of 46  Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designations Standards for Specific Land Uses RO RO-H P-1 I OS and related facilities Religious institutions, lot size less than one acre A P X P X Religious institutions, lot size more than one acre C A X P X Studio – Art, dance, martial arts, music, etc. P X X X X RESIDENTIAL Duplex P1 X X A X Home occupation P P X P P Chapter 18.60 ACC Live/work, work/live unit A P X A X Marijuana cooperative X X X X X Multiple-family dwellings, stand-alone P2 A3 X A X One detached single- family dwelling P X X X P5 Nursing home, assisted living facility A A X P X Senior housing A A X A X RETAIL Restaurant, cafe, A A P A X Page 370 of 465 50 of 46  Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designations Standards for Specific Land Uses RO RO-H P-1 I OS coffee shop, excluding drive-through facilities SERVICES Banking and related financial institutions, excluding drive- through facilities4 P P X X X Daycare, including mini daycare, daycare center, preschools or nursery schools A P X P A Home-based daycare P P X P P Medical services – Clinic or urgent care4 P P X X X Mortuary, funeral home, crematorium X P X X X Professional offices P P X A A Personal service shops P P X X X Pharmacies X P X X X TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS AND INFRASTRUCTURE Utility facilities, substations, utility transmission or X X X X A See ACC 18.02.040(E) Page 371 of 465 51 of 46  Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designations Standards for Specific Land Uses RO RO-H P-1 I OS distribution line Wireless communication facility (WCF) (See ACC 18.04.912(V) * * * * * *See ACC 18.31.100 for use regulations and zoning development standards. Eligible facilities request (EFR) (Wireless communication facility (See ACC 18.04.912(G)) P P P P P Small wireless facilities (ACC 18.04.912(P)) P P P P P Emergency wireless communication facility (EWCF) X X X P X See ACC 18.04.912 and 18.31.100 OTHER USES THAT ARE NOT LISTED Other uses may be permitted by the planning director or designee if the use is determined to be consistent with the intent of the zone and is of the same general P P P P P Page 372 of 465 52 of 46  Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designations Standards for Specific Land Uses RO RO-H P-1 I OS character of the uses permitted Notes: 1 Duplexes, 3,600 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit is required. 2 Multifamily dwellings; provided, that 2,400 square feet of lot area is provided for each dwelling unit. 3 Multifamily dwellings; provided 1,200 square feet of lot area is provided for each dwelling unit. 4 Permitted within a public college or university as an amenity or service provided to students: A stand-alone bank or medical services/clinic is not permitted. 5 One single-family detached dwelling unit per existing legal lot. No residential subdivisions permitted in the open space zone. Page 373 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 1 of 22 SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose of checklist: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use “not applicable” or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision- making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for Lead Agencies: Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. Use of checklist for non-project proposals: For non-project proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NON-PROJECT ACTIONS (part D). Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non-projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements –that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. A. Background [HELP] 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: City of Auburn Franchise and Wireless Communications related Code Amendments 2. Name of applicant: City of Auburn Legal, Public Works, and Community Development Departments. Page 374 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 2 of 22 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Amber Price, Right-of-Way Specialist, Public Works Dept. 25 West Main St, Auburn WA 98001-4998 253-804-3120 Desk, 253-204-0316 Cell aprice@auburnwa.gov 4. Date checklist prepared: September 22, 2020. 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Auburn, Community Development Department. 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): No phasing is proposed. The Planning Commission will consider those city code changes that are subject to their purview in the October/November timeframe. The City Council will consider the full slate of changes in the November/ December timeframe. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No further activity is anticipated beyond code changes and administrative actions to implement the code changes. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. No environmental information has been prepared specific to the city’s code changes except this WA State environmental checklist application. The federal laws changes governing telecommunications have been the subject of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance. Also future National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance will be required in the future for certain facilities. All licensees (companies) erecting antenna facilities must comply with the federal NEPA regulations. If a licensee's proposed action falls within one of the eight categories listed in federal regulation 47 C.F.R. § 1.1307, then 47 C.F.R. § 1.1308(a) requires the licensee to consider the potential environmental effects from its construction of antenna facilities or structures, and disclose those effects in an environmental assessment (EA) which is filed with the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC's) Wireless Telecommunications Bureau for review. The categories that trigger the need for an EA include impacts on: endangered species; archaeological, cultural or historic properties; tribal lands; and floodplains. It is the responsibility of all companies erecting wireless facilities to comply with the federal regulations. Local government jurisdictions should assist by informing applicants of all known potential siting problems. Any required EA will also provide valuable information to local officials. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. Page 375 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 3 of 22 There are no know applications pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal. The proposal is a non-project action. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. While not an approval, the development regulations changes must be submitted to the WA State Dept. of Commerce for state agency review. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The proposed action consists of amendments to the municipal code in response to changes in evolving technology for wireless telecommunications, federal legislation regulating wireless telecommunications specially including requirements of local jurisdictions and in response to emerging legal precedents arising from related court cases. The proposed action include changes to 7 titles of city code their chapters and sections. It is anticipated that the code changes will lead to development of administrative procedures and forms for implementation. To aid in understanding the scope of changes and to assess their environmental significance or in-significance, in summary the main changes to the following code sections are proposed to consist of: • TITLE 3, REVENUE AND FINANCE O CHAPTER 3.42, CABLE TELEVISION UTILITY TAX O CHAPTER 3.84, TELEPHONE BUSINESS O CHAPTER 3.88, UTILITY SERVICES The key changes to Title 3, are:  Align definitions with those of Title 20 for utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process.  Repeal of ACC 3.84.110 as annexation notification is addressed by applicable state law  Repeal of ACC 3.88.030 as the provision is outdated and duplicative of requirements in Title 5 • TITLE 5, BUSINESS LICENSES AND REGULATIONS O CHAPTER 5.84, LICENSING OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS CARRIERS, OPERATORS, PROVIDERS AND OTHER UTILITIES The key changes to Title 5, are:  Remove purpose statement of business licensing as it is duplicative. Page 376 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 4 of 22  Align definitions with those of Title 20 for utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process. • ITLE 12, STREETS, SIDEWALKS AND PUBLIC WORKS O CHAPTER 12.24, CONSTRUCTION PERMITS O CHAPTER 12.32, SIDEWALK OBSTRUCTIONS The key changes to Title 12, are:  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process.  Ensure that any construction work performed under this title is done per the City’s Engineering Design and Construction Standards. • TITLE 13, WATER, SEWERS AND PUBLIC UTILITIES O CHAPTER 13.32A, UNDERGROUND WIRING O CHAPTER 13.36, CATV SYSTEMS (REPEALED) O CHAPTER 13.44, ELCTRICAL FRANCHISE (REPEALED) The key changes to Title 13, are:  Align definitions with those of Title 20 for utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process.  Ensure that any construction work performed under this title is done per the City’s Engineering Design and Construction Standards.  Update requirements, exemptions and process for undergrounding of utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Repeal of Chapter 13.36 ACC as the provisions are being moved to Title 20 and updated to reflect current federal requirements.  Repeal of Chapter 13.44 ACC as the provisions are outdated and addressed under the provisions of Title 20 • TITLE 17, LAND ADJUSTMENTS AND DIVISIONS O CHAPTER 17.14, IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS – SUBDIVISIONS O CHAPTER 17.28, INFRASTRUCTURE CONDUIT (REPEALED) The key changes to Title 17, are:  Minor changes to improve clarity and correct references.  Repeal of ACC 17.28 because addressed in ACC 13.32A. • TITLE 18, ZONING O CHAPTER 18.02, GENERAL PROVISIONS O CHAPTER 18.04, DEINITIONS O CHAPTER 18.07, RESIDENTAL ZONES O CHAPTER 18.23, COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL ZONES O CHAPTER 18.31, SUPPLEMENTAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Page 377 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 5 of 22 The key changes to Title 18, are:  Changes to be consistent with the requirements of federal legislation that provide the city must approve additions or modifications to existing wireless communication facilities that do not exceed a ”substantial increase” and that the city must approve within a specified timeframe. This requires new terminology, procedures, and regulations.  Also changes were made to accommodate the new technology of “small cell wireless communication” facilities when located on private property.  Other minor housekeeping or administrative changes were also made. • TITLE 20, FRANCHISES, CABLE FRANCHISES, AND LEASES O CHAPTER 20.02, GENERAL PROVISIONS O CHAPTER 20.04, UTILITY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS FRANCHISES O CHAPTER 20.06, CABLE FRANCHISE O CHAPTER 20.08, FACILITIES LEASE O CHAPTER 20.10, CONDITIONS OF PUBLIC WAY AGREEMENTS, FRANCHISES, AND FACILITIES LEASES (REPEALED) O CHAPTER 20.12. OPEN VIDEO SYSTEMS (REPEALED) O CHAPTER 20.14, SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES The key changes to Title 20, are:  Align definitions throughout the titles for utilities, telecommunications and cable.  Update City Code in conformance with current federal and state requirements for utilities, telecommunications and cable in the public ways and on city owned facilities and property.  Modernize procedural provisions to reflect actual process  Repeal of Chapter 20.10 ACC as the provision of this chapter have been updated and moved to Chapter 20.02 ACC  Repeal of Chapter 20.12 ACC as this chapter was empty. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The City of Auburn and its Potential Annexation Area (PAA) B. Environmental Elements [HELP] Page 378 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 6 of 22 1. Earth [help] a. General description of the site: (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other _____________ The City of Auburn and its Potential Annexation Area (PAA) are characterized by a relatively flat central valley floor bordered by steep hillsides and upland plateaus to the west, east and southeast. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The slopes vary in areas of the city and the PAA, but in some locations slopes associated with the valley walls reach nearly 100%. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. The valley floor is made up primarily of soils of the Oridia, Renton, Snohomish, and Briscott series. These soils are generally poorly drained and formed in the alluvium (river sediments) associated with the White and Green Rivers. These are considered good agricultural soils, though in many areas, are not well-drained. There is no designated farmland within the City of Auburn. The hillsides and plateaus are made up of primarily Alderwood associated soils and a small amount of Everett associated soils (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1973). Alderwood soils are moderately well drained gravelly sandy loams 20-40 inches deep. Beneath these soils is glacial till with low permeability. Roots penetrate easily to the hardpan layer. Runoff potential is slow to medium. Erosion and slippage hazard is moderate; ranging to severe on steeper slope phases The Everett series consists of somewhat excessively drained soils that are underlain by very gravelly sand. These soils formed in very gravelly glacial outwash deposits under conifers. They are found on terraces and terrace fronts and are gently undulating to moderately steep. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Many factors affect slope stability including soil type, parent material, slope and drainage. These factors can be further affected by human intervention such as slope alteration, and vegetation removal. The City has identified categories of geologic hazard areas and inventoried these areas. Maps of the erosion, seismic, and landslide hazard areas are provided as maps that are part of the critical areas ordinance inventory. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Not applicable. The proposed code amendements are non-project actions, no site alteration, construction, or earthwork is proposed. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Page 379 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 7 of 22 Not applicable. The action does not involve site specific development proposals. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: This is a non-project action; no site specific erosion control measures are proposed. However, the existing comprehensive plan and implementing development regulations includes numerous policies to reduce or control erosion through the use of best management practices, landscaping requirements, limitations on alteration of steep slopes and other critical areas protections. Impacts to earth/soil resources will be identified and, if necessary, mitigated during the development review process as specific development proposals are made that might be associated with these plan amendments. 2. Air [help] a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 3. Water [help] a. Surface Water: [help] 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The major bodies of water within Auburn are the Green River, the White (Stuck) River, Bowman Creek, Cobble Creek, Mill Creek, Lea Hill Creek, Olson Creek and White Lake. The City has conducted an inventory of wetlands and streams within the city limits. These are shown on City’s critical area inventory maps. Shorelines of the State are reflected in Auburn’s Shorelines Master Program adopted in 2019 and the shoreline environment designations are shown within the Shoreline Management Program. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. Page 380 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 8 of 22 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Several areas within Auburn lie within the 100-year floodplain of the Green or White Rivers and Mill Creek and Mullen Slough. Floodplain as well as flood hazard areas as defined by the City are shown on the city critical area maps and floodplain maps (2020). The Riparian Habitat Zone, as a FEMA special flood hazard area is shown on the city’s inventory and addressed in the city’s regulations. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. b. Ground Water: [help] 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals. . . ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. Page 381 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 9 of 22 Not applicable. This is a non-project action. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 4. Plants [help] a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: __X__deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other __X__evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other __X__shrubs __X__grass __X__pasture __X__crop or grain ____ Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. __X__ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other __X__water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other __X__other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Not applicable. This is a non-project action. However, in general urban development results in the removal or alteration of many types of vegetation. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known at this time. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 5. Animals [help] a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: X birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: X mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Page 382 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 10 of 22 X fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other ________ b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. There are nesting/breeding sites of great blue herons and green backed herons within Auburn as shown on critical area inventory maps. The Environmental Impact Statement for the NE Auburn/Robertson Properties Special area plan and addendum indicate the bald eagle was delisted as ‘threatened’ in 2008 and is now a federal ‘species of concern’. There are several species that potentially occur within King County including: gray wolf (federally and state endangered), grizzly bear (federally threatened and state endangered), Canada lynx (federally and state threatened), marbled murrelet (federally and state threatened), and northern spotted owl (federally threatened and state endangered) (USFWS 2007). Due to their limited range and specific habitat requirements, the gray wolf, grizzly bear, Canada lynx, marbled murrelet, and northern spotted owl would not be expected to occur within the urban areas of King County. The 2004 EIS also identified several federal species of concern that may occur in King County. The list was updated in 2007 to include: tailed frog, Larch Mountain salamander, and northern sea otter (USFWS, 2007). The project area does not contain suitable habitat to support these species at this time. The 2004 EIS did not include the Oregon spotted frog or yellow-billed cuckoo, which are federal candidate species. Though given the current range and distribution of the species and the degraded conditions of on-site wetlands and stream, the likelihood of Oregon spotted frog occurring within the city is very low. Yellow-billed cuckoos breed in large blocks of riparian habitats (particularly woodlands containing cottonwoods and willows) (Erhlich et al., 1988). This species may now be extirpated from Washington (66 Federal Register 210). There have been documented sightings of yellow- billed cuckoo in King County and the Green River riparian corridor may provide some limited foraging and breeding habitat; however, areas of Auburn are devoid of mature dense cottonwood stands of significant size to support the species and their presence is not anticipated. Fish The 2004 EIS identified the Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia Coho salmon as a candidate species; however, their current federal status has been down-graded to a species of concern. Other listing changes that have occurred since that time includes the 2007 listing of the Puget Sound Distinct Population Segment (DPS) steelhead as threatened under the ESA (72 Federal Register 91), and the 2005 listing of designated critical habitat for the Puget Sound Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU) Chinook salmon and Coastal-Puget Sound DPS bull trout in the Green River (70 Federal Register 170; 70 Federal Register 185). Since the 2004 EIS, a Biological Opinion was issued by NMFS that determined the effects of certain elements of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) throughout Puget Sound is likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the following species listed under the ESA: Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Puget Sound steelhead, Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon, and Southern Resident killer whales. The Biological Opinion also determined that NFIP is likely to adversely modify the following ESA designated critical habitats: Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon, and Southern Resident killer whale critical habitats. The biological opinion provides a reasonable and prudent alternative which can be implemented to avoid jeopardy and adverse modification of critical habitat. In response to the Biological Page 383 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 11 of 22 Opinion, FEMA developed a model ordinance for NFIP participating communities, which includes the City of Auburn. The City of Auburn incorporated substantive terms of the model ordinance into their interim floodplain regulations (Ordinance No. 6295). By letter dated September 21, 2011 FEMA acknowledged that the city’s ordinance complies with their model ordinance and as a result, the interim ordinance becomes permanent. The Biological Opinion originally established a 2010 timeline for compliance for all NFIP participating communities within the Puget Sound Basin (NMFS, 2008). The City amended its floodplain regulations including new maps in 2020. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Auburn is a portion of the Pacific Flyway for migratory birds. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 6. Energy and Natural Resources [help] a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 7. Environmental Health [help] a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. Page 384 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 12 of 22 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indi- cate what hours noise would come from the site. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action. 8. Land and Shoreline Use [help] a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. The City and Potential Annexation Area (PAA) contain a variety of land uses including residential, industrial, institutional, commercial, open space, and public land uses. Page 385 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 13 of 22 b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or nonforest use? Much of Green and White River Valleys and the City of Auburn were used for agriculture at some time in the past. Over the last several decades, rapid growth in the area resulted in much of the agricultural land converting to urban uses. No land within the city is formally designated as Agricultural Land, though some parcels continue in agricultural use. 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: Not applicable. This is a non-project action and no specific development is proposed. c. Describe any structures on the site. Structures within the city and PAA range from small single family detached homes to large industrial manufacturing and warehousing facilities. Properties subject to the plan map amendments range in use, as examples, from vacant land, schools, residential, commercial to those that appear as primarily wetlands. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Not applicable. This is a non-project action. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? City zoning districts include: RC (Residential Conservancy); R-1 (1 du/acre) R-5 (5 du/acre); R-7 (7 du/acre); R-10 (10 du/acre); R-16 (16 du/acre); R-20 (20 du/acre); R-MHC (Manufactured/Mobile Home Community); RT (Residential Transition); CN (Neighborhood Commercial) C1; (Light Commercial); C2 (Central Business District); DUC (Downtown Urban Center Zone); C3 (Heavy Commercial); C4, Mixed Use Commercial, M1 (Light Industrial); EP (Environmental Park District); M2 (Heavy Industrial); LF (Airport Landing Field); UNC (Unclassified Use); I (Institutional Use); Lakeland Hills South PUD; and TV (Terrace View Zoning District). f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? A Comprehensive Plan map of the City is contained in the City’s Comprehensive Plan and includes various different plan designations similar to, and implemented by the zoning categories. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Page 386 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 14 of 22 Portions of the City along the Green and White Rivers fall under the Shoreline Master Program. A map of the shoreline designations for those areas is contained in the shoreline management program. Shorelines of the State are reflected in Auburn’s Shorelines Master Program adopted in June 2019. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. Not applicable. This is a non-project action. However, areas of the city do contain environmentally sensitive or critical areas and the regulation and protection of environmentally sensitive areas are addressed through the city’s critical areas ordinance (ACC 16.10). i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not applicable. This is a non-project action and no specific development is proposed. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Not applicable. This is a non-project action and no specific development is proposed. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. This is a non-project action and no specific development is proposed. L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: This proposal is to amend the City of Auburn city code as described in response to the environmental checklist application question A.11 above. The evaluation by staff and the public hearing and review process that occurs as part of the city code amendment process will be used to help evaluate whether a particular proposal is consistent with existing plans. Also, the proposed amendments are circulated to State agencies for a State Agency review process in accordance with RCW 36.70A.106, m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long-term commercial significance, if any: Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. 9. Housing [help] a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, mid- dle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. Page 387 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 15 of 22 b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. 10. Aesthetics [help] a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. 11. Light and Glare [help] a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. 12. Recreation [help] a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Page 388 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 16 of 22 The City of Auburn provides a full range of parks and recreational facilities. The City’s 2015 Parks, Art, Recreation and Open Space Plan shows the location of these facilities. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. 13. Historic and cultural preservation [help] a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers ? If so, specifically describe. Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. However, as a matter of information, in Auburn, the Blomeen House located at 324 B Street NE is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The Carnegie Library Building at 306 Auburn Avenue (currently Auburn Dance and Music Center) and the Auburn Post Office (formerly the Seattle-King County Health Department) at 20 Auburn Avenue NE are listed local and county landmarks. The Olson Farm, located at 28728 Green River Road South, was designated as King County Landmark in 2000 and the Masonic Temple Building at the southeast corner of Auburn Way South and East Main Street was designated as a King County Historical Landmark in 2002. The Pioneer Cemetery at Auburn Way North & 9th ST NE was designated as a City of Auburn Landmark in 2016. b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. Several historic Indian campsites have been identified along the Green and White Rivers in the Auburn Thoroughbred Racetrack EIS and in preliminary work for the Army Corps of Engineers’ Special Area Management Plan (SAMP). c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. Page 389 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 17 of 22 Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. 14. Transportation [help] a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The Comprehensive Transportation Plan (The transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan) shows the City’s current and future classified street system. b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Figure 4-1 of the Comprehensive Transportation Plan (Transportation element) shows the location of public transit routes within the City. Also, a commuter rail station exists along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad right-of-way just south of West Main Street and east of C Street SW. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non-project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. There is no water transportation in the Auburn area other than for recreational uses. The area is particularly well served by rail. At this time, local freight service is available. Burlington Northern Santa Fe and Union Pacific both operate freight railroad lines within Auburn. Auburn is also a commuter rail station site for the Sounder commuter rail line between Tacoma, Seattle and Everett. Service began September 18, 2000. Amtrak trains pass through Auburn but do not stop here. The Auburn Airport is a general purpose airport located north of 15th and D Streets NE. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would Page 390 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 18 of 22 be trucks (such as commercial and nonpassenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. 15. Public Services [help] a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. This proposal is a non-project action. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. The Comprehensive Plan contains policies that seek to maintain a sufficient level of service for public services as development occurs. Also, Auburn reviews under SEPA, the impacts of significant development on these public services. Mitigation measures are required to reduce significant adverse impacts. 16. Utilities [help] a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other ___________ Electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other – Cable TV. All of the above utilities are available within the City of Auburn. The City provides water, sewer and storm facilities. There are also private water and sewer utility districts and private utility providers with service area boundaries within the city. c. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Page 391 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 19 of 22 This is a non-project action. However, the Comprehensive Plan includes a private and a public utilities element (as required by the Growth Management Act), which describes the utilities that serve the Auburn area and includes policies for their provision. Also, the city actively engages in planning for public facilities. The Comprehensive Water Plan, Comprehensive Sewer Plan and Comprehensive Stormwater Drainage Plan were adopted by the City in 2015. A new six-year Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) was adopted in 2016 (2017-2022) and plan amendments this year will include an update consisting of the City of Auburn 2018-2023. The City seeks to update the CFP a minimum of every two years, and more commonly, yearly. These plans ensure that utility impacts are adequately monitored and evaluated on a project level and city- wide basis. C. Signature [HELP] The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: _________________________________ Name of signee __Jeff Dixon________________________________________________ Position and Agency/Organization _Planning Services Manager_____________________ Date Submitted: _October 6, 2020____________ D. Supplemental sheet for nonproject actions [HELP] (IT IS NOT NECESSARY to use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; pro- duction, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? Taken as a whole, there should be a minimal change in discharges to water, emissions to air, production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances or the production of noise. The proposed code amendments themselves will not create a change in intensity of discharge to water, emissions to air, production, storage or release of toxic or hazardous substances or the production of noise from those levels expected under the existing plan. Page 392 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 20 of 22 Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: The City of Auburn Comprehensive Plan contains provisions to reduce increases or emissions caused by new development. Emphasis in the Comprehensive Plan on reducing the reliance on the automobile for transportation should reduce the amount of emissions to the air. Policies in the Plan also provide guidance in the review of development proposals to encourage use and retention of native vegetation. This supports wildlife habitat areas, particularly near streams, as the policies assist the City in addressing adverse impacts to water quality and wildlife habitat from runoff since native plantings can retain and treat runoff and may require less pesticide use. The proposed amendments set the framework where properties and uses would in the future be in compliance with expansion, site redevelopment or new development. City policy and code regulates such impacts through the storm drainage requirements and critical area regulations as applicable. An environmental review of all non-exempt (from SEPA) development will be conducted to evaluate and mitigate impacts related to discharges, emissions, and the release of toxic substances. Evaluation of the subsequent site-specific proposals will be based on the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, development regulations and appropriate mitigation will take place on a case by case basis. City development standards including but not limited to the critical areas ordinance, shoreline master program regulations, Stormwater Management Manual, Floodplain permit regulations, and the Engineering Design and Construction Manual, also provide additional protection for these types of impacts. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? This proposal will amend the Auburn city code. The code implements the city’s Comprehensive Plan and contains critical area and shoreline requirements. The plan recognizes the Shoreline Master Program that was amended in May 2019 which governs development within the Shoreline Management Area, reducing the impacts from new development on plants, animals. The changes will not change any policy which would have a direct effect on flora, fauna, or marine life. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: Generally, the adopted Auburn Comprehensive Plan and critical areas ordinance seek to protect and conserve plants, animals, fish, and marine life. An environmental review under SEPA of all non-exempt development is conducted to measure impacts. Evaluation based on the policies of the Auburn Comprehensive Plan and appropriate mitigation will take place on a case-by-case basis. Policies within the Plan also provide guidance in the review of development proposals to encourage native vegetation be used and/or retained. This should support wildlife habitat areas, particularly near streams as the policies assist the city in addressing adverse runoff impacts to water quality and wildlife habitat since native plantings may require less pesticide use. City development standards including but not limited to the critical areas ordinance and the shoreline master program regulations also provide additional protection for these types of impacts. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The proposed code amendments themselves will not create a change in intensity of future development or use of natural gas, petroleum and electricity and result in increased automobile uses. However, there does not Page 393 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 21 of 22 appear to be any significant adverse increases in the use of energy of natural resources resulting from the amendments being proposed to the existing municipal code. The city’s recent completion of amendment for alternative powered vehicles and for preparation of a greenhouse gas inventory establishes a baseline for future energy conservation measures. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: None specifically, as this is a non-project action. However, Comprehensive Plan policies encourage energy conservation in public buildings, street lighting, and recycling, it places an emphasis on providing for alternative methods of travel to the automobile such as transit, walking, and biking. An environmental review under SEPA of all significant development will be conducted to measure the project impacts. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: This proposal will amend the municipal code. Taken as a whole, the increase in impacts from the proposed code amendments on environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated for government protection should be minor, if at all. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? Amendments can only be approved if it can be assured that future development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and its policies and related development regulations. Project allowed by the code amendments will only be approved if consistent with comprehensive plan policies or other development regulations. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: The comprehensive plan, critical areas ordinance, and other development regulations, such as the zoning ordinance and shoreline master program, seek to protect these land and shoreline resources and to reduce the effects of development on them. An environmental review under SEPA of all development that is non-exempt will also be conducted to evaluate a proposal’s land use and environmental impacts. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? This proposal will amend 7 Chapters of City code and remain in compliance with the Auburn Comprehensive Plan for Capital Facilities Elements. The proposal will not result in an increase in demands on transportation and public services. Rather, the six-year CFP responds to growth by identifying the public facilities and improvement needed to address future growth. The growth projections mentioned above would occur with or without these amendments. Page 394 of 465 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 22 of 22 Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: As stated above, no measurable increase in demands to these subject areas will result from the proposed code amendments. An environmental review under SEPA for non-exempt development proposals identified in the CFP will be conducted to measure and evaluate impacts. Also, the city actively engages in planning for public facilities. The Comprehensive Water Plan, Comprehensive Sewer Plan and Comprehensive Stormwater Drainage Plan were adopted by the city in 2015. An update to the Comprehensive Transportation Plan was adopted in 2015. These specific plans help ensure that infrastructure impacts are adequately monitored and evaluated on a project level and city-wide basis. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The proposal does not appear to present any conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements. The code changes are for the purpose of implementing federal telecommunication regulations. Page 395 of 465 DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) & NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING (NOH) City of Auburn Franchise & Wireless Communications related Code Amendments SEP20-0017 and ZOA20-0005 The City of Auburn is issuing a Notice of Public Hearing (NOH) and Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) for the following described proposal. The project application and listed studies may be reviewed by contacting the Department of Community Development at planning@auburnwa.gov or by visiting www.auburnwa.gov/landuse. Proposal: The proposed non-project action consists of amendments to City’s Municipal code in response to changes in evolving technology for wireless telecommunications, federal legislation regulating wireless telecommunications specially including requirements of local jurisdictions and in response to emerging legal precedents arising from related court cases. Changes to the following seven (7) titles of the Municipal Code are proposed:  Title 3, Revenue and Finance  Title 5, Business Licenses and Regulations  Title 12, Streets, Sidewalks and Public Works  Title 13, Water, Sewers, and Public Utilities  Title 17, Land Adjustments and Divisions  Title 18, Zoning  Title 20, Franchises, Cable Franchises, and Leases A document showing the strikethrough/underline changes was submitted with this application and is available for review. Application Complete: October 12, 2020 Permit Application: September 22, 2020 File Nos. SEP20-0017 ZOA20-0005 Applicant: City of Auburn Location: City of Auburn and its Potential Annexation Area (PAA) Statement of Consistency and List of Applicable Development Regulations: This proposal is subject to and shall be consistent with the Auburn City Code, Comprehensive Plan, and Public Works Engineering Design & Construction Standards. Lead Agency: City of Auburn The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not requir ed under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Public Comment Period: This may be your only opportunity to comment on the environmental impact of the proposal. All persons may comment on this application. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11- 340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 da ys from the date issued below. Comments must be in writing and submitted by 5:00 pm on November 3, 2020 to the mailing address of 25 W Main Page 396 of 465 NOTICE OF HEARING and DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE SEP20-0017 / ZOA20-0005 (Continued) Page 2 of 2 ST, Auburn, WA, 98001 or emailed to the contact below. Any person wishing to become a party of record, shall include in their comments that they wish to receive notice of and participate in any hearings, if relevant, and request a copy of decisions once made. Any person aggrieved of the City's determination may file an appeal with the Auburn City Clerk at 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001- 4998 within 14 days of the close of the comment period, or by 5:00 p.m. on November 17, 2020. Public Hearing: The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing specifically on changes to Titles 17, ‘Subdivision’ & 18, ‘Zoning’ that are subject to their purview on November 4, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. The public hearing will be held virtually and telephonically. To attend the meeting virtually please enter the meeting ID into the ZOOM app or call into the meeting at the ZOOM phone number listed below. Per City Resolution No. 5533 the location for Planning Commission meetings will be virtual until King County enters into Phase 3 of the Governor's Safe Start Reopening Plan. Join the ZOOM meeting at the following web address: https://zoom.us/j/95038060198. Meeting ID: 950 3806 0198, or via one tap mobile: 253 -215-8782, 95038060198# US (Tacom a). Written comments may be either emailed or mailed attention to the contact person below to 25 W Main St., Auburn WA, 98001 (please note, due to the current Governor’s Stay Home Stay Safe order, mailed comments may not be received by City Staff in time for distribution to the Planning Commission in advance), or submitted at the public hearing by email. For citizens with speech, sight, or hearing disabilities wishing to review documents pertaining to this hearing should contact the person below within 10 calendar days prior to the hearing. Each request will be considered individually according to the type of request, the availability of resources, and the financial ability of the City to provide the requested services or equipment. For questions regarding this project, please contact Jeff Dixon, Planning Srvs. Mgr., at planning@auburnwa.gov or 253-804-5033. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: Jeff Tate POSITION/TITLE: Director, Dept. of Community Dev. ADDRESS: 25 West Main Street Auburn, Washington 98001 253-931-3090 DATE ISSUED: SIGNATURE: Note: This determination does not constitute approval of the proposal. Approval of the proposal can only be made by the legislative or administrative body vested with that authority. The proposal is required to meet all applicable regulations. October 19, 2020 Page 397 of 465 REQUEST TO PUBLISH ______________________________________________________________________________ Please publish the following Notice of Application and Determination of Non-Significance in the Seattle Times on October 19, 2020. Bill the City of Auburn: City of Auburn ATTN: City Clerk 25 West Main Auburn, WA. 98001 An "Affidavit of Publication" is requested for this billing. Thank you. Please publish below the line only. ________________________________________________________________________________________ NOTICE OF PUCLIC HEARING (NOH) and DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) City of Auburn Franchise and Wireless Communication related Code Amendments / SEP20- 0017 and ZOA20-0005 The City of Auburn is issuing a Notice of Public Hearing (NOH) and Determination of Non- Significance (DNS) for the following described proposal. The project application and listed studies may be reviewed by contacting the Department of Community Development at planning@auburnwa.gov or by visiting www.auburnwa.gov/landuse. Proposal: The proposed non-project action consists of amendments to City’s Municipal code in response to changes in evolving technology for wireless telecommunications, federal legislation regulating wireless telecommunications specially including requirements of local jurisdictions and in response to emerging legal precedents arising from related court cases. Changes to the following seven (7) titles of the Municipal Code are proposed: Title 3, Revenue and Finance. Title 5, Business Licenses and Regulations. Title 12, Streets, Sidewalks and Public Works. Title 13, Water, Sewers, and Public Utilities. Title 17, Land Adjustments and Divisions. Title 18, Zoning. Title 20, Franchises, Cable Franchises, and Leases. A document showing the strikethrough/underline changes was submitted with this application and is available for review. Notice of Completeness: October 12, 2020 Permit Application: September 22, 2020 File No.: SEP20-0017, ZOA20-0005 Applicant: City of Auburn, 25 W Main ST, Auburn, WA 98001 Statement of Consistency and List of Applicable Development Regulations: This proposal is subject to and shall be consistent with the Auburn City Code, Comprehensive Plan, and Public Works Design and Construction Standards. Lead Agency: City of Auburn. The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Public Comment Period: This may be your only opportunity to comment on the environmental impact of the proposal. All persons may comment on this application. This DNS is issued under WAC 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date issued below. Comments must be in writing and submitted by 5:00 pm on November 3, 2020 to the mailing address of 25 W Main St., Auburn, WA, 98001. Any person wishing to become a party of record, shall include in their comments that they wish to receive notice of and participate in any hearings, if relevant, and request a copy of decisions once made. Any person aggrieved of the City's determination may file an appeal with the Auburn City Clerk at 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA 98001- 4998 within 14 days of the close of the comment period, or by 5:00 p.m. on November 17, 2020. Public Hearing: The Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing specifically on changes to Titles 17, ‘Subdivision’ & 18, ‘Zoning’ that are subject to their purview on November 4, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. The public hearing will be held virtually and telephonically. To attend the meeting virtually please enter the meeting ID into the ZOOM app or call into the meeting at the ZOOM phone number listed below. Per City Resolution No. 5533 the location for Planning Commission meetings will be virtual until King County enters into Phase 3 of the Governor's Safe Start Reopening Plan. Join the ZOOM meeting at the following web address: Page 398 of 465 https://zoom.us/j/95038060198. Meeting ID: 950 3806 0198, or via one tap mobile: 253-215-8782, 95038060198# US (Tacoma). Written comments may be either emailed or mailed attention to the contact person below to 25 W Main St., Auburn WA, 98001 (please note, due to the current Governor’s Stay Home Stay Safe order, mailed comments may not be received by City Staff in time for distribution to the Planning Commission in advance), or submitted at the public hearing by email. For questions regarding this project, please contact Jeff Dixon, Planning Srvs. Mgr., at planning@auburnwa.gov or 253-804-5033Any person wishing to become a party of record shall include in their comments that they wish to receive notice of and participate in any hearings, if relevant, and request a copy of decisions once made. Date of Notice: October 19, 2020 Page 399 of 465 THANK YOU We have received your amendment submission. Please allow 1-3 business days for review. Please keep the Submittal ID as your receipt and for any future questions. We will also send an email receipt to all contacts listed in the submittal. Submittal ID: 2020-S-1897 Submittal Date Time: 10/09/2020 Submittal Information Jurisdiction City of Auburn Submittal Type Request for Expedited Review / Notice of Intent to Adopt Amendment Amendment Type Development Regulation Amendment Amendment Information Brief Description Proposed amendments to the code in response to changes in evolving technology for wireless telecommunications, federal legislation regulating wireless telecommunications specially including requirements of local jurisdictions and in response to emerging legal precedents arising from related court cases. The proposed action include changes to 7 titles of city code their chapters and sections. o Yes, this is a part of the 8-year periodic update schedule, required under RCW 36.70A.130. Anticipated/Proposed Date of Adoption Attachments Attachment Type File Name Upload Date Development Regulation Amendment - Draft Franchise Code Update Document - SEPA Document - All Chapters.pdf 10/09/2020 03:41 PM Contact Information Prefix Mr. First Name jeff Last Name dixon Title planning services manager Work (253) 804-5033 Cell (253) 261-0797 Email jdixon@auburnwa.gov Page 400 of 465 o Yes, I would like to be contacted for Technical Assistance. Certification n I certify that I am authorized to submit this Amendment for the Jurisdiction identified in this Submittal and all information provided is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Full Name jeff dixon Email jdixon@auburnwa.gov Page 401 of 465 1 of 46  Page 402 of 465 2 of 46  Chapter 20.14 SMALL WIRELESS FACILITIES WITHIN THE PUBLIC WAY Sections: 20.14.010 Overview. 20.14.020 Application for small wireless facilities permits. 20.14.030 Implementation – Small wireless facilities permits. 20.14.040 Small wireless facility permit review process. 20.14.050 Deviations. 20.14.060 Small wireless facility approvals and processes. 20.14.070 Additional review procedures. 20.14.080 Compliance with federal processing limitations. 20.14.090 Design standards. 20.14.100 Noninterference. 20.14.110 Facility removal. 20.14.010 Overview. A. Service providers or any other persons or entities who seek to use the public way for small wireless facilities deployment to provide personal wireless service, data transmission, or other related services, must have a valid franchise under Chapter 20.04 ACC to use the public way and a small wireless facility permit to deploy that technology at each proposed location. Entities with franchises who wish to use a small wireless facility deployment to upgrade or expand their existing services will use the processes set forth in this chapter to obtain approval of specific installations. An entity without a franchise will apply for a franchise as well as a small wireless facility permit for its initial deployment, and the applications will be processed concurrently. B. Nothing in this chapter revises or diminishes the rights and obligations of an existing franchise. C. Nothing herein shall exempt small wireless facilities deployment from SEPA compliance. D. For purposes of this chapter, “small wireless facilities” are defined as facilities that meet the following conditions: 1. The facilities: Page 403 of 465 3 of 46  a. Are mounted on structures 50 feet or less in height, including their antennas as defined in 47 CFR 1.1320(d); or b. Are mounted on structures no more than 10 percent taller than other adjacent structures; or c. Do not extend existing structures on which they are located to a height of more than 50 feet or by more than 10 percent, whichever is greater; and 2. Each antenna associated with the deployment, excluding associated antenna equipment (as defined in the definition of antenna in 47 CFR 1.1320(d)), is no more than three cubic feet in volume; and 3. All other wireless equipment associated with the structure (including the wireless equipment associated with the antenna and any preexisting associated equipment on the structure) is no more than 28 cubic feet in volume; and 4. The facilities do not require antenna structure registration under Code of Federal Regulations, Title 47, Part 17; and 5. The facilities are not located on Tribal lands, as defined under 36 CFR 800.16(x); and 6. The facilities do not result in human exposure to radio frequency radiation in excess of the applicable safety standards specified in 47 CFR 1.1307(b); and 7. The facilities are currently located or are proposed to be located within the public way. For facilities currently located or proposed to be located on private property, please see Chapter 18.31 ACC. For facilities currently located or proposed to be located on public property or facilities, please see Chapter 20.08 ACC. (Ord. 6707 § 1 (Exh. A), 2018.) 20.14.020 Application for small wireless facilities permits. For locations in the public way, the director of public works (“director”) is charged with administration of small wireless facilities deployments and other small wireless facilities permit review processes for use of public way established under this chapter. Unless previously provided with an application for a franchise, the following information will Page 404 of 465 4 of 46  be provided by all applicants seeking to use small wireless facilities deployment: A. Specific locational information, including GPS coordinates of all proposed facilities; and B. Specific design information and plans, addressing poles or other support structures, attachments, conduit, and any ground-mounted equipment; and C. A narrative addressing how the proposed plans are consistent with the franchise exhibit(s), if applicable, or otherwise meet the design requirements of this chapter, and otherwise as required within the ACC; and D. A concealment plan demonstrating how the proposed small wireless facilities comply with the city of Auburn engineering design standards; and E. Provision of proof of Federal Communications Commission and other regulatory approvals required to provide the service(s) or use the technologies sought to be installed; and F. Provision of proof that the proposed facilities will not interfere with the city’s automated metering infrastructure (AMI), telemetry (SCADA), automated light meter facilities, or other city communication facilities; and G. Provision of proof from pole or structure owners that the additional load of small wireless facilities can be accommodated by the poles or structures or if the city is the pole or structure owner, proof of compliance with Chapter 20.08 ACC; and H. Any other information determined by the director to be necessary for processing the application. Permits issued under this chapter will not supplant any other permits required under applicable law, or the Auburn City Code, including, but not limited to, Chapters 12.24 and 13.32A ACC. (Ord. 6707 § 1 (Exh. A), 2018.) 20.14.030 Implementation – Small wireless facilities permits. The rights granted under a franchise are implemented through the issuance of small wireless facilities permits. The franchise application, required under Chapter 20.04 ACC, may be accompanied by one or more applications for a small wireless facilities permit to Commented [KA1]: Regulation of interference is preempted by the FCC. The city can seek relief via the FCC should it suspect interference, which is highly unlikely, as SWF's use licensed and dedicated spectrum. Page 405 of 465 5 of 46  deploy small wireless facilities. An initial franchise and any related small wireless facilities permit applications will be processed concurrently. A. Up to five sites may be specified in one small wireless facilities permit application for processing. There is no limit to the number of applications that may be submitted at one time. B. Issuance of a small wireless facilities permit to install small wireless facilities will be contingent upon approval of a franchise under Chapter 20.04 ACC, or the possession of a valid franchise. C. Any element of a deployment that qualifies as an eligible facilities request under 47 CFR 1.600 will be specifically designated by the applicant and may be addressed separately by the director in order to comply with the shot clocks established by applicable law. D. The director may approve, deny, or conditionally approve all or any portion of the sites proposed in a small wireless facilities permit application. Any denial of an application under this chapter must be made in writing and be supported by substantial evidence. E. Any application for a small wireless facilities permit that contains an element that is not exempt from SEPA review will simultaneously submit a SEPA Environmental Checklist under Chapter 43.21C RCW and Chapter 16.06 ACC. F. The city recognizes that the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 gives the Federal Communications Commission sole jurisdiction in the field of regulation based upon the environmental effects of electromagnetic radio frequency emissions and small wireless facilities that meet Federal Communications Commission standards will not be conditioned or denied on the basis of environmental effects of radio frequency or electromagnetic frequency impacts. Applicants for small wireless facilities will be required to provide the city information on the projected power density of the facility and compliance with the Federal Communications Commission requirements. (Ord. 6707 § 1 (Exh. A), 2018.) 20.14.040 Small wireless facility permit review process. The following provisions relate to applications for a small wireless facility permit: A. Federal Law. Review of the site locations proposed by the applicant will be governed by the provisions of 47 USC 253 and 47 USC 332 and applicable law. Applicants will be Page 406 of 465 6 of 46  treated in a competitively neutral and nondiscriminatory manner with other service providers whose facilities are similarly situated in terms of structure, placement, or cumulative impacts. B. Concealment. The city will permit small wireless facility deployment on existing or replacement poles or structures conforming to the city’s generally applicable pole design standards, the city’s engineering design and construction standards, the concealment element plan approved as part of the small wireless facilities permit(s), and consistent with the relevant franchise exhibit (if applicable). Small wireless facilities may not be expanded unless the expansion does not defeat the facility’s concealment elements. C. The director will review applications for small wireless facilities permits for consistency with relevant franchise exhibits, design standards, and applicable law. D. Small wireless facilities permits to install facilities will be processed within the time frames set by applicable federal regulations. E. The decision of the director to approve a small wireless facility permit will be final and is not subject to appeal under city code or further legislative review. (Ord. 6707 § 1 (Exh. A), 2018.) 20.14.050 Deviations. Any request for deviations from the approved small cell facilities design designated in the franchise, or any previously approved small wireless facility permit, will be considered a new small wireless facilities permit request. An applicant seeking approval of a deviation from an approved small wireless facilities permit will apply for a new small wireless facilities permit. (Ord. 6707 § 1 (Exh. A), 2018.) 20.14.060 Small wireless facility approvals and processes. Approval of a small wireless facility permit and/or other approval referenced in this chapter are conditioned on the following requirements: A. Satisfy applicable requirements, such as noise and light regulations. B. Comply with adopted design and concealment standards as provided by the city’s engineering design and construction standards. Page 407 of 465 7 of 46  C. Obtain the written approval of the owner of any pole or structure for the installation of its facilities on such pole or structure. Approval of a franchise under Chapter 20.04 ACC does not authorize attachment to city-owned poles or other structures. D. Unless specifically provided for in a franchise, obtain a lease or other applicable authorization from the city to use city-owned poles, ground space or infrastructure for the installation of any small wireless facility, or to locate any new ground-based structure, base station, or other attendant equipment on city owned facilities or property. E. Comply with all city construction standards and state and federal codes when operating in the public way and obtain a required permit to enter the public way for construction. F. If the applicant does not take action in good faith, the application will be considered abandoned after 180 days of non-action. (Ord. 6707 § 1 (Exh. A), 2018.) 20.14.070 Additional review procedures. Small wireless facilities in shorelines management zones or environmentally critical areas are subject to review as provided in Chapters 16.08 and/or 16.10 ACC. (Ord. 6707 § 1 (Exh. A), 2018.) 20.14.080 Compliance with federal processing limitations. Review of small wireless facilities permits will comply with the provisions of 47 CFR Part 1, subpart U, if applicable. Applications will be reviewed, completeness determined, and the time frame tolled as provided in this chapter and Chapter 20.04 ACC. (Ord. 6707 § 1 (Exh. A), 2018.) 20.14.090 Design standards. All small wireless facilities will be constructed or installed according to applicable Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), state and city regulations and standards, including the city of Auburn engineering design and construction standards. (Ord. 6707 § 1 (Exh. A), 2018.) Page 408 of 465 8 of 46  20.14.100 Noninterference. Wireless facilities of any kind will not interfere with any emergency, communication, or utility infrastructure systems of the city. A. If the city notifies service providers that their equipment is potentially interfering with public safety communications equipment, the providers will cooperate and coordinate with the city and among themselves to investigate and mitigate the interference, if any, utilizing the procedures set forth in the joint wireless industry – public safety “Best Practices Guide,” released by the FCC in February 2001, including the “Good Engineering Practices,” as may be amended or revised by the FCC from time to time. B. If any service provider or facility owner fails to cooperate with the city in complying with the owner’s obligations under this section or if the FCC makes a determination of radio frequency interference with the city communications equipment, the owner who fails to cooperate and/or the owner of the facility or facilities which caused the interference will be responsible, upon FCC determination of radio frequency interference, for reimbursing the city for all costs associated with ascertaining and resolving the interference, including but not limited to any engineering studies obtained by the city to determine the source of the interference. For the purposes of this subsection, failure to cooperate will include failure to initiate any response or action as described in the “Best Practices Guide” within 24 hours of the city’s notification. (Ord. 6707 § 1 (Exh. A), 2018.) 20.14.110 Facility removal. A small wireless facility will be removed: A. Within 180 days of the date the facility’s use is discontinued, it ceases to be operational, the permit is revoked, or, if the facility falls into disrepair and is not maintained, within 90 days of a notice from the city to effect repairs and maintenance to the satisfaction of the city. The owner and/or operator of a facility will notify the city upon the discontinued use of a particular facility. B. If the owner and/or operator fails to remove the facility as required, then the facility is a nuisance and subject to appropriate legal proceeding in accordance with Chapter 1.25 ACC. (Ord. 6707 § 1 (Exh. A), 2018.) Commented [KA2]: See previous comment re: interference. Page 409 of 465 9 of 46  Title 17 Land Adjustments and Divisions 17.14.080 Underground utilities. A. Consistent with ACC Titles 12 and 13 ACC and the city’s design and construction standardsEngineering Design and Construction Standards, all utility lines serving the subdivision, including but not limited to power, telephone and television cables, shall be installed underground. Adequate easements shall be provided for all such utility lines which will not be located within public right-of-way. Television conduit and miscellaneous hardware shall be installed according to the requirements of Chapter 13.3620.06 ACC. B. Whenever an intersection of an arterial and any other street is constructed or improved under the requirements of this title, and when the city engineer has determined that traffic signalization of such intersection will be needed in the future, the city engineer may require the installation, at the subdivider’s applicant’s expense, of underground conduit which will be necessary for and will facilitate such future signalization. (Ord. 6239 § 1, 2009; Ord. 5164 § 1, 1998; Ord. 4296 § 2, 1988. Formerly 17.12.240.) Page 410 of 465 10 of  Chapter 17.28 INFRASTRUCTURE CONDUIT [Repealed] Sections: 17.28.010 Infrastructure conduit in streets. 17.28.010 Infrastructure conduit in streets. In addition to the other requirements set forth in this title, any time street improvements or right-of-way improvements are to be provided in connection with development activity governed hereby, the city review process shall determine in consultation with public works, police, parks, arts, and recreation, planning and development departments, information services, and with the local fire authority, whether conduit at least three inches in diameter should be included therein, in which cases, if so required, the applicant shall construct said improvement in conformance with the public facility extension requirements of Chapter 13.40 ACC. (Ord. 6414 § 3, 2012.) Page 411 of 465 3 pf 46  Title 18 Zoning 18.02.040 Applicability. A. The provisions of this title shall apply to both public and private use of land within the corporate limits of the city. B. Hereafter, no use shall be conducted, and no building, structure and appurtenance shall be erected, relocated, remodeled, reconstructed, altered or enlarged unless in compliance with the provisions of this title, and then only after securing all permits and approvals required hereby. It shall be unlawful to build or use any building or structure or to use premises in the city for any purpose or use other than the uses listed as being permitted in the zone in which such building, land, or premises is located. C. Any building, structure or use lawfully existing at the time of passage of this title, although not in compliance herewith, may continue as provided in Chapter 18.54 ACC. D. No division of land shall occur unless in compliance with the provisions of this title and ACC Title 17 ACC, Land Adjustments and Divisions. E. This title is not intended to regulate work or facilities of any kind conducted in or on the public ways as defined in ACC 20.02.020.the erection, construction, or reconstruction of public streets, power poles, street lights, utility facilities, utility conveyance or storage systems, transmission lines, or other public uses necessary to support the general public welfare, carried on by the city, or agents of the city working under the appropriate contract or franchise. (Ord. 6245 § 2, 2009; Ord. 5026 § 1, 1997; Ord. 4773 § 1, 1995; Ord. 4229 § 2, 1987. Formerly 18.02.030.) Formatted: Highlight Page 412 of 465 4 of 46  18.04.912 Wireless communications - Definitions. “Wireless communications” means the provision of any personal wireless service, as defined in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and for the purposes of this title includes the following terms: A. “Antenna” means any devise used to transmit and/or receive radio or electromagnetic waves such as, but not limited to panel antennas, reflecting discs, microwave dishes, whip antennas, directional and non-directional antennas consisting of one or more elements, multiple antenna configurations, or other similar devices and configurations, and exterior apparatus designed for telephone, radio, or television communications through the sending and/or receiving of wireless communications signals.a device used in wireless communications which transmits and/or receives radio signals. Antennas include the following types: 1. Accessory: Antennas including, but not limited to, test mobile antennas and Global Positioning System (GPS) antennas which are less than 12 inches in height or width and do not directly provide personal wireless communication. 2. Directional or panel: An antenna or array of antennas designed to transmit a radio signal in a particular direction typically encompassing an arc of 120 degrees. Panel antennas, also called directional antennas, are typically flat, rectangular devices approximately six square feet in size. 3. Dish or parabolic: A bowl-shaped device for the reception and/or transmission of radio frequency communications signals in a specific directional pattern. 4. Whip, rod or omni-directional antenna: An antenna, tubular in shape, that transmits and receives signals throughout a 360-degree range. 5. Other: All other transmitting or receiving equipment not specifically described herein shall be regulated in conformity with the type of antenna defined herein which most closely resembles such equipment. B. “Antenna array” means one or more rods, panels, discs or similar devices attached to a support structure used for the transmission or reception of radio frequency signals. Page 413 of 465 5 of 46  CB. “Attached wireless communications facility (WCF)” means a wireless communication facility that is affixed to an existing structure other than a Tower. Examples of attached wireless communication facilities include antennas affixed to or erected upon existing buildings, water tanks, or other existing structures. an antenna array which is attached to an existing building or structure. C. “Base station” means the structure or equipment at a fixed location that enables wireless communications, licensed or authorized by the FCC, between user equipment and a communications network. By way of example, a building, ballfield structure or a utility pole outside of the public way, becomes a base station once wireless facilities are permitted and attached. The term does not encompass a wireless communication tower as defined in this title or any equipment associated with a wireless communication tower. D. “Camouflage”, “concealment”, or “camouflage design techniques” means that a wireless communication facility is camouflaged or utilizes camouflage design techniques, such as paint to match surroundings and use of nonreflective materials, when any measures are used in the design and siting of wireless communication facilities with the intent to minimize or eliminate the visual impact of such facilities to surrounding uses. For example, a wireless communication facility site utilizes camouflage design techniques when it (1) is integrated in an outdoor fixture such as a flagpole, or (2) uses a design which mimics and is consistent with the nearby natural or architectural features (such as an artificial tree), or (3) is incorporated into (including, without limitation, being attached to the exterior of such facilities and painted to match it) (such as a belvedere or a dormer), or replaces existing permitted facilities (including without limitation, freestanding light standards) so that the presence of the wireless communication facility is minimized or not readily apparent. The terms do not include fencing and landscape screening that is used to enhance visual compatibility at ground level ED. “Carrier” means a company providing wireless communication services, also referred to as a wireless service provider. EF. “Co-location” means: (1) mounting or installing a WCF on a pre-existing structure, and/or (2) modifying a structure for the purpose of mounting or installing a WCF on that structure. Provided that, for purposes of Eligible Facilities Requests, Deleted: A Page 414 of 465 6 of 46  “Co-location” means the mounting or installation of transmission equipment on an Page 415 of 465 7 of 46  Eligible Support Structure for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency signals for communications purposes. the use of a common WCF or site by two or more wireless license holders, or by one wireless license holder for more than one type of communications technology. G. “Eligible facilities request” (EFR) means any request for modification of an existing wireless communication tower or base station that was previously authorized by the local permitting jurisdiction and that does not substantially change, as defined in this Section, the physical dimensions of such wireless communication tower or base station from the original authorization involving: (1) co-location of new transmission equipment, (2) removal of transmission equipment, or (3) replacement of transmission equipment. H. “Eligible Support Structure” means an existing wireless communication tower or base station as defined in this title and that has proposed alterations that meet the standards of an eligible facilities request FI. “Equipment facility” means a structure used to contain ancillary equipment for a WCF which may include cabinets, shelters, an addition to an existing structure, pedestals and other similar structures. J. “Emergency wireless communication facility (EWCF)” means any structure not entirely within an enclosed building or vehicle, including antennas, guy wires, microwave dishes or horns, structures or towers to support receiving and/or transmitting devices, accessory buildings, i.e., equipment storage buildings, energy power generating housing, and the leased or owned property surrounding the wireless communication tower and any access or utility easements, that is used for the transmission or reception of electromagnetic waves for emergency communication purposes, operated by a local public agency responsible for providing emergency services K. “Existing” means a constructed tower or base station if it has been reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or siting process, or under another State or local regulatory review process, provided that a tower that has not been reviewed and approved because it was not in a zoned area when it was built, but was lawfully constructed, is existing for purposes of this definition. Formatted: Indent: Left: 0", Right: 0", Space Before: 0 pt, Line spacing: single Page 416 of 465 GL. “Microcells” are typically located in and exclusively benefit residential neighborhoods. Microcells consist of an antenna that is either: (1) a dish or parabolic antenna that is no more than four feet in height and with an area of not more than 580 square inches; or (2) a tubular antenna that is no more than four inches in diameter and no more than six feet in height; or (3) one or more panel antennas that are no more than six feet in height, and their width or depth is no more than six inches and the aggregate area of such panel antenna(s) would not exceed 580 square inches that would be visible from any one viewpoint; or (4) similar antennas that are of comparable size and shape. M. “Monopole” means a single, freestanding pole-type structure supporting one or more antennas. HN. “Separation” means minimum distance required by city regulation between the base of Towersprimary support structures. O. “Site” for purposes of this chapter means for wireless communication towers other than wireless communication towers in the public way, the current boundaries of the leased or owned property surrounding the wireless communication tower and any access or utility easements currently related to the site, and, for eligible support structures, is further restricted to that area in proximity to the structure and to other transmission equipment already existing on the ground. P. “Small wireless facilities” shall mean the definition contained in Chapter 20.14 ACC. Q. “Substantial change” for purposes of this chapter means a modification that alters the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure if, after the modification, the structure meets any of the following criteria: 1. For towers other than towers in the public rights of way, it increases the height of the tower by more than ten percent or by the height of one additional antenna array with separation from the top of nearest existing antenna to the bottom of the new antenna, not to exceed twenty feet, whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it increases the height of the structure by more than 10% or more than ten feet, whichever is greater; 2. For towers other than towers in the public rights of way, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the Commented [KA3]: This term is used to describe largely outdated equipment types. Flagged for discussion. Commented [KA4]: This may need to change to reflect the new FCC rulemaking. Commented [KA5]: Suggested to align with new 6409 FCC Order 19-250 clarifying this section and to accurately quote existing language. Formatted: Normal, Indent: Left: 0.16", No bullets or numbering Formatted: Font: 12 pt, Font color: Custom Color(RGB(44,150,210)) Formatted: Font: 12 pt, Font color: Custom Color(RGB(44,150,210)) Formatted: Font: 12 pt, Font color: Custom Color(RGB(44,150,210)) Formatted: Font: 12 pt, Font color: Custom Color(RGB(44,150,210)) Formatted: Font: 12 pt, Font color: Custom Color(RGB(44,150,210)) Formatted: Font: 12 pt, Underline color: Custom Color(RGB(44,150,210)), Font color: Custom Color(RGB(44,150,210)) Page 417 of 465 7 of 45  Page 418 of 465 8 of 46      tower more than twenty feet, or more than the width of the tower structure at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the structure that would protrude from the edge of the structure by more than six feet; 3. For any eligible support structure, it involves installation of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, but not to exceed four cabinets per installation; or, for base stations, it involves installation of any new equipment cabinets on the ground if there are no preexisting ground cabinets associated with the structure, or else involves installation of ground cabinets that are more than ten percent larger in height or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the structure; 4. It entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site as that term is defined in this section; 5. It would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support structure; or 6. It does not comply with conditions associated with the original approval of the construction or modification of the eligible support structure or base station equipment, unless noncompliance is only in a manner that would exceed the thresholds identified in subsections (1) through (4) of this definition. For purposes of determining whether a substantial change exists, changes in height are measured from the original support structure as it existed at the time the first Eligible Facilities Request was approved for that structure in cases where facilities are or will be separated horizontally, in other circumstances, changes in height are measured from the dimensions of the wireless communication tower or base station, inclusive of originally approved appurtenances and any modifications that were approved prior to February 22, 2012. IR. “Support structure” means a structure designed to support WCFs including, but not limited to, towers, alternative tower structures, replacement poles, and other freestanding self-supporting pole structures.the structure to which the antenna and other necessary associated hardware are attached. Support structures include but are not limited to the following: Formatted: Underline, Underline color: Custom Color(RGB(44,150,210)), Font color: Custom Color(RGB(44,150,210)) Page 419 of 465 9 of 46  1. Lattice tower: A structure of varying height that consists of a network of crossed metal braces forming a tower which is usually triangular or square in cross section. To be considered a primary support structure. 2. Monopole: A structure of varying height consisting of a single spire sunk into the ground and/or attached to a foundation. To be considered a primary support structure. 3. Other structures: This may include existing buildings, water towers, athletic field light poles, or other similar structures. To be considered a secondary support structure. S. “Toll” and “Tolling” means to delay, suspend or hold off on the imposition of a deadline, statute of limitations or time limit. T. “Tower” means any structure that is designed and constructed primarily for the purpose of supporting one or more antennas for telephone, radio, and similar communication purposes, including self-supporting lattice towers, guyed towers, or monopole towers. The term includes radio and television transmission towers, microwave towers, common-carrier towers, cellular telephone towers, alternative tower structures, and the like. The term includes the structure and any support thereto. U. “Wireless communications” means the provision of any personal wireless service, as defined in the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as amended, or wireless information services provided to the public or to such classes of users as to be effectively available directly to the public via licensed or unlicensed frequencies; or wireless utility monitoring and control services. JV. “Wireless communications facility (WCF)” means a facility used to provide personal wireless services as defined at 47 U.S.C. Section 332 (c)(7)(C); or wireless information services provided to the public or to such classes of users as to be effectively available directly to the public via licensed or unlicensed frequencies; or wireless utility monitoring and control services. A WCF does not include a facility entirely enclosed within a permitted building where the installation does not require a modification of the exterior of the building; nor does it include an accessory wireless communications antenna, used for serving that building only and that is otherwise Commented [KA6]: Recommend using either the plural or singular of this term throughout the document. It currently has both. Page 420 of 465 10 of 46  permitted under other provisions of the ACC. A WCF includes an antenna or antennas, including without limitation, direction, omni-directional and parabolic antennas, support equipment, alternative tower structures, and wireless communication towers. It does not include the support structure to which the WCF or its components are attached if the use of such structures for WCFs is not the primary use. The term does not include mobile transmitting devices used by wireless service subscribers, such as vehicle or hand-held radios or telephones and their associated transmitting antennas, nor does it include other facilities specifically exempted from the coverage of this titleany nonstaffed facility for the transmission and/or reception of wireless telecommunications services, typically consisting of an antenna array, an equipment facility and/or a support structure. K. “Emergency wireless communication facility (EWCF)” means a wireless communications facility for the purpose of an emergency communication system operated by a local public agency responsible for providing emergency services. (Ord. 6716 § 1 (Exh. A), 2019; Ord. 6245 § 3, 2009; Ord. 5777 § 1, 2003; Ord. 5645 § 1, 2002; Ord. 5020 § 1, 1997.) Page 421 of 465 11 of 46  18.07 Residential Zones 18.07.020 Uses. Table 18.07.020. Permitted Use Table – Residential ZonesZoning Designations P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 A. Residential Uses. Accessory dwelling units P P P P X1 X1 X1 Accessory use, residential P P P P P P P Adult family home P P P P P P P Bed and breakfast P P P P P P P Communal residence four or less individuals P P P P P P P Duplexes; provided, that minimum lot size of zoning designation is met and subject to compliance with Chapter 18.25 ACC (Infill Residential Development Standards) X X A P P P X Foster care homes P P P P P P P Group residence facilities (7 or more residents) X X X X C C C Group residence facilities (6 or fewer residents) P P P P P P P Keeping of animals4 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 Multiple-family dwellings X X X X A P P Neighborhood recreational buildings and facilities owned and managed by A6 A6 A6 A6 A6 P P Page 422 of 465 12 of 46  P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 the neighborhood homeowners’ association Use as dwelling units of (1) recreational vehicles that are not part of an approved recreational vehicle park, (2) boats, (3) automobiles, and (4) other vehicles X X X X X X X Renting of rooms, for lodging purposes only, to accommodate not more than two persons in addition to the family or owner occupied unit8 P P P P P P P Residential care facilities including but not limited to assisted living facilities, convalescent homes, continuing care retirement facilities P P X X A P P Single-family detached dwellings, new P P P P P P X Supportive housing, subject to the provisions of ACC 18.31.160 X X X X X P P Swimming pools, tennis courts and similar outdoor recreation uses only accessory to residential or park uses P P P P P P P Townhouses (attached) X X X X P P P B. Commercial Uses. Commercial horse riding and bridle trails A X X X X X X Commercial retail, included as part of mixed-use development and not a X X X X A A A Page 423 of 465 13 of 46  P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 home occupation in compliance with Chapter 18.60 ACC Daycare, limited to a mini daycare center. Daycare center, preschool or nursery school may also be permitted but must be located on an arterial X A A A A A A Home-based daycare as regulated by RCW 35.63.185 and through receipt of approved city business license P P P P P P P Home occupations subject to compliance with Chapter 18.60 ACC P P P P P P P Marijuana cooperative X X X X X X X Marijuana processor X X X X X X X Marijuana producer X X X X X X X Marijuana related business X X X X X X X Marijuana researcher X X X X X X X Marijuana retailer X X X X X X X Marijuana transporter business X X X X X X X Mixed-use development3 X X X X P P P Nursing homes X X X X C C C Private country clubs and golf courses, excluding driving ranges X X C C C X X Privately owned and operated parks and playgrounds and not homeowners’ association-owned recreational area X A A A A P P Page 424 of 465 14 of 46  P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 Professional offices, included as part of mixed-use development and not a home occupation in compliance with Chapter 18.60 ACC X X X X A A A C. Resource Uses. Agricultural enterprise:7 When 50 percent, or more, of the total site area is dedicated to active agricultural production during the growing season, and with 52 or less special events per calendar year A7 X X X X X X When less than 50 percent of the total site area is dedicated to active agricultural production during the growing season, or with more than 52 special events per calendar year C7 X X X X X X Agricultural type uses are permitted provided they are incidental and secondary to the single-family use: Agricultural crops and open field growing (commercial) P X X X X X X Barns, silos and related structures P X X X X X X Commercial greenhouses P X X X X X X Pasturing and grazing4 P X X X X X X Public and private stables4 P X X X X X X Page 425 of 465 15 of 46  P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 Roadside stands, for the sale of agricultural products raised on the premises. The stand cannot exceed 300 square feet in area and must meet the applicable setback requirements P X X X X X X Fish hatcheries C X X X X X X D. Government, Institutional, and Utility Uses. Civic, social and fraternal clubs X X X X A A A Government facilities A A A A A A A Hospitals (except animal hospitals) X X X X X C C Municipal parks and playgrounds A P P P P P P Museums X X X X A A A Religious institutions, less than one acre lot size A A A A A A A Religious institutions, one acre or larger lot size C C C C C C C Transmitting towers C C C C C C C Type 1-D wireless communication facility (see ACC 18.04.912(VJ) and ACC 18.31.100) P P P P P P P Eligible facilities request (EFR) (Wireless communication facility – See ACC 18.04.912(G)) P P P P P P P Utility facilities and substations C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 C5 Formatted: Strikethrough Commented [KA7]: Verizon requests that larger facilities be permitted with a CUP in R zones on lots with nonresidential uses. Page 426 of 465 16 of 46  P = Permitted A = Administrative C = Conditional Use X = Not Permitted Land Uses Zoning Designations RC R-1 R-5 R-7 R-10 R-16 R-20 Small wireless facilities (ACC 18.04.912(P)) P P P P P P P 1 An accessory dwelling unit may be permitted with an existing single-family residence pursuant to ACC 18.31.120. 2 Please see the supplemental development standards for animals in ACC 18.31.220. 3 Individual uses that make up a mixed-use development must be permitted within the zone. If a use making up part of a mixed-use development requires an administrative or conditional use permit, the individual use must apply for and receive the administrative or conditional use approval, as applicable. 4 Proximity of pasture or livestock roaming area to wells, surface waters, and aquifer recharge zones is regulated by the King or Pierce County board of health, and property owners shall comply with the provisions of the board of health code. 5 Excludes all public and private utility facilities addressed under ACC 18.02.040(E). 6 Administrative use permit not required when approved as part of a subdivision or binding site plan. 7 Agricultural enterprise uses are subject to supplemental development standards under ACC 18.31.210, Agricultural enterprises development standards. 8 An owner occupant that rents to more than two persons but no more than four persons is required to obtain a city of Auburn rental housing business license and shall meet the standards of the International Property Maintenance Code. (Ord. 6642 § 4, 2017; Ord. 6600 § 9, 2016; Ord. 6565 § 2, 2015; Ord. 6560 § 9, 2015; Ord. 6477 § 8, 2013; Ord. 6369 § 2, 2011; Ord. 6363 § 3, 2011; Ord. 6269 § 3, 2009; Ord. 6245 § 5, 2009.) Page 427 of 465 17 of 46  18.23 Commercial and Industrial Zones 18.23.030 Uses. A. General Permit Requirements. Table 18.23.030 identifies the uses of land allowed in each commercial and industrial zone and the land use approvalprocess required to establish each use. B. Requirements for Certain Specific Land Uses. Where the last column in Table 18.23.030 (“Standards for Specific Land Uses”) includes a reference to a code section number, the referenced section determines other requirements and standards applicable to the use regardless of whether it is permitted outright or requires an administrative or conditional use permit. Table 18.23.030. Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone, Commercial and Industrial Zones. PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 INDUSTRIAL, MANUFACTURING AND PROCESSING, WHOLESALING Building contractor, light X X X P X P X P Building contractor, heavy X X X X X A X P Manufacturing, assembling and packaging – Light intensity X X X P X P P P ACC 18.31.180 Page 428 of 465 18 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Manufacturing, assembling and packaging – Medium intensity X X X A X P A P ACC 18.31.180 Manufacturing, assembling and packaging – Heavy intensity X X X X X X X A ACC 18.31.180 Marijuana processor X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana producer X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana researcher X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana retailer X X X C X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Marijuana transporter business X X X X X C C C Chapter 18.59 ACC Outdoor storage, incidental to principal permitted use on property X X X P X P P P ACC 18.57.020(A) Storage – Personal household storage facility (mini-storage) X P X P X P X P ACC 18.57.020(B) Page 429 of 465 19 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Warehousing and distribution X X X X X P P C ACC 18.57.020(C) Warehousing and distribution, bonded and located within a designated foreign trade zone X X X P X P P P Wholesaling with on- site retail as an incidental use (coffee, bakery, e.g.) X X X P X P P P RECREATION, EDUCATION AND PUBLIC ASSEMBLY USES Commercial recreation facility, indoor X P P P P P P A Commercial recreation facility, outdoor X X X A A P A A ACC 18.57.025(A) Conference/convention facility X X A A X A X X Library, museum X A A A X A P X Meeting facility, public or private A P P P X A P A Page 430 of 465 20 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Movie theater, except drive-in X P P P P X X X Private school – Specialized education/training (for profit) A A P P P P P P Religious institutions, lot size less than one acre A P P P A A A A Religious institutions, lot size more than one acre C P P P A A A A Sexually oriented businesses X X X P X P X P Chapter 18.74 ACC Sports and entertainment assembly facility X X A A X A X A Studio – Art, dance, martial arts, music, etc. P P P P P P A A RESIDENTIAL Caretaker apartment X P P P X P P P Live/work unit X X P P P P P X Page 431 of 465 21 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Work/live unit X P P P P P P X Marijuana cooperative X X X X X X X X Multiple-family dwellings as part of a mixed-use development2 X X P P P P P X ACC 18.57.030 Multiple-family dwellings, stand-alone X X X X X X X X Nursing home, assisted living facility X P P P C X X X Senior housing2 X X A A X X X X RETAIL Building and landscape materials sales X X X P X P X P ACC 18.57.035(A) Construction and heavy equipment sales and rental X X X X X A X P Convenience store A A P P X P P P Drive-through espresso stands A A A P A P A A Page 432 of 465 22 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Drive-through facility, including banks and restaurants A A A P P P X P ACC 18.52.040 Entertainment, commercial X A P P X A X A Groceries, specialty food stores P P P P P P P X ACC 18.57.035(B) Nursery X X X P A P X P ACC 18.57.035(C) Outdoor displays and sales associated with a permitted use (auto/vehicle sales not included in this category) P P P P P P P P ACC 18.57.035(D) Restaurant, cafe, coffee shop P P P P P P P P Retail Community retail establishment A P P P P P X P Neighborhood retail establishment P P P P P P X P Page 433 of 465 23 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Regional retail establishment X X X P P P X A Tasting room P P P P P P P P Tavern P P X P P P X A Wine production facility, small craft distillery, small craft brewery A P P P P P P P SERVICES Animal daycare (excluding kennels and animal boarding) A A A P A P X P ACC 18.57.040(A) Animal sales and services (excluding kennels and veterinary clinics) P P P P P P X P ACC 18.57.040(B) Banking and related financial institutions, excluding drive- through facilities P P P P P P P P Catering service P P P P A P A P Page 434 of 465 24 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Daycare, including mini daycare, daycare center, preschools or nursery schools A P P P P P P X Dry cleaning and laundry service (personal) P P P P P P P P Equipment rental and leasing X X X P X P X P Kennel, animal boarding X X X A X A X A ACC 18.57.040(C) Government facilities; this excludes offices and related uses that are permitted outright A A A A A A A A Hospital X P P P X P X P Lodging – Hotel or motel X P P P P A P A Medical – Dental clinic P P P P P P X X Mortuary, funeral home, crematorium A P X P X P X X Page 435 of 465 25 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Personal service shops P P P P P P X X Pharmacies P P P P P X X X Print and copy shop P P P P P P X X Printing and publishing (of books, newspaper and other printed matter) X A P P P P P P Professional offices P P P P P P P P Repair service – Equipment, appliances X A P P P P X P ACC 18.57.040(D) Veterinary clinic, animal hospital A P P P P P X X Youth community support facility X P X X X X X X ACC 18.57.040(E) TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS AND INFRASTRUCTURE Ambulance, taxi, and specialized transportation facility X X X A X P X P Broadcasting studio X P X P X P X P Heliport X X X C X C X C Page 436 of 465 26 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Motor freight terminal1 X X X X X X X X See Footnote No. 1 Parking facility, public or commercial, surface X P P P P P P X Parking facility, public or commercial, structured X P P P P P P X Towing storage yard X X X X X A X P ACC 18.57.045(A) Utility transmission or distribution line or substation A A A A A A A A Wireless communication facility (WCF) (See ACC 18.04.912(V) –* –* –* –* –* –* –* –* ACC 18.04.912, *See ACC 18.31.100 for use regulations and zoning development standards. Eligible facilities request (EFR) (Wireless communication facility (See ACC 18.04.912(G)) P P P P P P P P Page 437 of 465 27 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 Small wireless facilities (ACC 18.04.912(P)) P P P P P P P P VEHICLE SALES AND SERVICES Automobile washes (automatic, full or self- service) X A X P P P X P ACC 18.57.050(A) Auto parts sales with installation services X A A P P P X P Auto/vehicle sales and rental X A X P X P X P ACC 18.57.050(B) Fueling station X A A P P P X P ACC 18.57.050(C) Mobile home, boat, or RV sales X X X P X P X P Vehicle services – Repair/body work X X A P X P X P ACC 18.57.050(D) OTHER Any commercial use abutting a residential zone which has hours of operation outside of the following: Sunday: 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. A A A A A A A A Page 438 of 465 28 of 46  PERMITTED, ADMINISTRATIVE, CONDITIONAL AND PROHIBITED USES BY ZONE P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designation Standards for Specific Land Uses C-N C-1 C-2 C-3 C-4 M-1 EP M-2 or Monday – Saturday: 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Other uses may be permitted by the planning director or designee if the use is determined to be consistent with the intent of the zone and is of the same general character of the uses permitted. See ACC 18.02.120(C)(6), Unclassified Uses. P P P P P P P P 1 Any motor freight terminal, as defined by ACC 18.04.635, in existence as of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section, is an outright permitted use in the M-1 and M-2 zones. Any maintenance, alterations and additions to an existing motor freight terminal which are consistent with ACC 18.23.040, Development standards, are allowed. 2 Any mixed-use development or senior housing project vested prior to Resolution No. 5187 (December 7, 2015) is an outright permitted use in the C-1 zone. Subsequently, if a nonresidential use within a vested mixed-use development changes, then the nonresidential use shall maintain a minimum of 10 percent of the cumulative building ground floor square footage consisting of the uses permitted Page 439 of 465 29 of 46  outright, administratively, or conditionally, listed under “Recreation, Education, and Public Assembly,” “Retail,” or “Services” of the C-1 zone. (Ord. 6728 § 3 (Exh. C), 2019; Ord. 6688 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2018; Ord. 6644 § 2, 2017; Ord. 6642 § 9, 2017; Ord. 6508 § 1, 2014; Ord. 6433 § 26, 2012.) Page 440 of 465 30 of 46  18.31 Supplemental Development Standards 18.31.100 Wireless communications facilities siting standards. The following siting standards are intended to guide the location and development of wireless communications facilities (WCF as defined by ACC 18.04.912(V) but not including microcells and small wireless facilities) on properties regulated under this title. The siting of microcells shall be in accordance with siting of microcells and small wireless facilities found in ACC 18.31.110. A. Types of Wireless Communication Facilities (WCFs). For the purposes of determining in which zones wireless communications facilities are to be permitted, and which land use approval process applies, they will be classified pursuant to the following types. Refer to the table in subsection L of this section to determine which zones allow for the following types of facilities: 1. Type 1. Type 1 are new antennas erected on existing buildings or nonresidential structures.is a new wireless communication facility (WCF) that is affixed to an existing structure other than a “wireless communication support structure” (also known as, an “Attached wireless communication facility”). Examples of attached wireless communications facilities include antennas affixed to or erected upon existing buildings, water tanks, or other existing structures. There are four separate Type 1 categories described as follows: a. 1-A. The combined height of the antenna WCF together with the height of the existing building structure cannot be 25 percent greater than the existing building structure or exceed the height limitation of the zone in which the building structure is located, whichever is greater. b. 1-B. The combined height of the antenna WCF together with the height of the existing building structure cannot be 50 percent greater than the existing building structure or exceed the height limitation of the zone in which the building structure is located. c. 1-C. The combined height of the antenna WCF together with the height of the existing building structure is 50 percent greater than the existing building structure or exceeds the height limitation of the zone in which the building structure is located. The height limitation of the zone can only be exceeded Commented [KA8]: Having such granular classifications for WCF types creates a long and overly complicated code. Verizon suggests Page 441 of 465 31 of 46  by 25 percent. Page 442 of 465 32 of 46  d. 1-D. Antenna The WCF is located on existing non-habitable structure such as water towers, athletic field light poles, or similar public utility infrastructure not located within a public street right-of-way. The height limitation of the WCF will be 10 percent of the existing structure height, but may be increased to a maximum of 20 percent with an administrative use permit and may be increased to a maximum of 30 percent with a conditional use permit. The height limitation of the zone may be exceeded relative to the above provisions allowed for a 1-D facility. Any increases in height above the limits of the zoning district, as permitted for Type1 facilities must include concealment techniques approved by the city. 2. Type 2. Type 2 are new antennas equipment erected on existing (primary) support structurestowers that have previous city approvals. There are two separate Type 2 categories described as follows: a. 2-A. Any request for modification of an existing wireless communication tower or base station that was previously authorized by the local permitting jurisdiction and that would exceed a “Substantial change”, and the combined height of the WCF and structure cannot be 20 percent greater than the existing structure and Must meet height requirements of previous approval and is limited to 50 percent total (cumulative) expansion of equipment area. b. 2-B. Any request for modification of an existing wireless communication tower or base station that was previously authorized by the local permitting jurisdiction and that that would exceed a “Substantial change”, and the combined height of the WCF and structure cannot be 50 percent greater than the existing structure and allow for more than 50 percent (cumulative) expansion of equipment area.Has greater height requirements than previous approval and allows for more than a 50 percent expansion of the equipment area. Any increases in height above the limits of a particular zone, as permitted for Type 2 facilities must include concealment techniques approved by the city. 3. Type 3. Type 3 is the erection of a new (primary) support structures “Tower”. Page 443 of 465 33 of 46  There are three separate Type 3 categories described as follows: Page 444 of 465 34 of 46  a. 3-A. Monopoles “Towers” that are 75 feet or less in height. b. 3-B. Monopoles “Towers” that are more than 75 feet in height or lattice towers of any height. c. 3-C. Monopoles or lattice towers “Towers” that meet the definition of an EWCF Emergency wireless communication facility (EWCF) and are 185 feet or less in structure height. 4. Type 4. Type 4 are new antennas erected on existing EWCF (primary) support structures that have previous city approvals. There is one Type 4 category, which is described as follows: a. 4-A. Mounting of antennas cannot exceed the following thresholds:1 i. Increase the height of an existing primary support structure by 10 percent, or 20 feet (whichever is less). ii. Add an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the outside edge of the tower more than 20 feet. iii. Install more than four ancillary equipment facilities. 1 This section is intended to be interpreted consistent with 47 CFR 1.40001, as amended. B. Separation between Facilities. 1. New, Freestanding Primary Support StructuresTowers. a. The minimum separation, i.e., distance, between a proposed monopole tower (that is 75 feet or less in height) and any other existing primary support structuretower, of any height, shall be the height of the proposed monopoletower, including antenna, multiplied by a factor of 10. b. The minimum separation, i.e., distance, between a proposed monopole tower (that is more than 75 feet in height, or lattice towers of any height) and any other existing primary support structuretower, of any height, shall be the Commented [KA9]: What is the rationale for this requirement? Page 445 of 465 35 of 46  height of the proposed monopoletower, including antenna, multiplied by a factor of 20. c. The Community Development director may exempt an applicant from these separation requirements if (1) the applicant demonstrates through technical network documentation that the minimum separation requirement cannot be satisfied for technical reasons, and failure to approve the exemption would be an effective prohibition of the applicant being able to provide wireless communications, or (2) the director determines, when considering the surrounding topography; the nature of adjacent uses and nearby properties; and, the height of existing structures in the vicinity, that placement of a WCF at a distance less than the minimum separation from another facility will reduce visibility and reduce visual clutter to a greater extent. 2. The distance between primary support structurestowers shall be measured by following a straight line, without regard to intervening buildings, from the base of one support structuretower to the base of the other supportstructuretower(s). 3. A primary support structuretower would be considered “existing” if it was reviewed, approved, and lawfully constructed in accordance with all requirements of applicable law as of the time it was built. For example, a tower that exists as a legal, non-conforming use and was lawfully constructed is existing. It shall be the applicant’s responsibility to provide evidence of lawful construction. Subsequent city permitted modifications of a tower that qualify as an Eligible Facilities Request and do not amount to a “Substantial Change”, do not make an existing tower non-conforming.a conditional use permit or administrative use permit has been issued and is still valid for sites which have not been built upon. C. Co-Location Requirements. 1. For monopoles towers that are more than 75 feet in height and lattice towers of any height (Type 3-B facilities), the owner of the property tower shall execute and provide evidence of a nonexclusive lease with the carrier underlying property owner, if the property owner is different, that allows for other carriers to place Page 446 of 465 antennas and equipment on the structure unless specific approval not to is provided in accordance with No. 3 below. 2. Any application for a Type 3-B or 3-C facility Towers that are more than 75 feet in height or lattice towers of any height or tower shall include technical justification or other reasons that an existing Type 3-B or 3-C facilityWCF with a nonexclusive lease could not be used instead of constructing a new tower. 3. New WCFs shall be designed and constructed to allow the facility to accommodate WCFs from at least two (2) carriers on the same WCF. No property owner or carrier shall unreasonably exclude another carrier from using the same facility or location. Design and construction for co-location shall not be required when it would materially compromise the camouflage design intent of the WCF, or when, in the reasonable discretion of the Community Development director, such construction is not technically feasible based upon construction, engineering and design standards of the industry, or based upon evidence provided, a site designed for co-location will not be commercially viable. An applicant, owner, or operator seeking Community Development director approval to waive the co- location requirements described herein shall provide evidence explaining why co- location is not possible at a particular facility or site. D. Height. 1. Unless otherwise provided for, the height of any primary support structure and/or antennatower with appurtenances shall not exceed the minimum needed to achieve the network objective and/ or future collocation. 2. The maximum height of any primary support structuretower shall not exceed 120 feet except as an eligible facility request. 3. There shall be no variances allowed to the height limitations. 4. The carrier applicant shall provide evidence that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has approved the location of a primary supportstructureand any future increases in height or other modifications that would otherwise be permissible as an eligible facilities request (EFR) for any tower relative to the Auburn Municipal Airport. 34 of 46  Commented [KA10]: Space on existing towers or structures is often not available to lease. Formatted: Strikethrough Deleted: height limitations of the zone. Commented [KA11]: Towers and antennas must clear the surrounding clutter to propagate signal effectively. Presumably, the structures nearby are built to zone height which would materially inhibit the ability to provide service with a tower of the same height. This would also preclude collocation in most circumstances. Formatted: Strikethrough Commented [KA12]: The city needs a deviation process separate from the typical variance criteria, that allows relief from standards, including height, that would materially inhibit the ability to provide service. Formatted: Strikethrough Formatted: Strikethrough Commented [KA13]: It is not possible to predict what modifications may be made in the future when a tower is built. Page 447 of 465 35 of 46      5. Unless otherwise restricted by this section, building- or structure-mounted antennas may extend a maximum of 15 feet above the maximum height permitted for structures within the zone except as an eligible facilityrequest. 6. Antennas that are mounted on structures that do not otherwise have a height restriction may be allowed to increase the overall height of the structure by no more than 10 percent of the height of the structure unless additional approvals are obtained except as an eligible facility request. E. Setbacks. 1. All equipment shelters, cabinets, support structures or other above-ground facilities shall meet the setback requirements of the zone in which located except as follows. All equipment shelters, cabinets, or other above-ground facilities used to support primary support structurestowers shall be set back the same distance required of the primary support structuretower. All equipment shelters, cabinets, or other above-ground facilities within a nonresidential zone shall be set back a minimum of 50 feet from any adjacent R residential zone. 2. The minimum distance from any primary support structuretower, of any height, to any residentially zoned parcel of property, including mixed use zones that include residential uses shall be a distance equal to the overall height of the primary support structuretower (including antennas), or the highest engineered breakpoint in the support structure. multiplied by a factor of two. 3. Where possibletechnically feasible, roof-mounted antennas and equipment shelters and/or cabinets are to be placed towards the center of the building, or away from public views. Equipment shelters and/or cabinets shall be screened by a parapet or similar architectural feature. F. Fencing and Landscaping. 1. Fencing. Fencing is required to enclose all above-ground support equipment that is associated with primary support structurestowers. Fencing will be 100 percent sight-obscuring, as defined in ACC 18.31.020(C)(2), if visible from a public right-of-way or from a less intense zone. Equipment shelters and/or cabinets shall be enclosed by fencing a minimum of six feet in height. Fencing Commented [KA14]: These provisions are too onerous. The equipment cabinet often needs to be placed where it can be accessed from a road or driveway. If a WCF is on a property in a residential zone, as allowed, that has a nonresidential use, like a church, the 50 foot setback from a residential zone cannot be achieved. Formatted: Strikethrough Commented [KA15]: There is no recognized safety reason for a 2 to 1 setback for the tower. A tower can be engineered for the upper portion to fold over on itself in the event of extreme weather or stress, rather than fall its full elngth. Page 448 of 465 36 of 46  shall meet the sight distance requirements of the city design and construction standardsEngineering Design and Construction Standards. 2. Landscaping. a. Where above-ground support equipment is visible from a public right-of- way, a minimum width of five feet of Type II landscaping as defined in ACC 18.50.040 will be provided on the exterior of the enclosing fence in order to effectively screen the equipment from the public right-of-way. The landscaping shall consist of evergreen and deciduous trees with no more than 50 percent being deciduous, and shrubs and groundcover shall be provided. Landscaping shall meet the sight distance requirements of the city design and construction standardsEngineering Design and Construction Standards. b. Where facilities are visible from adjacent residential or mixed use zoning districtsuses, a minimum width of five feet of Type I landscaping as defined in ACC 18.50.040 will be provided on the exterior of the enclosing fence in order to effectively screen the equipment from the adjacent residential uses. The landscaping shall consist of evergreen trees or tall shrubs, a minimum of six feet in height at planting which will provide a 100 percent sight-obscuring screen within three years from the time of planting; or a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees with no more than 30% being deciduous, backed with a 100 percent sight-obscuring fence, as defined in ACC 18.31.020(C)(2), with shrubs and groundcover provided. c. Existing mature tree growth and natural landforms on the site shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. Existing on-site vegetationmay be used to meet the landscape requirements if approved by the planning Community Development director. G. Aesthetics. 1. Camouflage and Concealment, Design Techniques. All WCFs and any transmission equipment shall, to the extent technically feasible, use camouflage and concealment design techniques including, but not limited to the use of materials, colors, textures, screening, undergrounding, or other design options Formatted: Strikethrough Commented [KA16]: This is not a feasible solution for sensitive radio equipment in a rainy climate. Page 449 of 465 37 of 46  that will blend the components of the WCF and the WCF to the surrounding natural setting and/or built environment. Design, materials, and colors of WCFs shall be compatible with the surrounding environment. Designs shall be compatible with structures and vegetation located on the site and parcel and on adjacent parcels. a. At a minimum, all tower-mounted WCF equipment shall be colored to match the tower color. b. Camouflage and concealment design may be of heightened importance where findings of particular sensitivity are made (e.g., proximity to historic or aesthetically significant structures and/or natural or community features). Should the Community Development director determine that WCFs are located in areas of high visibility, they shall (where possible) be designed (including but not limited to camouflaged, placed underground, depressed, or located behind earth berms) to minimize aesthetic impacts at the request of the Community Development director. c. The camouflage and concealment design may include the use of alternative tower structures should the Community Development director determine that such design meets the intent of this section and the community is better served. d. All WCFs, shall be constructed out of or finished with non-reflective materials (visible exterior surfaces only). 21. In order to minimize any potential negative aesthetic impacts from new primary support structurestowers including protecting views to and from residential neighborhoods, mitigation may be required to blend the facilities in with the adjacent development or environsnatural setting and/or built environment. Typical solutions for the support structurecamouflage and concealment design might include: an extension of the building, a component of a sign structure, disguising the facility as a tree, planting of tall trees, moving the location of the facility, painting or texturing the facility, etc. WCFs shall be additionally sited in a manner that is sensitive to the proximity of the facility to residential structures. When placed near a residential or mixed use Commented [KA17]: How are these defined? Page 450 of 465 38 of 46  zoned property, the WCF shall be placed, to the extent feasible, adjacent to the common side yard property line between adjoining residential properties, such that the WCF minimizes visual impacts equitably among adjacent properties. In the case of a corner lot, the WCF may be placed adjacent to the common side yard property line between adjoining residential or mixed use zoned properties, or on the corner formed by two intersecting streets. If these requirements are not reasonably feasible from a construction, engineering, or design perspective, the applicant may submit a written statement to the Community Development director requesting the WCF be exempt from these requirements using the procedure for an administrative waiver elsewhere is this chapter. 32. Building- or roof-mounted antennas will be painted or textured to blend with the adjacent surfaces. 43. No lettering, symbols, images or trademarks large enough to be legible to occupants of vehicular traffic on any adjacent street shall be placed on or affixed to any part of the WCF, unless required by the FCC or FAA. 54. Except as specifically required by the FAA (but must be approved by the city), freestanding primary support structurestowers shall be painted a color that best allows them to blend into the surroundings. The use of grays, blues and greens might be appropriate; however, each application shall be evaluated individually. 6. Camouflage and concealment Design Standards for Accessory Equipment and Transmission Equipment. Accessory equipment and transmission equipment for all WCFs shall meet the following requirements: a. All transmission equipment and accessory equipment shall be grouped as closely together as technically possible. b. Transmission equipment and accessory equipment shall be located out of sight whenever possible by locating within equipment enclosures. Where such alternate locations are not available, the transmission equipment and accessory equipment shall be camouflaged or concealed. Page 451 of 465 c. Transmission equipment and accessory equipment shall be of a neutral, non-reflective color that is identical to, or closely compatible with, the color of the supporting structure or uses other camouflage/concealment design techniques so as to make the equipment as visually unobtrusive as possible, including, for example, painting the equipment to match the structure. 7. Administrative Waiver. a. An administrative waiver of any of the above camouflage, height, setback and concealment design standards may be requested of the Community Development director by filing a written application form provided by the city and payment of an application fee. The application will be evaluated for, and must demonstrate conformance with the following waiver criteria, for approval: i. The camouflage and concealment design standard prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting the provision of wireless communication service through the proposed WCF at the location because the standard will not allow the technology to function at that location; and ii. There is no existing nearby alternate structure for collocation or attachment that will provide the technological functionality and which otherwise meets the design standard requested to be waived; and iii. The proposal for varying from the design standard represents a reasonable and best approximation of achieving the same objective as the specific standard sought to be waived; and iv. The proposed alternative does not and will not conflict with public health, safety, or welfare. b. If any camouflage, height, setback or concealment design standard is approved for waiver, the WCF proposed shall nevertheless meet all other applicable design standards not approved for waiver. c. If a waiver request is denied for failure to meet any of the criteria specified above and there is no alternative for installation of the WCF at the particular 39 of 46  Deleted: and Page 452 of 465 40 of 46      location in a manner that meets the applicable design standards, then such application for the WCF for such specific location shall be denied. H. Lighting. 1. Freestanding support structures shall not be artificially lighted, unless required by the FAA or other applicable authority, or the WCF is mounted on a light pole or other similar structure primarily used for lighting purposes on property located outside of the public way. If lighting is required, the City may review lighting alternatives and approve the design that would cause the least illumination disturbance to the surrounding views. Any proposed lighting shall, at a minimum, comply with the standards of Chapter 18.55 ACC, (Outdoor Lighting) and shall be submitted at the time of the initial application. Any lighting must be reviewed and approved by the city. 2. Security lighting used to light the equipment facility shall be directed downward, shielded and kept within the boundaries of the site. I. Abandoned Facilities. 1. Any WCF which is not utilized for a period of nine months or more will be considered abandoned. 2. Any WCF which falls into a state of disrepair as determined by the Community Development planning director will be consideredabandoned. 3. Any WCF considered to be abandoned must be removed completely within 90 days from the date of notification by the city to the owner, owner’s agent and/or the operator of the WCF, based upon the contact information that has previously been provided to the city’s code enforcement personnel. The citycode enforcement personnel may extend the 90-day period should a valid application for use of the facility be submitted to the city. The owner of such WCF shall remove the same within ninety (90) days of receipt of written notice from the city. If such WCF is not removed within ninety (90) days, the city may remove it at the owner’s expense and any approved permits for the WCF shall be deemed to have expired. Commented [KA18]: This could put the city at risk of an effective prohibition claim under Section 253 of the Telecommunications Act. Page 453 of 465 41 of 46  J. Noise. For the purposes of this section, WCF will be considered a Class B, commercial, noise source pursuant to WAC 173-60-040. K. Supplemental Information Required for Applications. In addition to the information that is otherwise required for an application for a permit for a WCF, the following is also required: 1. For all new WCFsa new primary support structure and related equipment, the applicant shall provide the carrier’s master network plan for the city showing the carrier’s existing WCF locations and narrative explaining the potential WCF locations over the next year, if known. The applicant shall also provide technical justification supporting the need for the height of the WCF and for any new towerprimary support structure and why a shorter support structure could not be utilized. Any application for a Type 3-B facility new tower greater than 75 feet in height shall provide technical justification as to why a Type 3-A facility could not be utilized instead to adequately serve the Auburn community. 2. Narrative description of the facility including whether there is capacity on the proposed structure for more antennas, methods for minimizing visual impacts of the facilities, etc. The applicant shall provide evidence of the consent of the underlying property owner, if the property owner is different, that allows for other carriers to place antennas and equipment on the structure. This ability for co- location must be demonstrated, unless relief from this requirement is requested and ultimately approved in accordance with the administrative waiver provisions in this Chapter 3. A color swatch sample for the proposed primary support structuretower. 4. narrative description of proposed camouflage and concealment design techniques to minimize visual impacts of the facilities. Photographs, photo simulations, or similar illustrations that show a reasonable likeness of the proposed facility including the antennas arrays and above-ground support equipment. L. Zones in Which WCF Are Permitted. The following table illustrates which zones the types of facilities as defined by ACC 18.04.912(J) and (VK) and ACC 18.31.100(A) are allowed in and which land use approval process, if any is permits Formatted: Strikethrough Formatted: Strikethrough Commented [KA19]: This information is proprietary. Deleted: ability to execute a non-exclusive lease between the carrier and Page 454 of 465 42 of 46  are required. Microcells, as defined by ACC 18.04.912(GL) (not located in public ways), are allowed only in residential zones and shall be permitted outright pursuant to the provisions of ACC 18.04.912(GL). Type of Permit Required Zone Permitted Outright Administrative Use Permit Conditional Use Permit All Zones 1-D 1-D1 1-D2 RO RO-H 1-A 1-B 1-C C-N 1-A 1-B 1-C C-1 1-A 1-B 1-C C-2, DUC 1-A 1-B 1-C C-3 C-4 1-B, 2-A 1-C, 2-B, 3-A 3-B M-1, EP 1-B, 2-A 1-C, 2-B, 3-A 3-B M-2 1-B, 2-A 1-C, 2-B, 3-A 3-B P-1 1-B, 2-A 1-C, 2-B 3-A3 I 1-A 1-B 1-C LF 1-A 1-B 1-C 1 Allowance for the WCF to extend to a height of 20 percent of the supporting structure. 2 Allowance for the WCF to extend to a height of 30 percent of the supporting structure. 3 The maximum height allowed, including antennas, is 45 feet. M. Exemptions. Commented [KA20]: Flagged for discussion of the extent of microcell deployment in residential zones to date and the ongoing viability of the use of this technology. Commented [KA21]: Verizon requests that WCF's be permitted in residential and mixed use zones with a CUP. Page 455 of 465 43 of 46  1. Unless otherwise provided for, the Mobile Testing Facilities/Equipment used to test network limitationsfollowing are exempt from the provisions of this section.: a. Microcells as defined by ACC 18.04.912(G). b. Mobile Testing Facilities/Equipment Used to Test Network Limitations. The facilities/equipment shall not be at any one location for more than 14 days and shall otherwise meet the requirements of any other ordinance, regulation or code provision. 2. EWCFs are exempt from the provisions of subsections B, Separation between Facilities; (C)(1), Co-Location Requirements; D, Height (except (D)(4)); and E, Setbacks, of this section. (Ord. 6716 § 1 (Exh. A), 2019; Ord. 6245 § 15, 2009.) N. Eligible Facilities Requests (EFR) 1. Application and Review Requirement for Eligible Facilities Requests. Applicants seeking approval of eligible facility requests must complete an application form furnished by the city and comply with any requirements set forth in applicable city ordinances. The application form shall be limited to the information necessary for the city to consider whether an application is aneligible facilities request. The application may not require the applicant to demonstrate a need or business case for the proposed modification or co-location. Such information may include, without limitation, whether the project: a. Would result in a substantial change, as defined in ACC 18.04.912(Q); b. Violates a generally applicable law, regulations, or other rule codifying objective standards reasonably related to public health, safety, and welfare. 2. Review Procedures for Eligible Facilities Requests. This section applies to any eligible facilities requests for co-location on, or modification to an existing tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base station. Page 456 of 465 44 of 46  a. Review Required for Eligible Facilities. No co-location or modification to any existing tower or base station may occur except after a written request from an applicant is reviewed and approved by the director. Upon receipt of an application for an eligible facilities request pursuant to this section, the city shall review such application to determine whether the application so qualifies. b Review Criteria. Upon receipt of an application for an eligible facilities request pursuant to this section, the city shall administratively review such application to determine whether the application meets the followingcriteria for an eligible facilities request: i. Does not result in a substantial change, as defined in ACC 18.04.912(Q); ii. Does not violate a generally applicable law, regulation, or other rule reasonably related to public health, safety, and welfare and complies with generally applicable building, structural, electrical, and safety codes; iii. Complies with the original application camouflage and concealment design techniques or conditions of approval, including but not limited to colors, textures, surfaces, scale, character, and siting, or any approved amendments thereto, subject to the thresholds established in the definition of substantial change; and 3. Timeframe for Reviewing and Deciding Eligible Facilities Requests. Subject to the tolling provisions below, within sixty (60) days of the date on which an applicant submits a complete application, as determined by the director, the city shall approve the application unless it determines that the application does not qualify as an “eligible facility request”, or does not comply with other applicable code requirements. a. Tolling of the Timeframe for Review. The 60-day review period deadline begins to run when the application is filed and may be tolled (halted) only by mutual agreement of the city and the applicant, or in cases where the director determines that the application is “incomplete”. Page 457 of 465 45 of 46  b. To toll the timeframe for incompleteness, the city must provide written notice to the applicant within thirty (30) days of receipt of the application, specifically delineating all missing documents or information required in the application; c. The timeframe for review continues running again the following business day after the applicant makes a supplemental written submission in response to the city’s notice of incompleteness; and d. Following a supplemental submission, the city will notify the applicant within ten (10) days that the supplemental submission did not provide the information identified in the original notice delineating missing information. The timeframe is tolled in the case of second or subsequent notices pursuant to the procedures identified above in (a) and (b). In the case of a second or subsequent notice of incompleteness, the city may not specify missing information or documents that were not delineated in the original notice of incompleteness. 4. Interaction with Telecommunications Act Section 332(c)(7). If the city determines that the applicant’s request is not an eligible facilities request as delineated in this section of the Code, the presumptively reasonable timeframe under Section 332(c)(7), as prescribed by the FCC’s Shot Clock order in WT Docket No. 08-165 (Adopted November 18, 2009), will begin to run from the issuance of the city’s decision that the application is not a covered request. To the extent such information is necessary, the city may request additional information from the applicant to evaluate the application under Section 332(c)(7) reviews. Page 458 of 465 46 of 46  18.31.110 Siting of microcells and small wireless facilities. The following siting standards are intended to guide the location and development of microcells as defined by ACC 18.04.912(L) and small wireless facilities on private property but not including other wireless communications facilities (WCF). The siting of other wireless communications facilities shall be in accordance with siting of wireless communication facilities found in ACC 18.31.100. A. Siting Criteria for Microcells and small wireless facilities (not located in public ways). 1. Panel antennas shall be incorporated into the design of the existing structure using painting, flush mounting or other concealment methods, to the extent technically feasible. 2. The equipment cabinets and other ground support equipment shall be located in an area that is no larger than 28 cubic feet. The height of the equipment cabinets shall be no more than four feet. The equipment shall be designed to be compatible with the residential neighborhood the project shall provide a minimum width of five feet of Type II landscaping as defined in ACC 18.50.040 or fencing or a combination of these or similar features. The landscaping shall consist of evergreen and deciduous trees with no more than 50 percent being deciduous, and shrubs and groundcover shall be provided. 3. There shall be a 300-foot separation between any microcells or small wireless facilities used by the same carrier. 4. The antennas must be located on light poles, power poles or similar public utility poles that are either owned/operated by the city of Auburn or owned/operated by a utility provider operating with an appropriate franchise if approved by the city engineer. The equipment cabinets may be located on private property. 54. Anyone wishing to establish a microcell, small wireless facility or associated components shall make application to the community developmentplanning director upon application forms provided by the planning director. The planning director shall review each application and may be empowered to approve, deny or modify the proposal. (Ord. 6245 § 15, 2009.) Formatted: Highlight Commented [KA22]: SWF's can be deployed on private property in limited circumstances, like parking lot light standards. There should be a streamlined process for SWF's outside of the right of way. Deleted: 16 square Page 459 of 465 47 of 46  18.35 Special Purpose Zones 18.35.030 Uses. A. General Permit Requirements. Table 18.35.030 identifies the uses of land allowed in each special purpose zone and the planning permit required to establish each use. B. Requirements for Certain Specific Land Uses. Where the last column in Table 18.35.030 (“Standards for Specific Land Uses”) includes a section number, the referenced section determines other requirements and standards applicable to the use regardless of whether it is permitted outright or requires an administrative or conditional use permit. Table 18.35.030. Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designations Standards for Specific Land Uses RO RO-H P-1 I OS MARIJUANA RELATED BUSINESSES Marijuana processor X X X X X Marijuana producer X X X X X Marijuana researcher X X X X X Marijuana retailer X X X X X Marijuana transporter business X X X X X PUBLIC Animal shelter, public X X P X X Government facilities, this excludes offices and related uses that are permitted outright A A P P C Page 460 of 465 48 of 46  Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designations Standards for Specific Land Uses RO RO-H P-1 I OS Municipal parks and playgrounds P P P P P RECREATION, EDUCATION AND PUBLIC ASSEMBLY Campgrounds X X X P P Recreational vehicle parks, private X X X P X Cemetery, public X X P A X Cemetery, private X X X A X College, university, public X X A A X Commercial recreation facility – Indoor X X X P X Commercial recreation facility – Outdoor X X X A C ACC 18.57.025(A) Conference/convention facility X X X A X Library, museum X X P P A Meeting facility, public or private A A P P A Private school – specialized education/training (for profit) P P X P X Public schools (K-12) X X P P X Page 461 of 465 49 of 46  Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designations Standards for Specific Land Uses RO RO-H P-1 I OS and related facilities Religious institutions, lot size less than one acre A P X P X Religious institutions, lot size more than one acre C A X P X Studio – Art, dance, martial arts, music, etc. P X X X X RESIDENTIAL Duplex P1 X X A X Home occupation P P X P P Chapter 18.60 ACC Live/work, work/live unit A P X A X Marijuana cooperative X X X X X Multiple-family dwellings, stand-alone P2 A3 X A X One detached single- family dwelling P X X X P5 Nursing home, assisted living facility A A X P X Senior housing A A X A X RETAIL Restaurant, cafe, A A P A X Page 462 of 465 50 of 46  Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designations Standards for Specific Land Uses RO RO-H P-1 I OS coffee shop, excluding drive-through facilities SERVICES Banking and related financial institutions, excluding drive- through facilities4 P P X X X Daycare, including mini daycare, daycare center, preschools or nursery schools A P X P A Home-based daycare P P X P P Medical services – Clinic or urgent care4 P P X X X Mortuary, funeral home, crematorium X P X X X Professional offices P P X A A Personal service shops P P X X X Pharmacies X P X X X TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATIONS AND INFRASTRUCTURE Utility facilities, substations, utility transmission or X X X X A See ACC 18.02.040(E) Page 463 of 465 51 of 46  Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designations Standards for Specific Land Uses RO RO-H P-1 I OS distribution line Wireless communication facility (WCF) (See ACC 18.04.912(V) * * * * * *See ACC 18.31.100 for use regulations and zoning development standards. Eligible facilities request (EFR) (Wireless communication facility (See ACC 18.04.912(G)) P P P P P Small wireless facilities (ACC 18.04.912(P)) P P P P P Emergency wireless communication facility (EWCF) X X X P X See ACC 18.04.912 and 18.31.100 OTHER USES THAT ARE NOT LISTED Other uses may be permitted by the planning director or designee if the use is determined to be consistent with the intent of the zone and is of the same general P P P P P Page 464 of 465 52 of 46  Permitted, Administrative, Conditional and Prohibited Uses by Zone P – Permitted C – Conditional A – Administrative X – Prohibited LAND USE Zoning Designations Standards for Specific Land Uses RO RO-H P-1 I OS character of the uses permitted Notes: 1 Duplexes, 3,600 square feet of lot area per dwelling unit is required. 2 Multifamily dwellings; provided, that 2,400 square feet of lot area is provided for each dwelling unit. 3 Multifamily dwellings; provided 1,200 square feet of lot area is provided for each dwelling unit. 4 Permitted within a public college or university as an amenity or service provided to students: A stand-alone bank or medical services/clinic is not permitted. 5 One single-family detached dwelling unit per existing legal lot. No residential subdivisions permitted in the open space zone. Page 465 of 465