HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 08/15/1989 CRY of Kent
City Council Meeting
Agenda
p
34
¢a
; d
�R
q�ga
3
38 a
�. Mayor Dan Kelleher
Council Members
Jim White, President
Berne Biteman Steve Dowell
Christi Houser Jon Johnson
SO • Paul Mann Judy Woods
gy,
August 15, 1989
�ce e
Office of the City Clerk �"
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
;August 15, 1989
Summary Agenda
City of Kent Council Chambers
Office of the City Clerk 7 : 00 p.m.
NOTE: Items on the Consent Calendar are either routine or
have been previously discussed. Any item may be
removed by a Councilmember. The Council may add and
act upon other items not listed on this agenda.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
1. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
2 . PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Street Vacation - Portion of Third Ave. S .
B. 1990 City Budget
3 . CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of Minutes of August 1, 1989
B. Approval of Bills
C. DARE Donation
D. Planning Commission Appointment
E. Soos Creek Interlocal Agreement
F. LID 334 Contract Acceptance G. Smith Street Improvements Contract Acceptance
H. Surplus Vehicles
I . State Agreement (S .R. 515)
4 . OTHER BUSINESS
_—A. Senior Housing Proposal Bond Issue
B. Traffic Mitigation Task Force Report
g.C. Civil Service - ordinance -------"
D. Kiwanis Tot Lot Contract
Bridgewater Petition
BIDS
A. Ditch Construction Project
B. Pickup and Cargo Van
C. Lake Fenwick Park
D. Police/Fire Communications Systems
E . Equipment for Fire Apparatus
6 . REPORTS
CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
ADJOURNMENT
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Citizens wishing to address the Council will, at this time,
make known the subject of interest, so all may be properly
heard.
Kent City Council Meeting
r Date August 15, 1989
�a(/ Category Public Hearing
1. SUBJECT: ST. ANTHONY'S CATHOLIC CHURCH STREET VACATION NO.
STV-89-4 -
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This hearing will consider an application
by St. Anthony's Catholic Church to vacate a portion of Third
Avenue South between West Titus and West Saar Streets. Proper
legal notice has been given by the City Clerk.
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff report and map.
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff denial
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: N/A
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
OPEN HEARING:
PUBLIC INPUT:
CLOSE HEARING:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
to deny/approve street vacation No. STV-89-4 .
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 2A
aq
KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT
August 10, 1989
MEMO TO: Mayor Dan Kelleher and City Council Members
FROM: James P. Harris, Planning Director
SUBJECT: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON AN APPLICATION TO VACATE A
PORTION OF THIRD AVENUE BETWEEN TITUS STREET AND SAAR STREET
I. Name of Application
St. Anthony' s Catholic Church
II . Reason for Requesting Vacation
The applicant states, "This vacation is being requested by the adjacent
property owners to coincide with the application currently before the
city for the vacation of 3rd Avenue South north of Titus and because of
common ownership on both sides of 3rd Avenue. "
III . Staff Recommendation
After reviewing comments from the following departments and agencies:
Public Works
Fire
. Police
Puget Power
Washington Natural Gas
and conducting our own review, the Planning Department recommends that
the request to vacate a portion of Third Avenue South as mentioned in
Resolution 1212 and shown on the accompanying map, be DENIED for the
following reasons:
1. It is important to maintain the Downtown street grid system to the
extent possible. The vacation of Third Avenue between Gowe and
Titus Streets should not automatically trigger other street
vacations in the vicinity, even though one property owner may own
properties on both sides of the street.
2 . The new Centennial building' s location over the old right of way
for Third Avenue is oriented toward access from Third Avenue south
of Titus Street. If Third Avenue is vacated south of Titus, access
to the new facility will be greatly hindered and all traffic will
have to use Fourth Avenue or Second Avenue to get onto Titus Street
to then enter the new facility.
3 . Recent channelization improvements have been made to Willis Street
at Third Avenue which include the installation of a left-turn
pocket for eastbound to northbound traffic. This improvement would
allow easy access to the City Hall from Willis Street. This also
has the potential for aiding a greater dispersal of traffic over
the grid system in the vicinity of City Hall; the vacation of Third
Avenue precludes this dispersal .
STAFF REPORT STV-89-4
THIRD AVE BETWEEN TITUS AND SAAR
AUGUST 10, 1989
4 . In light of the plans to remodel the current library building for
use as Kent's Police Headquarters building, closure of the street
would greatly hamper egress and ingress into police parking. This
situation would adversely impact building security and potentially
slow emergency response. In addition, it could impede egress and
ingress to the new parking garage which would potentially block the
one planned entrance to police parking.
5. Why is the proposed vacation of Third Avenue between Titus and Saar
Streets different from the vacation of Third Avenue between Gowe
and Titus Streets?
The City Hall complex is being transformed into a campus-type
setting. Third Avenue currently ends at Gowe Street; much
of the traffic using this portion of Third Avenue is City
vehicles or the public doing business at City Hall. It is not
uncommon for campus-type developments, as they spread outward,
to alter local circulation patterns. There is nothing wrong
with this as long as alternatives to the altered circulation
pattern are taken into consideration. This has been done with
the City Hall complex.
The City might still provide access through the parking lot
of the Centennial/City Hall complex which would connect Gowe
and Titus Streets. This access would not be a street but
might be a connector via the parking lots between Titus and
Gowe Streets.
Kent Is newly-revised Downtown Plan (adopted by Resolution 1203
on May, 2 1989) has as its overall goal under the circulation
section the following:
PROVIDE FOR SAFE, EFFICIENT AND IDENTIFIABLE ACCESS TO
AND MOVEMENT WITHIN THE PLANNING AREA BY PLANNED ROUTES
FOR PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICULAR TRAFFIC, RECOGNIZING THE
NECESSITY OF RELATING CIRCULATION TO LAND USE AND
ASSOCIATED ACTIVITIES.
The closure of Third Avenue between Gowe and Titus Streets has
very effectively implemented this goal by taking into
consideration the campus-type development for City Hall. This
is vastly different from simply desiring to close a street
because there are some common ownerships on both sides of it.
JPH:ca
Attachment
2
xII � l
i
x
rn Jf
m
m - —
�' N. 7HOIiPSON AVE.
N
IooSe �-Q r va cz
5. NADEN AVE.
Z�
-f'•o
Sca.lG
N. 6TH. AVE.
cn x
r' O ft
�^ 0, x z
in
rn
5TH. RVE. m
rn
�D x
Ln
a
H
N. 4TH. RYE. r
L
o r V ac a t'oh ^I dal
N r 1 77
.f 3 RD VL'_ g s Q A :10
C. �JiC.itld �� �•� _ .-.
LA
N
o
r
o
N. 2N0. AVE. M
F'•
n I F
IFm
Kent City Council Meeting
Date Auaust 15 , 1989
Category Public Hearing
1. SUBJECT: 1990 BUDGET
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Tonight's meeting has been set to receive
public input for the 1990 Budget. The meeting follows receipt
of public input at a July 18 Council meeting and the
presentation of departmental programs to Council at a July 28
work session. Tonight's input will be the final public input
session prior to the development of the 1990 Preliminary
Budget. Following its presentation to Council, the official
public hearing on the Budget will be held November 7 prior to
scheduled Budget adoption on December 5.
3 . EXHIBITS: Council Budget/CIP calendar.
4 . RECOMMENDED BY:
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED:
SOURCE OF FUNDS :
OPEN HEARING:
PUBLIC INPUT:
CLOSE HEARING:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 2B
3/30/89 City of Kent, Washington � 0
2OUNCIL BUDGET/CIP CALENDA.
COUNCIL WORKSHOP March 21, 1989
4th Quarter Financial Report
Review 1990 Budget/CIP, calendar/process
CIP questionnaire and process , input and direction
COUNCIL WORKSHOP May 2 , 1989
1st Quarter Financial Report
1990 - 1993 Preliminary Financial Forecast
Review CIP questionnaire results
CIP project input and direction
COUNCIL COMMITTEES May 15, 1989 -
Review Departmental programs, goals and budget July 14 , 1989
priorities
COUNCIL REGULAR 1 June 6, 1989
Public Hearing on Proposed CIP
COUNCIL REGULAR
CIP Adopted June 20, 1989
COUNCIL REGULAR July 18 , 1989
Proposed Use Public Hearing on 1990 Budget priorities
COUNCIL WORK SESSION (ALL DAY) July 28 , 1989
2nd Quarter Financial Report
1990 - 1993 Updated Financial Forecast
1990 base line budget presentation
Departmental presentations on 1990 budget proposals
Council committee chairs report on committee priorities
Development of budget direction with alternatives
COUNCIL WORKSHOP (REGULAR)
Reality check on budget preparation direction August 15, 1989
Proposed Use Public Hearing on Budget
COUNCIL WORKSHOP
Summary Budget update September 19 , 1989
.COUNCIL WORKSHOP October 17 , 1989
Review 3rd Quarter Financial Report
Overview of Preliminary 1990 Budget
COUNCIL COMMITTEES October 18 , 1989-
Review Departmental Budgets November 15, 1989
COUNCIL REGULAR _.
Regular Public Hearing on 1990 budget November 7 , 1989
COUNCIL REGULAR December 5, 1989
Adoption of Budget and Tax Levy Ordinance
COUNCIL REGULAR December 19, 1989
Adoption of the Final Adjustments for 1989
CONSENT CALENDAR
3 . City Council Action:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember
seconds that Consent Calendar Items A through I be approved.
Discussion
Action
3A. Approval of Minutes.
Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of
August 1, 1989 .
3B. Approval of Bills.
Approval of payment of the bills received through August 24,
1989 after auditing by the Operations Committee at its meeting
at 3 : 00 p.m. on September 1, 1989.
Approval of checks issued for vouchers:
Date Check Numbers Amount
Approval of checks issued for Payroll:
Date Check Numbers Amount
Council Agenda
Item No. 3 A-B
CONSENT CALENDAR
3 . City Council Action:
Councilmember
Councilmemrbe
r
seconds that :Consent C f1moves,
Items A through approved.
2, r
Discussion 4
Action U
3A. Approval of Minutes.
Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of
August 1, 1989 .
3B. Approval of Bills.
Approval of payment of the bills received through August 24 ,
1989 after auditing by the Operations Committee at its meeting
at 3 : 00 p.m. on September 1, 1989 .
Approval of checks issued for vouchers:
Date Check Numbers Amount
8/4 122858-123549 $748 , 903,--5
Approval of checks issued for payroll:
Date Check Numbers Amount
Council Agenda
Item No. 3 A-B
Kent, Washington
August 1, 1989
Regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at 7 : 00
p.m. by Mayor Kelleher. Present: Councilmembers Dowell, Houser,
Johnson, Mann, White and Woods, City Administrator Chow, City Attorney
Driscoll, Planning Director Harris and City Engineer Gill. Also
present: Fire Chief Angelo, Police Chief Frederiksen, Assistant City
Administrator Hansen, Finance Director McCarthy, Information Services
Director Spang and Personnel Director Webby. Councilmember Biteman,
Public Works Director Wickstrom and Parks Director Wilson were on
vacation. Approximately 25 people were at the meeting.
PRESENTATIONS (ITEM 1A)
Wings Over Washington. Mayor Kelleher read a
proclamation signed by Governor Booth Gardner
proclaiming July 29, 1989, as Wings over Washington
Day in the State of Washington and encouraging
citizens to join in the celebration at the Kent
International Balloon Classic.
(ITEM 1B)
National Night Out. The Mayor declared August 8 ,
1989 , as "National Night Out" in the City of Kent.
The proclamation was presented to Police Chief
Frederiksen and Bob Bradley and Diane Lewis of the
Kent Police Crime Prevention Unit.
(ITEM 1C)
Employee of the Month. Mayor Kelleher announced
that Diane Harrison of the Information Services
Department has been chosen as the Employee of the
Month for August. He commended Ms. Harrison for her
high degree of accuracy and turnaround time, and
presented her with a plaque.
CONSENT (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3)
CALENDAR WHITE MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A through J
be approved with the exception of Item C which he
removed. Mann seconded and the motion carried.
MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR 3A)
Approval of Minutes. APPROVAL of the minutes of the
regular Council meeting of July 18, 1989.
1
August 1, 1989
HEALTH AND (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3C AND ITEM 4F)
SANITATION REMOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE
Lavender Hills Bill of Sale. ACCEPTANCE for
continuous operation and maintenance the bill of
sale and warranty agreement for the utility and
street improvements constructed in the vicinity of
94th Ave. S. and S.E. 240th St. for the Lavender
Hills project and release of cash bond after
expiration of the one year maintenance period.
It was determined for Maureen MacNamara of 23839
94th Ave. S . that the developer would be liable for
any failed improvements within the one year period.
MacNamara showed a construction drawing for the
development and Gill determined that the developer
had completed the project as shown except for the
position of the fog line. He further explained that
the intent of the SEPA condition was to allow space
for people to walk along the side of the road.
MacNamara asked if the area beyond the white line
was considered to be the walkway. Gill determined
that some of the original four feet planned for the
walkway was allocated to widening the road, and that
this was the decision of the City and could be
changed. She pointed out that the space allocated
beyond the white line was as narrow as 18 inches at
one place and as wide as 5 feet in others. Jim
Hansen clarified for Woods that the city had no
clear definition for sidewalks or walkways but that
such standards were to be developed.
Dowell suggested that the Public Works Committee
further study the matter or that consideration be
given to formation of an LID to improve the street,
including sidewalks. WHITE MOVED to delay action
for two weeks, but no second was made. Harris
explained that SEPA conditions are recommended by
staff and approved by Council and are not a part of
the plat conditions.
MacNamara asked that the white line be removed and
WOODS SO MOVED, noting that the Public Works
Committee was amenable to this suggestion. Houser
2
August 1, 1989
HEALTH AND seconded and Dowell asked about the danger of this
SANITATION unimproved road. MacNamara stated that the
residents did not want the road improved, that it
would increase the amount and speed of traffic and
would change the character of the neighborhood.
Upon White' s question, Gill noted that only half
streets are required adjacent to the platted
property, but that no-protest LID covenants had been
required, as usual. The motion to delete the fog
line carried with the notation that the matter would
also be discussed at the Public Works committee
meeting. (Date later established as August 22)
Will Palmer, contractor for the project, asked that
Item 3C now be approved as all requirements have
been met and more than adequate bonding is in place.
WHITE MOVED to adopt Item 3C, Johnson seconded and
the motion carried.
STREETS (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3J)
LID 327. ADOPTION of Ordinance 2865 amending
Section 1 of Ordinance 2846, as previously amended
by Ordinance 2853 , correcting the amount of the
final assessment roll.
(ITEM 4C)
LID 330 - 64th Avenue Improvements. The public
hearing on formation of this LID was opened and
closed on March 7 , 1989. Adoption of the ordinance
was delayed until such time as the mitigation issues
surrounding the properties fronting the lagoon were
determined. In order to proceed with construction
of the project during this construction season,
authorization was given to segregate that portion of
LID 330 lying between S. 226th and S. 216th Streets
and proceed with the improvements of the remaining
portions between Meeker St. and S. 212th St. On
July 11 a DNS was issued for the revised LID 330
project. It is recommended that Ordinance 2866 be
adopted forming LID 330.
City Attorney Driscoll noted that there is a
question as to whether the legal description
3
August 1, 1989
STREETS appropriately reflects the intent of the Council to
segregate a portion of the entire LID, as -previously
discussed. She noted that she would review the
legal description to ensure that the appropriate
parcels are excluded. JOHNSON MOVED that Ordinance
2866 forming LID 330 be adopted, subject to review
by the City Attorney. Houser seconded and the
motion carried.
SEWER (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3G)
LID 334 Derbyshire Sewer and Water Improvements.
AUTHORIZATION to set September 5 as the date for a
public hearing on final assessment roll for LID 334 .
ANNEXATION (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3D)
ZONING Hehr Annexation Zoning. ADOPTION of Ordinance 2862
establishing the zoning for the Hehr Annexation to
be R1-7 . 2 single family residential, as recommended
by the Hearing Examiner. Public hearings were held
on June 6 and July 18, 1989 .
ZONING CODE (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3E)
AMENDMENT. Land Use Sian Boards. ADOPTION of Ordinance 2863
authorizing the use of sign boards for land use
notices, as approved by Council on July 18 , 1989 .
FLOOD CONTROL (ITEM 4B)
FEMA Ordinance. This ordinance has been prepared
adopting the updated floodplains study and maps
developed by Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) . FEMA requires that the City adopt their
study related to these revised maps. Not doing so
would suspend this community from the National Flood
Insurance Program thereby eliminating the
availability of flood insurance for development in
the area. The Public Works Department at their May
23 , 1989 meeting recommended adoption of the
ordinance. JOHNSON MOVED to .adont- -Ordinance -2867
annrovingthe FEMA study and revised maps. Woods
seconded. Motion carried.
SALMON (ITEM 4A)
ENHANCEMENT Salmon Enhancement Program. The City has been
PROGRAM contacted by a volunteer working for the Kent School
4
August 1, 1989
SALMON District requesting support for Salmon Enhancement
ENHANCEMENT Program for several of the elementary schools in the
PROGRAM Kent School District. Kent' s support would be the
purchase of tanks and related equipment at a cost of
$866 each. These tanks would be placed in the
elementary schools, salmon eggs obtained from the
Department of Fisheries would be placed in the tanks
and the fry would be released into streams in the
surrounding area that have been approved by the
Department of Fisheries.
Houser noted that this item was approved by the
Operations Committee with an amendment recommending
that the City retain ownership, that the equipment
be returned to the City if the program is
discontinued, and that the salmon fry be released
into streams within City boundaries whenever
possible. Carolyn Wiley noted that she has been
involved in the program for two years and that it is
a wonderful learning experience for children. Wiley
introduced Sandi Weaver who urged the Council to
approve the request.
City Engineer Gill clarified that $5000 was
available to fund the project in the Salmon
Enhancement Fund, which is part of the Drainage
Utility.
JOHNSON MOVED for approval to fund the purchase of
tanks and necessary equipment at a cost of $866 for
Salmon Enhancement Program for Scenic Hill
Elementary, Pine Tree Elementary, East Hill
Elementary and Kent Elementary and to include
Houser' s suggestions. Houser seconded and the
motion carried.
SOLID WASTE (ITEM 4E)
Solid Waste Disposal Rates. The King County Solid
Waste Division has recommended a Solid Waste
Disposal rate increase of approximately 83 percent.
The Suburban Cities Association and the City of
Seattle have analyzed the proposal and made certain
recommendations to the County including the
5
August 1, 1989
SOLID WASTE refunding of energy resource recovery fund monies to
the cities, ceasing the collection of such monies,
the lack of a need for a rate increase, and the
solid waste recycling program not be funded through
the disposal fee so as not to duplicate cost to the
cities that already have recycling programs. It is
recommended that the Kent City Council adopt a
resolution endorsing the recommendation of the
Suburban Cities Association related to the solid
waste disposal rates. JOHNSON MOVED to adopt
Resolution No. 1213 relating to proposed King County
solid waste disposal rates, endorsing the
recommendation of Solid Waste Interlocal Forum
Resolution 89-004 . Woods seconded and the motion
carried.
CITY CODE (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3H)
Recodification of City Code. AUTHORIZATION to enter
into a contract with Municipal Code Corporation for
the recodification of the Kent City Code. The total
price for the contract will be $16,500 to be paid
over a two year period. $8 , 000 of this contract is
already authorized in the 1989 Law Department
budget.
POLICE (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3F)
Drinking Driver Task Force. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of a
donation of $200 from the Aid Association for
Lutherans.
PARKS AND (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3I)
RECREATION Parks Security Personnel. ADOPTION of Ordinance
2864 creating the positions of Park Security
Officers within the Maintenance Division of the
Parks and Recreation Department. The Parks
Maintenance Division has requested a limited law
enforcement commission for parking violations only,
for the Park Security staff. Duties would include
overtime, double parking, parking on the wrong side
of the street or in restricted areas. Passage of
This ordinance would reduce the calls made to the
Police Department to enforce parking violations in
the park system.
6
August 1, 1989
PARKS AND (ITEM 4D)
RECREATION Golf Complex Personnel. AUTHORIZATION is requested
to immediately hire two new full time maintenance
workers to meet the increased maintenance demands.
Also a budget correction is requested to reflect the
replacement of a 1989 budgeted Assistant
Greenskeeper with a Maintenance Worker.
Houser noted that this item had been discussed by
the Operations Committee, and based on that
discussion SHE MOVED to approve $17, 327 to fund
temporary-part time maintenance hours for the
remainder of 1989 , and to analyze the full time
positions in conjunction with the 1990 budget. Mann
seconded.
White pointed out that the Council had not received
any information on this item and the Council was
reminded that committee recommendations required
full Council action. Finance Director McCarthy
stated that an analysis of staffing levels at golf
courses in other cities had been prepared,
indicating that the full time staff which currently
" exists at our golf course for outside maintenance
workers is appropriate, but that the golf
maintenance requires additional part-time hours for
the summer months, which is the peak time. The
question of whether to then continue them as part-
time or hire them as full time would be addressed in
the 1990 budget. White emphasized that the
situation should be studied before any full time
people are hired. There was no further discussion
and the motion carried.
FINANCE (ITEM 3B)
Approval of Bills. APPROVAL of payment of the bills
received through August 7, 1989 after auditing by
the Operations Committee at its meeting at 3 : 00 p.m.
on August 15, 1989 .
7
August 1, 1989
FINANCE Approval of checks issued for vouchers:
Date Check Numbers Amount
7/17-7/27 81693-81747 $242 , 462 . 63
7/28/89 81748-82197 565 , 604 . 57
$808 , 067 . 20
Approval of checks issued for payroll:
Date Check Numbers Amount
7/20/89 122137-122857 $727 , 631. 43
REPORTS (ITEM 6G)
Administrative Reports. It was noted that
Councilmember Bitemen had asked to be excused from
tonight's meeting. WHITE SO MOVED, Johnson seconded
and the motion carried.
EXECUTIVE At 8 : 05 p.m. , City Administrator Chow requested an
SESSION executive session of approximately 30 minutes to
ADJOURNMENT discuss a collective bargaining matter. The meeting
reconvened at 8 : 40 p.m. and adjourned.
Marie Je , CMC
City Clerk
8 ...
X/ Kent City Council Meeting
UU Date August 15, 1989
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: DARE DONATION
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Acknowledgd of Ak* receipt of a $1, 000
contribution from the Eagles Club of Kent to the DARE program
(Drug Abuse Resistance Education) .
3 . EXHIBITS: None
4 . RECOMMENDED BY:
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED:
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3C
G�
Kent City Council Meeting
Date Auctust 15 1989
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION - APPOINTMENT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Confirmation of the Mayor's appointment
of Leona Orr to the Planning Commission to replace Robert Badger
who has resigned. This term will begin immediately and will
continue through 12/31/91.
3 . EXHIBITS: Mayor's letter
4 . RECOMMENDED BY:
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED:
SOURCE OF FUNDS :
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3D
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
TO: JIM WHITE, PRESIDENT, CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR�wM——
DATE: AUGUST 8, 1989
SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION--APPOINTMENT
I have recently appointed Leona Orr to the Planning
Commission. She will replace Robert Badger who has resigned his
position.
Ms. Orr is active in civic affairs and currently heads the
Responsible Urban Growth Group (R.U.G.G. ) and is chair of the
Mayor's Single-Family Housing Committee and is a member of the
Mayor's Assisted Housing Committee.
Her term will begin immediately and continue through 12/31/91.
I submit this for your confirmation.
DK:jb
cc: City Councilmembers
Ed Chow, City Administrator
Marie Jensen, City Clerk
Jim Harris, Director of Planning
Kent City Council Meeting
(� Date August 15 , 1989
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: SOOS CREEK INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
wo koi
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authoriz4 the Mayor to sign the Soos
Creek Interlocal Agreement with King County� as recommended by
the Council's Planning Committee.
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff memo; synopsis of concerns and responses
regarding Soos Creek Interlocal Agreement; Soos Creek Interlocal
Agreement; Planning Committee minutes, August 1, April 18,
April 4 .
4 . RECOMMENDED BY:
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
Recommendation from the Council's Planning Committee will be
made at their August 15 meeting.
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED:
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3E
KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT
August 10, 1989
MEMO TO: Mayor Dan Kelleher and City Council Members
FROM: James P. Harris, Planning Director
SUBJECT: SOOS CREEK INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
In August 1988 , the City Council approved the Soos Creek Interlocal
Agreement, providing for interlocal notification and cooperation
between the City and King County in planning efforts. The
Agreement was designed to improve coordination and reduce disputes
between the two parties. The City-approved version of the
Agreement was later modified by the County Council prior to their
approval. The County Council ' s approved version, dated 1/25/89 ,
is currently subject to your consideration.
The amended version of the Agreement has been the subject of
several Planning Committee meetings. Committee members and Legal
Department staff initially expressed a number of concerns about the
current version of the Agreement. Staff made an effort to
summarize critical issues and provide further explanation or
proposed modifications as appropriate. The proposed amendments are
shown on the attached staff report, entitled "Concerns Regarding
the Soos Creek Interlocal Agreement. " Staff recommends approval
of the January 25, 1989 version of the Agreement, with the proposed
amendments shown in the staff report.
It is unclear how the County Council will respond to these proposed
amendments, if approved by the City. Both the Auburn and Renton
Councils have approved the January 25 version of the Interlocal
Agreement. If the terms of Kent' s Interlocal cannot be resolved
through the current channels, it may be desirable for the Council
to hold a joint meeting with the County Council wherein the
outstanding issues can be discussed.
DS :JPH:ca
Attachments
CONCERNS REGARDING THE SOOS CREEK INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
1/25/89 Version
SECTION III
1. Concern: The Agreement lacks reference to the SEPA process. Concern is to clarify that obligations in
the Agreement are in addition to, and do not supersede, the County's obligations under SEPA.
Concern raised by: Legal Dept.
Response: The interlocal agreement can not supersede or nullify SEPA, which is existing state law.
However, to avoid any misunderstanding the Legal Department feels the agreement should clearly state that
it does not act as a substitute for the County's affirmative duties under SEPA.
Proposed amendment: Modify Paragraph IILE., page 3, as follows:
REVIEW AND COMMENT OPPORTUNITY is the provision of pertinent materials for another jurisdiction
to review and comment on. King County and Kent both understand that the opportunity for review and
comment is within the timeframes the responsible jurisdiction establishes, provided the responsible
jurisdiction makes an effort to provide a reasonable amount of time. This Agreement is intended to
supplement any requirement of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and applicable City and County
ordinances.
SECTION IV
1. Concern: Page 6, Paragraph IV.D.3. The County Council amended the earlier version of the agreement
by adding a specific reference to the County Comprehensive Plan, such that the County would not support
proposed annexations by Kent that would prevent achievement of the Plan's density target of 7-8 dwelling
units per acre. The 8/88 version stated that the County will not support annexations that would prevent
achievement of "regional goals" for density.
Concern raised by: Councilmembers Dowell and Johnson, Legal Dept.
Response: This language is included under "King County Responsibilities." While it does not address the
city's responsibilities, there is some concern that it may be read as a tacit agreement that all annexation
zoning would meet the County's density target. County staff, on the other hand, feels this whole section
gives major ground to the City, by providing that the county will support annexations under certain
circumstances. This is particularly noteworthy given recent county concerns over budgetary impacts of
annexations and incorporations (e.g., Kirkland, Federal Way, Sea-Tac). Proposed substitute language
follows.
Proposed Amendment: Modify Paragraph IV.D.3, page 6, as follows:
King County will not support annexations proposed by Kent
that would prevent the oehievement of Ving
when
consideration has not been made of regional density policies for new development in those portions of urban
areas which are planned for residential growth,undeveloped, served or can be served with adequate services,
and are free of physical constraints.
SECTION V
1. Concern: Page 6, Paragraph V.A.I. Under "Kent's Responsibilities," stipulates that the City will provide
the County notice and opportunities for comment and consultation on certain land use actions.
Concerns Regarding Soos Creek Interlocal
Concern raised by: Councilmember Dowell.
Response: This language is unchanged from the 8/88 version approved by Council last August. It would
provide for consultation between the City and County on certain major land use actions; however, it would
not bind the City in any way to accept the County recommendations. The additional coordination can be
accomplished with existing staff resources with minimal impact on the land use review period.
Proposed Amendment: No change proposed. Impact on staff time and review period is expected to be
manageable with existing staff. The additional coordination may provide for a time savings in some cases
by preventing later disputes.
2. Concern: Page 7, Paragraph V.13.1.a, and B.Lb, under "Kent's Responsibilities." In the first paragraph,
the County amended the 8/88 version, by inserting specific reference to the King County Comprehensive
Plan and its numerical density standard. Under the new language, Kent would agree to use its planning
and regulatory controls to achieve the County policy citywide.
Paragraph V.13.1.a, is essentially unchanged from the 8/88 version, except for insertion of two words: Kent
agrees to use its plans, policies, zoning and other regulatory controls to encourage city-wide achievement
of regional goals for: urban residential and employment densities...
These paragraphs have raised two concerns: a) that they may call into question City ordinances to the extent
that they conflict with any other "regional goals;" particularly where one of those goals (for density) is
expressed in numbers and referenced to the County Comprehensive Plan; and b) that the provisions would
be applicable "city-wide."
Concern raised by: Councilmembers Dowell and Johnson, Legal Dept.
Response: These have been perhaps the most controversial provisions in the current version of the
proposed Agreement. Paragraphs B.La and B.Lb address similar issues, i.e., regional goals. To what extent
can the City accept regional goals for residential and employment densities, affordable housing,
environmental protection, etc.? Does the City's recognition or acceptance of such goals foreclose local
decision-making and control; i.e., "tic the City's hands" by subordinating City policy to the County
Comprehensive Plan and/or other policy statements?
The Planning and Legal departments were not able to reach a consensus on this issue, and thus alternative
amendments are presented below. The Planning Dept. feels that it is appropriate for all the localities within
the region to be working toward certain common density goals, as expressed by the County, and that these
goals may be met (in fact, already are being met) City-wide. In contrast, the Legal Dept. feels that to
protect the City's decision-making flexibility, the language accepting regional goals needs to be toned down
considerably. The Legal Department's proposed amendments would retain maximum local flexibility.
Proposed Amendments: Modify V.B.La, page 7, as follows:
Alternative a (Legal Dent.): Kent agrees to use its plans, policies, zoning and other regulatory controls to
encourage area-wide achievement of the T7 ng roomy
regional density policies.
2
Concerns Regarding Soos Creek Interlocal
Alternative b (Plannine Dept.): Kent agrees to use its plans, policies, zoning and other regulatory controls
to encourage city-wide (including within potential annexed areas) achievement of the King County
Kin
County's regional density policies as they may affect Kent.
Also Modify V.B.Lb, page 7, as follows:
Alternative a (Legal Dept.) Kent agrees to ease consider and evaluate applicable regional Qoals in its plans,
policies,zoning and other regulatory controls to encourage area-wide city wide achievement of regional goals
for urban, residential and employment densities; the provision of a full range of housing opportunities,
including affordable housing; the protection of the environment, including natural resources, rural areas,
and open space; transportation; economic development; and historic preservation; and to the extent
applicable incorporate such Goals where such are consistent with the City's plans and objectives.
Alternative b (Planning Dept.) Kent agrees to use consider and evaluate applicable Kine County regional
goals in its plans, policies, zoning and other regulatory controls to encourage city-wide achievement of
regional goals for urban, residential and employment densities; the provision of a full range of housing
opportunities, including affordable housing; the protection of the environment, including natural resources,
rural areas, and open space; transportation; economic development; and historic preservation; and to the
extent applicable incorporate such foals where such are consistent with the City's plans and objectives.
3. Concern: Page 7, Paragraph V.B.2.b. Under "Kent's Responsibilities," states that the City will provide
staff for the Technical Advisory Committee to the County's Soos Creek Plan. This is language in the earlier
(8/88) version.
Concern raised by: Councilmember Dowell.
Response: For some months the Planning Department has been providing a representative to the Soos
Creek Technical Advisory Committee, as have planning staffs in Auburn and Renton. This has provided
a forum for raising City concerns about County Policies in the Soos Creek extraterritorial area.
Proposed Amendment: No change proposed. Staff is already carrying out this function. The cost for this
staffing has been Insignificant to date.
4. Concern: Page 8, Paragraph V.13.2.e. States that the City will "consider adopting the updated Soos Creek
Plan for the City's portion of the Soos Creek Planning Area." Language in the original version.
Concern raised by: Councilmember Dowell.
Response: This language states only that the City will consider adopting policies and zoning of the Soos
Creek Plan in the extraterritorial area. This does not bind the City in any way to adopt the Plan policies
and zoning. The City should review the developing Soos Creek Plan and zoning to determine if there are
portions appropriate for Kent's East Hill Plan.
Proposed Amendment: No change proposed, since the language has no binding effect. Consideration of the
Soos Creek Plan may be desirable, but local flexibility is retained.
3
Concerns Regarding Soos Creek Interlocal
5. Concern: Page 8, Paragraph V.C.1. Stipulates that the City will provide the County with notice, review
and comment opportunity when undertaking code development or major amendment. Language in the
original version.
Concern raised by: Councilmember Dowell.
Response: The City does not routinely provide such notice and comment opportunity to County staff at this
time. However, it could be provided with little impact on the timeframe for code development or
amendment. County comments are not binding on the City, and the additional coordination is imperative
to head off later disputes.
Proposed Amendment:No change proposed. Impact on staff time is expected to be manageable with existing
staff. County comments are not binding, and the additional coordination will help prevent later disputes.
6. Concern: Page 8, Paragraph V.D.2, and Subparagraph V.D.3.a, regarding Kent's Potential Annexation
Area. Language in original version states that Kent shall negotiate with the County to adopt an Interlocal
Annexation Agreement. This section further sets forth criteria for lands to be included within the City's
Potential Annexation Area. Land designated "rural" in the County Comprehensive Plan is not to be
included. Agricultural districts may be included only where the City executes a legally binding agreement
for their continued resource management, and "environmentally sensitive" areas may be included only where
the City provides protection equivalent to County standards.
Concern raised by: Councilmember Dowell, Legal Department.
Response: In calling for a specific Interlocal addressing annexation, the proposed Agreement recognizes the
complexity of the issue, and the need for a separate Agreement covering such. It states that the City will
negotiate with the County to develop such--a non-binding approach.
Stipulations addressing which lands to include in the Potential Annexation Area may not be inconsistent
with current City policy. All lands included within the City Council's approved 20-year annexation plan are
designated "urban" in the County Comprehensive Plan; no portion is designated "rural". (See attached map
of Soos Creek Area.) A minor amendment tying the County's "urban" boundaries to the current date would
be a useful clarification.
The "agricultural district" issue affects only the Horseshoe Bend area just south of the City, recent
negotiations with the County over this Priority Annexation Area have resolved this issue. Regarding
environmentally sensitive areas, in recent years the City has shown a growing commitment to protecting such
lands. City standards may well be able to provide a level of protection equivalent to or superior to the
County standards.
Proposed Amendment: Modify Paragraph V.D.3.a, page 8, as follows:
The area is currently designated by King County Comprehensive Plan Map as urban." Transitional areas
can be included added if redesignated to urban through the adopted Soos Creek Plan.
SECTION VI
The apparent Section VI, entitled "Administration of this Agreement," page 9, is mislabelled and numbered
as a second Section V. The numbering should be corrected.
4
Concerns Regarding Soos Creek lnterlocal
ADDITIONAL CONCERN: Within the Impact and Annexation Area boundaries, the City and County
should adopt the same development standards.
Concern raised by: Councilmember Johnson
Response: The proposed Agreement addresses this issue in a general manner. On page 5,Paragraph IV.B.3,
the County Agrees to "work with" Kent and other suburban cities to compare development standards and
examine whether it is possible to develop a uniform set of standards for the cities and the urban areas of
unincorporated King County.
Proposed Amendment: No action proposed. Issue is addressed in current version; further study to occur
due to complexity and scope.
5
A COOPERATIVE PLANNING AGREEMENT BETWEEN KING COUNTY AND
KENT FOR THE SOOS CREEK COMMUNITY PLANNING AREA
I
WHEREAS, within their own jurisdictions, King County and Kent each has responsibility
and authority derived from the Washington State Constitution 'and state laws to plan for
and regulate uses of land and by law must consider the impacts of its actions on adja-
cent jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, King County and Kent recognize that planning and land use decisions can
have extra-jurisdictional impacts and that intergovernmental cooperation is an effective
way under existing law to deal with impacts and opportunities which cross jurisdictional
boundaries; and
WHEREAS, cooperative efforts can increase efficiency of government by minimizing
conflicts and providing more mutually satisfactory land use and planning decisions; and
WHEREAS, King County Comprenensive Plan policies PI-301 through PI-305 encourage
interjurisdictional cooperation and the use of interlocal agreements to implement solutions
to major planning issues; and
WHEREAS, King County and Kent desire to jointly achieve the effective management of
impacts associated with new development, the efficient provision of needed levels of
urban service, the coordinated preparation of land use, functional and capital improvement
plans, and the delineation of appropriate potential annexation areas; and
WHEREAS, King County is initiating the update of the Soos Creek Community Plan which
is within King County's jurisdiction but is partly within Kent's planning area;
NOW, THEREFORE, KING COUNTY AND KENT AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
I. INTRODUCTION
This Soos Creek Community Planning Area Agreement is envisioned as the first
in a series of cooperative planning agreements between King County and Kent.
Subsequent agreements identifying Kent's Municipal Service Area and Potential
Annexation Area will be developed as an outcome of the County's and city's
cooperation in updating the Soos Creek Community Plan. These subsequent
agreements would be intended to implement the updated Soos Creek Community
Plan, once adopted.
it. PURPOSES
The purposes of this agreement are to:
A. Establish a cooperative relationship through which King County and Kent
can develop and maintain compatible land use policies, zoning and develop-
ment standards within the Soos Creek planning area; and
B. Provide a means by which King County and Kent will consider each other's
plans, regulations and policies in land use development, capital improvement
1 1/25/89
_3:KNT
project planning and natural resource protection within the Soos Creek
Community Planning Area; and
C. Create a workable system for interjurisdictional communication and coor-
dination between the County and city throughout the processes of updating.
adopting and. subsequently. implementing the Soos Creek Community Plan:
and
D. Minimize iinconsistencies between the Soos Creek Community Plan. the King
County Comprehensive Plan and Kent's Comprehensive Plan: and
E. Increase the efficiency and reduce the costs of planning for the area by
preventing duplication of efforts by the two jurisdictions; and
F. Promote a more predictable and certain process and produce more
understandable and long-lasting policies for residents, property owners, deve-
lopers and other agencies and jurisdictions: and
G. Increase the visibility of King County's and Kent's planning efforts, making
their decision-making more understandable to the public; and
H. Define the means by which King County will obtain Kent's cooperation in
achieving regional goals for: urban residential and employment densities:
the provision of a full range of housing opportunities, including affordable
housing; the protection of the environment, including natural resources, rural
areas and open space; transportation: economic development; and historic
preservation. and
I. Provide the means for determining Kent's Municipal Service and Potential
Annexation Areas.
III. DEFINITIONS
A. GEOGRAPHIC AREAS:
1. PLANNING AREA is that portion of the Soos Creek Community Planning
Area outside Kent's city limits for which the city prepares or assists
the County in preparing land use policies as shown on the map
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2. IMPACT AREA is the area outside Kent's city limits within which new
development is likely to have an impact on the city.
3. MUNICIPAL SERVICE AREA is the area outside Kent's city limits which
is the composite of the city's sewer, water and fire protection
franchise areas. together with any areas for which the city has a
contractual obligation to serve. Municipal Service Area includes those
areas the city currently serves as well as those areas for which there
are plans approved by King County for future service.
4. POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA is an area outside Kent's city limits
which the County and the city agree is logical to consider for annexa-
S:KNT 2 1/25/89
tion by the city. Such areas are determined by joint effort of the
County's and city's elected officials and staffs. This effort also
involves a public hearing process to solicit the input of the general
public, area residents, property owners and affected local governments.
B. CODE or PLAN DEVELOPMENT is the preparation or major amendment of
any of these land use regulations or planning documents:
1. LAND USE REGULATIONS: Ordinances which adopt or make major
amendments to regulations controlling the development of land.
2. LAND USE PLANS: Planning documents which express goals. policies
and plans for land use, such as comprehensive or community plans.
3. FUNCTIONAL AND-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS: Plans for the pro-
vision of public facilities and services, such as water, sewer, transpor-
tation and open space plans.
C. PLAN PARTICIPATION is the involvement of the County or city in developing
the other's plans.
D. AGENCY NOTICE is written notification mailed through regular post or hand
delivered from the County to city, or vice versa, which is given in a manner
consistent with ensuring timely exchange of information in considering each
other's plans and policies.
E. REVIEW AND COMMENT OPPORTUNITY is the provision of pertinent
materials for another jurisdiction to review and comment on. King County
and Kent both understand that the opportunity for review and comment is
within the timeframes the responsible jurisdiction establishes, provided the
responsible jurisdiction makes an effort to provide a reasonable amount of
time.
F. STAFF CONSULTATION is a commitment to give the other jurisdiction an
opportunity to ask questions and make comments at the staff level. The
reviewing jurisdiction has the opportunity to request a meeting to get
information and explanation and to indicate the relative compatibility of the
action or plan being considered with its own plans and policies. This
opportunity includes a commitment by the initiating jurisdiction to include in
its pertinent staff report the reviewing jurisdiction's timely submitted written
comments.
IV. KING COUNTY'S RESPONSIBILITIES
A. Development Permit Review
STATEMENT OF INTENT: THE INTENT OF THIS SECTION OF THE
AGREEMENT IS TO INVOLVE KENT IN THE EARLIEST POSSIBLE STAGE OF
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEW IN ORDER TO INCREASE COUNTY
OFFICIALS' UNDERSTANDING OF POTENTIAL CITY CONCERNS ABOUT THE
PROPOSALS.
S:KNT 3 1/25/89
1. In reviewing the development permits listed in this section in the
PLANNING AREA shown on the map attached hereto as Exhibit A. the
King County Building and Land Development Division shall provide Kent
with AGENCY NOTICE. REVIEW AND COMMENT OPPORTUNITY. and the
opportunity for STAFF CONSULTATION before making a threshold
determination. BALD shall invite Kent's staff to participate in a tech-
nical screening meeting which will initially review the permit to deter-
mine it additional information is required before the threshold
deten-nination can be made.
2. All development permits which are not categorically exempt from
threshold determinations and EIS requirements under King County's
environmental procedures are subject to this agreement, including but
not limited to:
a. Zoning reclassifications
b. Preliminary subdivisions, including short plats
C. Preliminary planned unit developments
d. Unclassified use and conditional use permits
e. Shoreline substantial development permits
t. Approval of any of the following:
i. more than 20 dwelling units
ii. agricultural buildings of 30,000 square feet or more
iii. school, office, commercial, industrial, recreational, service-and
storage buildings of 12,000 square feet or more
iv. parking lots for more than 40 automobiles
V. filling, grading or excavating of 500 cubic yards or more.
B. Plan Development
STATEMENT OF INTENT: THE INTENT OF THIS SECTION OF THE
AGREEMENT IS TO INVOLVE KENT IN KING COUNTY'S UPDATE OF THE
SOOS CREEK COMMUNITY PLAN IN ORDER TO OBTAIN THE CITY'S
CONCURRENCE WITH THE UPDATED PLAN'S POLICIES AND ZONING AND
TO OBTAIN THE CITY'S COMMITMENT TO HELPING KING COUNTY ACHIEVE
REGIONAL POLICY GOALS IN THAT PART OF THE SOOS CREEK PLANNING
AREA WHICH IS KENT'S PLANNING AREA.
1. When it undertakes Plan Development in the planning area shown on
the map attached hereto as Exhibit A, the King County Planning and
Community Development Division shall provide Kent with AGENCY
NOTICE, REVIEW AND COMMENT OPPORTUNITY, and opportunities for
STAFF CONSULTATION and PLAN PARTICIPATION. While updating the
Soos Creek Community Plan, the King County Planning and Community
Development Division shall:
a, provide an opportunity for Kent's staff to serve on the Technical
Resource and Advisory Committee with other agencies and juris-
dictions which have interests in the Soos Creek planning area:
b. recommend candidates who have been nominated by Kent for the
Citizen Advisory Committee to be appointed by the King County
Council;
C. work with Kent's staff to propose the issues the update will
S:KNT
4 1/25/89
address;
d. consider comments from Kent's staff on data. land use alter- 1
natives, the draft Environmental Impact Statement and capital
improvement project recommendations;
e. provide Kent the opportunity to discuss disputed issues in a good
faith attempt to resolve differences before the draft plan is
completed and submitted to the Executive;
f. work with Kent to define the boundaries of the city's potential
annexation area and the criteria by which to determine when
annexation of any part of that area is appropriate;
g. encourage Kent to adopt the policies and zoning of the updated
Soos Creek Community Plan for that part of the city's planning
area which is in the Soos Creek planning area;
2. King County shall provide Kent the following opportunities to participate
- in the review of the Executive Proposed Soos Creek Community Plan:
a. Kent may comment on the Executive Proposed Plan at the King
County Council's first public hearing to introduce that plan to the
general public. Kent will receive notice of that hearing at least
fifteen days before it is held.
b. Kent may comment on proposed policies and area zoning at the
County Council Panel meetings during which the proposed plan is
reviewed. King County Council staff and/or Planning and
Community Development Division staff will inform Kent staff of
the time, place and the agenda before each meeting.
C. Kent may comment on the Council Panel proposed Soos Creek
Community Plan and Area Zoning when the County Council holds
its final public hearing on the plan.
3. King County shall work with Kent and all other suburban cities to com-
pare County and city development standards in order to determine
whether or not it is possible to develop one set of urban development
standards that could be ultimately applied in the cities and the urban
areas of unincorporated King County.
4. King County shall provide AGENCY NOTICE to the city during the com-
munity planning process when it initiates long-range planning for capi-
tal improvement projects such as roads and surface water management
facilities. King County shall also provide Kent opportunities for STAFF
CONSULTATION and REVIEW AND COMMENT.
C. Code Development
1. When it undertakes CODE DEVELOPMENT of the codes listed in this
section King County shall provide Kent with AGENCY NOTICE and
REVIEW AND COMMENT OPPORTUNITY.
2. The codes subject to this agreement include:
a. zoning code
b. subdivision and short plats
C. environmental regulations
S:KNT 5 1/25/89
d. shoreline regulations
e. development standards
D. Municipal Service and Potential Annexation Areas
1. King County shall work with Kent to define the city's POTENTIAL
ANNEXATION and MUNICIPAL SERVICE AREAS and to adopt interlocal
agreements between them which define how regional goals will be
jointly achieved within those areas.
2. King County shall support those annexations proposed by Kent that
comply with the adopted interlocal agreement for POTENTIAL
ANNEXATION AREAS.
3. King.County will not support annexations proposed by Kent that would
prevent the achievement of the King County Comprehensive Plan's
policy prescribing an average density of 7-8 dwelling units per acre
for new development in those portions of Urban
Areas which are planned for residential growth, undeveloped,
served or can be served with adequate services, and free
of physical constraints.
4. King County will not support annexations proposed by Kent that would
prevent the achievement of regional goals for: urban residential and-
employment densities; the provision of a full range of housing oppor-
tunities, including affordable housing; the protection of the environ-
ment, including natural resources, rural areas and open space;
transportation; economic development: and historic preservation.
V. KENT'S RESPONSIBILITIES
A. Development Permit Review
STATEMENT OF INTENT: THE INTENT OF THIS SECTION OF THE
AGREEMENT IS TO OFFER KING COUNTY THE OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW
KENT'S DEVELOPMENT PERMITS IN ORDER TO INCREASE CITY OFFICIALS'
UNDERSTANDING OF POTENTIAL COUNTY CONCERNS ABOUT THE
PROPOSALS.
1. When it undertakes review of the development permits listed in this
section within the city. Kent shall provide the King County Planning
and Community Development Division with AGENCY NOTICE, REVIEW
AND COMMENT OPPORTUNITY, and the opportunity for STAFF
CONSULTATION.
2. All permits which are not categorically exempt from threshold deter-
minations and EIS requirements under Kent's environmental procedures
are subject to this agreement, including but not limited to:
a. Zoning reclassifications
b. Preliminary subdivisions, including short plats
C. Preliminary planned unit developments
S:KNT 6 1/25/89
d. Unclassified use and conditional use permits
e. Shoreline substantial development permits
f. Approval of any of the following:
i, more than 20 dwelling units
ii. agricultural buildings of 30,000 square feet or more
iii. school, office, commercial, industrial, recreational, service and
storage buildings of 12,000 square feet or more
iv. parking lots for more than 40 automobiles
V. tilling, grading or excavating of 500 cubic yards or more.
B. Plan Development
STATEMENT OF INTENT: THE INTENT OF THIS SECTION OF THE
AGREEMENT IS TO ENSURE THAT COOPERATIVE LAND USE PLANNING
BETWEEN KENT AND KING COUNTY WILL RESULT IN COMPATIBLE PLANS
AND AREA ZONING AND THE ACHIEVEMENT OF REGIONAL POLICY GOALS.
1. When it undertakes Plan Development, Kent shall provide the King
County Planning and Community Development Division with AGENCY
NOTICE. REVIEW AND COMMENT OPPORTUNITY, and opportunities for
STAFF CONSULTATION and PLAN PARTICIPATION.
a. Kent, agrees to use its plans, policies, zoning and other regula-
tory controls to encourage citywide (including within potential
annexation areas) achievement of the King County
Comprehensive Plan's policy prescribing an average residential
density of 7-8 dwelling units per acre.
b. Kent agrees to use its plans, policies, zoning and other regulatory
controls to encourage citywide achievement of regional goals for:
urban residential and employment densities; the provision of a full
range of housing opportunities, including affordable housing; the
protection of the environment, including natural resources, rural
areas and open space; transportation; economic development; and
,istoric preservation.
2. During the Soos Creek Community Plan's development, Kent shall:
a. advise King County about its plans, policies, zoning and other
regulatory controls so that the Soos Creek Community Plan and
Kent's plans are as compatible as possible;
b. provide staff to serve on the County's Technical Resource and
Advisory Committee for the update of the Soos Creek Community
Plan. Kent's staff is responsible for providing County staff with
information about the city's goals, plans and policies and for
advising County staff about the compatibility of proposed updated
policies with Kent's plans;
C. provide the County data on existing conditions and growth and
development trends within the city upon which the land use
alternatives shall be partly based;
d. work with King County to define the boundaries of the city's
potential annexation area and the criteria by which to determine
S:KNT 7 1/25/89
when annexation of any part of that area is appropriate:
e. consider adopting the policies and zoning of the updated Soos
Creek Community Plan for that part of Kent's planning area which
is in the Soos Creek planning area.
3. Kent shall work with King County and all other suburban cities to com-
pare County and city development standards in order to determine
whether or not it is possible to develop one set of urban development
standards that could be ultimately applied in the cities and the urban
areas of unincorporated King County.
4. Kent shall provide AGENCY NOTICE to the County when it initiates
long-range planning for capital improvement projects, such as roads
and surface water management facilities. Kent shall provide King
County opportunities for STAFF CONSULTATION and REVIEW AND
COMMENT.
C. Code Development
1. When it undertakes CODE DEVELOPMENT of the codes listed in this
section Kent shall provide the County with AGENCY NOTICE and
REVIEW AND COMMENT OPPORTUNITY.
2. The codes subject to this agreement include:
a. zoning code
b. subdivision and short plats
C. environmental regulations
d. shoreline regulations
e. development standards
D. Municipal Service and Potential Annexation Areas
1. Kent shall work with King County to define the city's POTENTIAL
ANNEXATION and MUNICIPAL SERVICE AREAS and to adopt interlocal
agreements between them which define how regional goals will be
jointly achieved within those areas.
2. Kent agrees that it shall negotiate with King County to adopt a
POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA interlocal agreement as part of the
process of reviewing any major annexation proposal.
3. Kent agrees that it shall only include within it's POTENTIAL
ANNEXATION AREA lands which conform to the following criteria:
a. The area is designated by King County Comprehensive Plan Map
as urban. Transitional areas can be included if redesignated to
urban through the adopted Soos Creek Community Plan.
b. Agricultural districts, as designated on the Comprehensive Plan
Map, shall not be included, unless continued management of the
resource would be maintained or enhanced, through a legally
binding agreement with Kent.
C. Rural Land as designated on the Comprehensive Plan Map shall
S:KNT
8 1/25/89
i �
not be included.
d. Areas which contain environmentally sensitive or other features
which are addressed by King County protective policies and/or
regulations may be included if Kent's environmental polices
and/or regulations would provide the same or more protection or
if Kent agrees to adopt the more restrictive policies and/or regu-
lations of the County for the areas. Environmentally sensitive or
other features include but are not limited to: wetlands, steep
slopes, floodways, landslide areas, coal mine hazard areas. erosion
hazards, shorelines, designated open space, and historic sites on
the County's register.
V. ADMINISTRATIM OF THIS AGREEMENT
The responsibility for administering this agreement shall rest jointly with the King
County Executive and the Mayor of the City of Kent through their respective
designees. Within ten (10) days of the signing of this agreement, the designees
shall inform each other of the name and address to be used in correspondence
regarding this agreement. King County and Kent shall each be responsible for
their own costs incurred pursuant to this agreement unless some other contrac-
tual arrangements are made.
V11. DURATION, TERMINATION AND AMENDMENT
This agreement shall become effective on the date of its mutual adoption by the
parties and shall remain in effect until terminated in writing after thirty (30) days
notice pursuant to legislative action of either party. This agreement may be
amended only by express written agreement of both parties pursuant to legisla-
tive action by each.
KING COUNTY CITY OF KENT
Tim Hill Dan Kelleher
King County Executive Mayor
S:KNT 9 1/25/89
KENT CITY COUNCIL
PLANNING COMMITTEE
August 1, 1989 4 :00 PM
Committee Members Present Planning Staff Present
Judy Woods, Chair Charlene Anderson
Steve Dowell Jim Harris
Dan Stroh
Others Present
Other City Staff
Leona Orr
Carolyn Lake
John Marchione
Alana McIalwain
SOOS CREEK INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
In the agenda packet was a synopsis of concerns and responses regarding the
Soos Creek Interlocal Agreement. Senior Planner Dan Stroh stated that the
proposed amendments to the County' s version of the agreement were the result
of staff s best effort to answer the concerns raised by Council and other
City departments. Should the amendments not be acceptable to the county, Mr.
Stroh suggests the County and City Councils meet to resolve areas of
disagreement.
Mr. Stroh mentioned some major areas of concern. One relates to SEPA and
agreement that the interlocal agreement does not supplant requirements of
SEPA and applicable City and County ordinances. The other major area of
concern relates to the County' s Comprehensive Plan and City regulations. The
Planning Department believes the interlocal agreement needs to state that
Kent recognizes a regional policy for residential density. The Legal
Department wants deleted any reference to the County' s Comprehensive Plan and
specific densities of 7-8 units per acre. Planning Director Harris added
that there are other regional goals besides King County's goals, e.g. , PSCOG
and METRO; he wants reference to "King County" goals for clarification.
Assistant City Attorney Lake stated that the first version of this interlocal
agreement which was passed by Kent City Council referred to regional goals;
this second version refers specifically to King County goals. She added that
although this is intended to be an interlocal agreement it states the City
is bound to residential densities on a city-wide basis. She believes the
reference to "city-wide" is a back-door expansion of the parameters of the
original agreement and intent. In addition, by citing specific densities the
agreement binds Kent to subrogate its plans and policies to the County' s
Comprehensive Plan. Ms. Lake recommends that Kent agree to consider the
County' s Comprehensive Plan when that plan is consistent with the City' s own
goals.
Mr. Harris stated that Kent is not in isolation; it is in a region. He
believes Kent must recognize that some of the County' s goals are applicable
to Kent but Kent cannot subrogate to the County. Kent should recognize King
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE
"iNUTES OF MEETING OF AUGUST 1, 1989
County as a regional agency whose goals are applicable in part to Kent.
In response to Councilman Dowell, Mr. Stroh stated that this agreement would
afford both Kent and King County better notification of development activity
within their Spheres of Interest. Councilman Dowell added that for that
notification Kent is giving up some control.
Councilman Dowell asked if this is the best agreement we can have. Jim
Harris responded staff believes it is workable. He added that Renton and
Auburn already have approved the County' s version of the agreement. Staff
is requesting that Council chose between the Planning and Legal Departments '
options. Councilman Dowell will talk to Councilman Johnson who is absent to
determine which alternative the Committee will recommend. This item will be
on the Planning Committee' s and City Council ' s agendas for August 15th.
GRANT FROM DEPT. OF ECOLOGY RELATED TO WETLANDS
Planning Director Harris informed the State that Kent could not accept the
$6, 000 grant from them until the Council decides the 1990 budget. This grant
would require matching funds from the City. The funds would be used to
inventory wetlands. Councilman Dowell MOVED and Chairwoman Woods SECONDED
the motion to recommend acceptance of the $6, 000 grant from the Dept. of
^cology.
ADDED ITEM
Staff informed the Committee that the Mayor' s Assisted Housing Committee is
proposing a $6 . 7 million bond issue for senior housing. This item will be
on the Committee ' s agenda for action on August 15th. It is estimated that
the bond proceeds would address 25% of the senior housing needs in Kent.
Chairwoman Woods asked that Council members be briefed on this issue prior
to the Committee meeting.
Because the bond issue will appear also on the Operations Committee agenda
for August 15th, it was suggested that the Planning Committee meet in the
early morning of the 15th to prepare a recommendation. Staff will call
Councilman Johnson to decide on a convenient time.
The Planning Committee adjourned at approximately 4 : 30 PM.
2
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE
MINUTES OF MEETING OF APRIL 18 , 1989
Department has stated there are major storm drainage problems in the strategy
area and staff requests the option to consider funding CDBG projects related
to storm drainage.
There are several actions that the Council needs to take to accept the
estimated $168 , 141 for 1990:
1) Accept pass-through funds. This leaves City of Kent options open and
maximizes the city' s control of the funds.
2) Allocate 15% of the pass-through funds for public (human) services
funding. This maintains flexibility in decision-making.
3) Allocate 6% of the pass-through funds for planning and administration.
Again, this allows flexibility in decision-making.
4) Adopt local program policies.
Ms. Ball clarified for Councilman Dowell that the CDBG Program Year is now
a calendar year. In addition, the remaining 79% of the CDBG funds (after
subtracting public (human) services and planning and administration) will be
used for capital projects and housing repair. Staff will bring forward to
the Council on September 1 the recommendations for funding.
Councilman Dowell MOVED and Councilman Johnson SECONDED the motion to approve
the 1990 CDBG Local Program Policies as amended and to accept pass-through
funds with 15% allocation to public (human) services and 6% to planning and
administration. Motion carried unanimously.
SOOS CREEK INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
Dan Stroh stated that in February, the King County Council adopted a version
of the Soos Creek Interlocal Agreement which is different from the version
Kent adopted previously. The staff memo sent with the agenda packet
summarizes the changes. The major elements added include Section IV. D. 3
which states "King County will not support annexations proposed by Kent that
would prevent the achievement of the King County Comprehensive Plan' s policy
prescribing an average density of 7-8 dwelling units per acre . . . " In
addition, Section V.B. l.a states "Kent, agrees to use its plans, policies,
zoning and other regulatory controls to encourage citywide . . . achievement
of the King County Comprehensive Plan' s policy prescribing an average
residential density of 7-8 dwelling units per acre. " Mr. Stroh stated it
appears Auburn and Renton will pass the Interlocal Agreement with the
language intact.
Kent' s average density appears to be around 6 . 4 units per acre without
subtracting land with development constraints, e.g. , steep slopes (which the
county is subtracting in their calculations) . Using the methodology of the
3
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE
"TINUTES OF MEETING OF APRIL 18 , 1989
county, Kent would probably meet the 7-8 unit per acre density.
Councilman Dowell stated the density issue was not the only concern he .had
about the agreement. Planning Director Harris acknowledged that the Legal
Department had problems with the agreement as well, especially regarding
SEPA, traffic, and annexation agreements.
City Attorney Driscoll distributed a memo from her office dated April 17 ,
1989 . The memo outlines the Legal Department's concerns with the changes
from the earlier version of the agreement. Ms. Driscoll stated that in
addition her office has the same concerns as before about the earlier version
of the agreement, especially related to transportation. She acknowledged
that from a planning point of view it is important to consider that the City
is trying to move toward regional cooperation. However, the changes in the
agreement subordinate the City' s land use plans to King County' s plans. In
addition, it would be important to have a statement that the agreement in no
way supersedes SEPA.
Jim Harris provided a background of the interlocal agreement. It was
originally intended to get the county to recognize the incorporated cities
and to get the county into a regional profile. At the present time in the
Puget Sound area, land use and transportation don't mesh. In addition, it
is difficult to work with the county staff because one part of the county
_.jperates separately from another. Assistant City Administrator Hansen
affirmed that the original document was meant to be a planning document done
in the spirit of cooperation to enhance planning. Over time the document has
become more specific. He is concerned that the planning process will be
completed before the City and County have an interlocal agreement to enhance
that process. Mr. Hansen responded to Councilman Dowell that upon annexation
of an area, the City would need to show a city-wide average density of 7-8
units per acre, not 7-8 units for the annexation area only.
Chairwoman Woods asked that staff work cooperatively with other cities and
provide a united front to the county related to this agreement. She
suggested the agreement would be more acceptable if the words "wherever
possible" were added. She would like staff to meet with Councilmen Dowell
and Johnson and City Attorney Driscoll to address their concerns.
Jim Hansen added that Barbara Heavey from King County would be present at
tonight' s city Council meeting to express a possible conflict between
adoption of the proposed annexation priorities on tonight' s agenda and the
proposed Soos Creek Interlocal Agreement related to annexing agricultural
areas.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at approximately 5: 00 PM. There will be no meeting on
May 2 , 1989 .
4
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE
MINUTES OF MEETING OF APRIL 4 , 1989
Motion carried unanimously.
FUNDING BASE - HUMAN SERVICES
Human Services Commission Chairman Marvin Eckfeldt read the motion relating
to the funding base for human services. He distributed and reviewed a
question and answer sheet providing additional information on the
recommendation of the Commission. This item will be discussed at the City
Council meeting of April 18 .
Commission Chairman Eckfeldt added that the process for review of
applications for human services funding runs parallel with the City's budget
process so there are timing problems to be overcome. It would be beneficial
for the Commission to know at the time of application review what the funding
base would be. Commission vice Chairwoman Moschel stated that the City of
Kent funding has been used to leverage funding from other governmental
agencies. Commissioner Atkin stated this brings additional funds into the
Kent area.
Councilman Dowell questioned using a percentage calculation rather than a
stated dollar amount. He recognizes the need for planning purposes to know
the level of funding but he believes it would be clearer to commit to a
specific dollar amount or per capita amount rather than a percentage.
Discussion occurred.
Councilman Johnson MOVED and Councilman Dowell SECONDED the motion to put
this item on the City Council agenda for April 18 under Other Business.
Motion passed unanimously. Chairwoman Woods clarified that the Planning
Committee is approving the recommendation of the Human Services Commission
with a 2-1 vote (Councilman Dowell does not support a percentage funding
base) . Committee members approved this clarification.
SOOS CREEK INTERLOCAL
Carolyn Lake, Assistant City Attorney, distributed a memo describing the Law
Department's concerns with the Interlocal Agreement. Councilman Dowell
mentioned he also has some concerns. Dan Stroh distributed a memo outlining
the differences between the recent county version of the Interlocal Agreement
and the version the Kent City Council adopted earlier. Fred Satterstrom will
gather such information to include in the Planning Committee agenda packet
for April 18 .
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at approximately 5 : 00 PM.
3
NrlNlllll..r.... ...........rarrwrrrr
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15 1989
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: LID 334 - DERBYSHIRE NO. 7 SANITARY SEWER
IMPROVEMENTS
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept as complete the contract with
Allied Construction for the final contract total of $255, 610. 82
for the LID 334 improvement project and release of retainage
after receipt of releases from the State.
3 . EXHIBITS: Memorandum from Director of Public Works
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Director of Public Works
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED:
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3F
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
August 10, 1989
TO: Mayor Kelleher _a$�d City Council
FROM: Don Wickstro4
RE: L.I.D. 334 -Derbyshire #7 Sanitary Sewer and Water Main
Replacement
The project was awarded to Allied Construction on December 20, 1988
for the bid amount of $202 , 119 . 16 .
The project provided for sanitary sewer improvements and water main
replacement in the Derbyshire #7 area in the vicinity of S .E. 276th
and 121st Avenue S .E. The final contract cost is $255, 610. 82, the
difference due to the need to excavate more material than
anticipated. It is recommended the project be accepted as complete
and the retainage released after receipt of the releases from the
State.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15. 1989
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: SMITH STREET IMPROVEMENTS
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Accept as complete the contract with West
Coast Construction for the final contract total of $718, 049. 03
for the Smith Street improvement project and release of
retainage after receipt of the necessary releases from the State.
3 . EXHIBITS: Memorandum from Director of Public Works
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Director of Public Works
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED:
SOURCE OF FUNDS :
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3G
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
August 10, 1989
TO: Mayor Kelleher and City Council
FROM: Don Wickstrom . 0
RE: Smith Street Improvements (1st to Jason)
The contract , for this project was awarded to West Coast
Construction on June 7 , 1988 for the bid amount of $590, 900.72 .
The project consisted of widening of Smith Street from 1st to Jason
including overlay, rechannelization, traffic signal revisions and
storm drainage improvements. The final contract cost was
$718, 049 . 03 . The difference between the bid and final contract
cost was due to additional work required during the course of the
construction project, such as replacement of the water main on
Smith Street, providing a new Puget Power trench, regrading parking
lots to the new sidewalk grade, adjusting light poles, utilities,
etc. Project budget was $1, 325, 000 and project costs paid to date
are $1, 199 , 740 . 83 . It is recommended the project be accepted as
complete and the retainage released after receipt of the releases
from the State.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date_ August 15, 1989
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: SURPLUS VEHICLES
2 . As recommended by the Public Works
Committee 14uthorization for he Pu is or s Depar men to
us nine vehicles as described in the July 7 memorandum from
the Fleet Manager and offer same for sale at state auction.
3 . EXHIBITS: Excerpt from Public Works Committee minutes of
August 8, 1989 ; memorandum from Jack Spencer, Fleet Manager.
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED:
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3H
Public Works Committe
August 8 , 1989
_. Page 2
participation (gas tax, etc. ) , impact fees, LIDS, and voter
approved bond issue. Development of an environmental mitigation
agreement took some time to reach agreement of all parties.
Involved in the process was a local land use law firm, CPI 's legal
representatives, Mel Kleweno, Boeing attorneys and Union Pacific
attorneys as well as Sandra Driscoll. The proposed environmental
mitigation agreement developed as a result of this process is
included as part of these minutes. It was clarified the agreement
has a fixed time period and a fixed maximum amount of commitment.
Knapp added that an additional recommendation of the Task Force
not shown on the attached material is to include the development
of the Transportation System Management (TSM) program as a
component in the Local Transportation Act (LTA) . Wickstrom added
that one of the key elements in implementation of these
recommendations is funding of the update of the Comprehensive
Transportation Plan in the 1990 budget. Johnson asked what the
next step would be on implementation if Council approves the
recommendation. Wickstrom indicated that some of the
recommendations can be implemented immediately, such as the
Environmental Mitigation Agreement. Next would be modification of
the SEPA ordinance to include the 10 peak hour trip threshold.
Third would be approval of the funding for the update of the
Comprehensive Transportation Plan in order to implement the studies
necessary to implement the LTA program. Driscoll added that the
recommendation is that these studies be completed and the LTA
program ready for implementation in one year. Dowell asked what
happens to the agreements already in effect. Knapp responded
there is a recommendation allowing renegotiation and execution of
the new agreement to the extent legally allowable. However, the
old agreements are probably better for the developers than the new
so there will probably be very few wanting to renegotiate. The
Committee unanimously recommended approval of the Task Force
recommendations and that City staff be directed to take steps
necessary to implement these recommendations.
Hansen commended Ted Knapp for the time he has contributed to this
program.
Surplus Vehicles
The list of vehicles for surplus was reviewed and the Committee
unanimously recommended approval to surplus the vehicles as
included in the memorandum from the Fleet Manager.
MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 71 1989
CITY OF KENT
TO: D%n,I!ckstrom.k"
.,:,.Q y.�... . JUL 1 01989
'Director"of"Public Works
FROM: Jack Spencer ENGINEERING DEPT.
Fleet Manager(/
SUBJECT: Authorization to Surplus Vehicles
I am requesting authorization to surplus vehicles which are no
longer needed by Equipment Rental. The list is as follows:
#61 1979 DODGE 1/2 TON PICKUP 58,792 MILES
This unit has been replaced with a new truck and also has been
used as a line vehicle for approximately two years. It has had
problems with the frame and steering. The body is very rough. It
would need extensive repair and paint work to be useable.
#49 1979 DODGE 1/2 TON PICKUP 91,378 MILES
Truck has been replaced with a new unit and was used as a line
vehicle. Engine uses oil and body would need repainting. It is
not economical to keep vehicle in use.
#754 1981 FORD FAIRMONT 4-DOOR SEDAN 59,529 MILES
This car was used by the Fire Department and has been replaced with
a new car. Appearance is poor and it would need repainting. The
engine will need repair in the near future.
#310 1985 PLYMOUTH FURY 83,827 MILES
This car has been replaced with a new unit. It has high mileage
and a rough appearance. Suspension is badly worn. Not useable for
Police work.
#335 1985 FORD MUSTANG 50,251 MILES
Car has been used by Police for investigation. It is no longer
effective for Police use. The car is a two-door model and not
useable for a line vehicle.
f #363 1985 PLYMOUTH FURY 72,921 MILES
Car has been replaced with a new Police car. Steering and
suspension are poor. It has engine, ignition and carburetor
problems.
AUTHORIZATION TO SURPLUS VEHICLES
July 61 1989
Page 2 of 2
#360 1982 DODGE DIPLOMAT 85,605 MILES
This car has been replaced in 1986 with a new unit. It has been
used as an evidence car since then. Mileage and appearance make
it necessary to surplus.
#364 1986 PLYMOUTH FURY 74,234 MILES
Car has been replaced with a new unit. Steering and suspension are
loose. Mileage and appearance make it unusable for Police patrol .
#366 1986 PLYMOUTH FURY 79,923 MILES
Car has been replaced with a new patrol car. High mileage and poor
handling make it unusable for Police patrol .
JS/map
cc: Tim Heydon
Dianne Sullivan
C315A03
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15 1989
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: S .R. 515P 220TH TO 196TH •
2 . Y ST recommended b Public Works
Committee, thorization for e ayor to sign agre with
the State for relocation of sanitary sewer main in conjunction
with their S.R. 515 (S .E. 220th to S.E. 196th) project.
3 . EXHIBITS: Excerpt from Public Works Committee minutes of
August 8 , 1989 ; copy of agreement.
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee
(committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: None
SOURCE OF FUNDS-
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3I
Public Works Committe
August 8 , 1989
Page 3
Agreement with State - Relocation of Sanitary Sewer SR 515 (S.E.
220th - S.E. 196th)
Wickstrom explained that in conjunction with the State's rebuild
of SR 515 (which is on hold until the State gets gas tax approval)
a City of Kent sanitary sewer main will need to be relocated. The
State will pay the costs involved. The agreement authorizes the
State to proceed with this work. The Committee unanimously
recommended approval for the Mayor to sign the agreement.
Pavement Marking for Pedestrian Access - lllth Avenue S.E.
Wickstrom explained this is in the vicinity of Sequoia Jr. High
responding to the request from the Kent School District. The
pavement is wide enough to place a 4-inch white stripe providing
a 4-foot walkway on the easterly side of lllth. The cost is
estimated to be $900 which could be funded from the Asphalt Overlay
funds. Johnson asked about the additional 20 MPH sign requested
by the School District. Wickstrom stated the proposed cost did not
include the sign which would be an additional $200. IBC has
indicated this would not need to go to Council as it can be funded
from existing funds. The Committee directed staff to proceed with
placement of the white stripe and the additional 20 MPH sign.
Pavement Management Program
Wickstrom explained that the Pavement Management Program is a
sophisticated computerized program which provides analysis of the
City' s street system resulting in a detailed report for maintenance
purposes. We currently have the old version of the program on line
which is difficult to run. The software has recently been upgraded
making it more "user friendly" and we are requesting purchase of
this upgrade, temporary data entry personnel and vehicle rental and
fuel for data collection. IBC has recommended approval since the
costs will be funded from existing operating budget. The Committee
unanimously approved the request.
Purchase of Microfilm Reader/Printer
Wickstrom explained IBC concurred with request for purchase of this
equipment as long as it could be purchased from our operating
budget. Gill explained the 1989 Operating budget included $7 , 000
to microfilm all our as-built construction plans and purchase a
reader. After the microfilming is completed, we anticipate having
approximately $2, 000 remaining to purchase equipment. A reader
would only allow us to look at the microfilm but not make a copy.
Washington State Duane BeTr nspon
Department of Transportation Secretary of Transportation
M
District 1
15325 S.E.30th Place _.
Bellevue,Washington 98007
(;f'Y OF VENT
May 9, 1989 MAY 1 a 1969
ENGINEERING DEPT.
City of Kent
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
ATTN: Mr. Don Wickstrom
Public Works Director
f SR 515 CS 1741
SE 220th to SE 196th
Widen to Five Lanes
City of Kent
Install Sewer Pipe
AGREEMENT UT 0241
Gentlemen:
Please have the originals of the referenced, enclosed agreement
(brown cover) signed on behalf of Utility and return to this
office. We will return an original with state signatures.
As the advertisement date is presently set for May 30, 1989 , we
need to have this agreement completed by May 23 , 1989 . Please
expedite the signing of this agreement and return to this office
by May 17 , 1989 for final execution by the state.
Do not write the date in on the front Page this will be entered
by the state upon signing. Enclosed is a copy (blue cover) of
the agreement for your temporary records.
Please contact Mr. Jay Ramage at 562-4258 if additional
information is needed.
S?ncetLyL,
JUTZ, P.E.
tilities Engineer
JMR:dp
Attach.
U6/tl4 .wk2
ORGANIZATION AND ADDRESS
UTILITY CONSTRUCTION City of Kent
AGREEMENT 220 Fourth Avenue South
WORK BY STATE--ACTUAL COST
Kent , WA 98032
AGREEMENT NUMBER SECTION/LOCATION
SE 220th to ' SE 196th Widen to
five lanes .
STATE ROUTE CONTROLSECTION DISTRICT
NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER
515 1741 1
ADVANCE PAYMENT AMOUNT
$ N/A
This AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of 19
between the STATE OF WASHINGTON, Department of Transportation, acting by and through the Secretary of Transporta-
tion, by virtue of Title 47 RCW, hereinafter called the "STATE"; and the above named organization, hereinafter called the
"UTILITY."
' WHEREAS, the STATE is-planning the construction or improvement of the State Route shown above, and in connection
therewith it is necessary to remove and/or relocate or construct certain UTILITY facilities as set forth in the attached plans,
and
WHEREAS, it is deemed to be in the best public interest for the STATE to include the necessary items of work for
relocating and/or constructing the UTILITY's facilities in the STATE's construction contract, and
WHEREAS, the STATE is obligated for the relocation of facilities where the UTILITY has a compensable interest in its
facilities and right-of-way by virtue of being located on easements or UTILITY owned right-of-way, the UTILITY is obligated
to reimburse the STATE for any relocation costs required for facilities not on easements or UTILITY owned right-of-way.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms,conditions, covenants and performances contained herein, or attached
and incorporated and made a part hereof, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
I The UTILITY agrees, upon satisfactory completion of
GENERAL the work involved, to deliver a letter of acceptance which
Federal-Aid Highway Program shall include a release and waiver of all Inure claims or
g Y g Manual, Volume 6, demands of any nature resulting from the performance of the
Chapter 6, Section 3, Subsection I (FHPM 6-6-3-1), and work under this AGREEMENT.
amendments thereto, determine and establish the definitions
and.applicable standards for this AGREEMENT and pay- II
ment i hereunder, and by this reference are incorporated PAYMENT
hereby and made a part of this AGREEMENT for all in- An itemized estimate of cost for work to be performed
tents and purposes as if fully set forth herein.
by the STATE marked Exhibit "B„ is attached hereto, and
The STATE, as agent'acting for and on behalf of the by this reference,made a part of this AGREEMENT.
UTILITY, agrees to do the work in removing, relocating The UTILITY, in consideration of the faithful perform-
and/or constructing the UTILITY facilities, in accordance
with and described in the specifications marked Exhibit "A" burs of the work to be done to the STATE, agrees to reed
and plans marked Exhibit "C" attached hereto, and by this cost the STATE for the actual direct and related indirect
reference made a part of this AGREEMENT. cost of all work which is the financial responsibility of the
,,,. UTILITY as defined in Exhibits "A" and "B".
Plans, specifications and cost estimates shall be pre- Partial payments shall,be made by the UTILITY, upon
pared by the STATE in accordance with the current State of re uest of the STATE, to cover costs incurred. These pay-
Washington Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and q per month. It
i
Municipal Construction, and adopted design standards, un- s agreed
are not toeed that any y such partial payment will not constitute
more frequent than one (1)
less otherwise noted. The STATE will incorporate the plans s agr
agreement as
and specifications into the STATE's project and thereafter a the appropriateness any item and that, at
advertise the resulting project for bid and, assuming bids are the time c final l audit, all required adjustments will be made
received and a contract is awarded,administer the contract. and reflected in a final payment.
' The UTILITY hereby approves the plans and specifica- The UTILITY agrees to pay the STATE the "Advance
tions for the described work as shown on Exhibits "A" and Payment Amount„ stated above within 20 days after the
„C STATE submits its first partial payment request to the
UTILITY. The advance payment represents approximately
The UTILITY may, if it desires, furnish an inspector on fifteen (15) percent of the estimate of cost for which the
the project. Any costs for such inspection will be borne solely UTILITY is responsible, and covers costs incurred by the
by the UTILITY. All contact between said inspector and the STATE in the initial stages'of,the project. The advance pay-
STATE's contractor shall be`through the STATE's repre- ment will be carried throughout the life of the project with
sentatives. final adjustment made in the final payment.
EXHIBIT "A"
SPECIFICATIONS AND SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
The work proposed under this Agreement contemplates the removal,
adjustment, and/or relocation of certain facilities as described
herein. All work is the responsibility of the state.
WORK TO BE PERFORMED BY THE STATE
Exhibit "C" , Sheet 1: Structure Notes.
Exhibit "C" , Sheet 2 : Construct 440 L.F. of 8-inch PVC Sewer
Pipe, 6 L.F. of 6-inch PVC Sewer Pipe
and three each manhole under 12 ft. ,
48-inch diameter, Type 1.
Exhibit "C" , Sheet 3 : Profile.
WORK TO BE PERFORMED BY THE UTILITY
NONE.
FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
The work to be performed by the State under this agreement is
100% the responsibility of the State.
FRANCHISE OR PERMIT
The Utility shall apply for and the State shall convey the
necessary statutory permits or franchises pursuant to Chapter
47 . 44 RCW required for installation of such facilities that
remain on or cross the State highway right of way.
-lA-
JR:dp Agreement UT 0241
EXHIBITA/thl.wk2
ESTIMATE OF COST
EXHIBIT "B"
Std.
Item Unit Unit
No. Description Measure Price Quantity Amount
0001 * Mobilization L. S. $ L. S. L. S. $ 1, 225. 00
3645 Trench Excavation C.Y. 18 . 00 443 7 , 974 . 00
3152 Testing Sewer Pipe L.F. 2 . 50 446 1, 115. 00
3651 Plain Concrete or L. F. 14 . 00 6 84 . 00
V.C. Sewer Pipe,
6-In. Diam.
Plain Concrete or L. F. 15. 00 440 6, 600. 00
. V.C. Sewer Pipe,
. 8-In. Diam.
7006 Structure Excavation C.Y. 11. 00 44 484 . 00
Class B, Incl. Haul
7010 Shoring and Cribbing S.F. . 20 91450 1, 890. 00
or Extra Excavation
Class B
7013 Gravel Backfill C.Y. ' 19 . 00 34 646. 00
for Pipe Bedding
3021 Manhole Under. 12 Ft. Each 1, 900 . 00 3 5, 700. 00
48 In. Diam. , Type 1
Contract Total $ 25, 718 . 00
Washington State Sales Tax (8 . 1%) 2 , 083 . 16
Agreement Subtotal $ 27 , 801. 16
* Engineering 10% 2 , 780. 12
Contingencies 5% 1, 390. 06
TOTAL - 100% STATE COST $ 31,971.34
* Actual cost for Mobilization and Engineering will be determined by a
proration based upon the total cost of the work in this Agreement to
the total contract.
-1B-
JR:dp Agreement UT 0241
EOC"B"/w7 .wk2
Or Kent City Council Meeting
` Date August 15 , 1989
1 Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: SENIOR HOUSING BOND ISSUE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: At its July 31 meeting, the Mayor's
Assisted Housing Committee recommended that the Council place a
$6.7 million voter-approved bond measure on the November
ballot. Proceeds from the bonds would build a minimum of 92
units of senior housing which is estimated to meet roughly 25
percent of the identified need for senior housing in Kent.
A
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff memo; committee report.
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Mayor's Assisted Housing Committee July 31 . 1989
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
Recommendations from the Council's Planning and Operations
Committees will be made at their August 15 meeting.
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: $6.7 million
SOURCE OF FUNDS: voter-approved general obligation_bonds
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: �r�/
ti'l�/v
Councilmember � ��-�'� moves, Councilmember seconds
to accept/Ytj15Ct- the report of the Mayor's Assisted Housing
Committee and to approve/ eve directing Planning, Finance,
City Attorney, and City Clerk to place a $6.7 million
voter-approved bond measure on the November ballot.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 4A
KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT
August 10, 1989
MEMO TO: Mayor Dan Kelleher and Members of City Council
FROM: James P, Harris, Planning Director
SUBJECT: PROPOSAL FOR VOTER-APPROVED SENIOR HOUSING BOND
The Mayor' s Assisted Housing Committee has been meeting over the
past several months to review the City's need for assisted housing.
At its July 31 meeting, the committee recommended that the Council
place a voter-approved bond measure on the November ballot. The
proposed bond would be in the amount of $6.7 million, for the
purpose of building a minimum 92 units of senior housing. The
committee's needs assessment shows this number of units as meeting
roughly 25% of the identified need for senior housing in Kent.
Attached is the full report of the committee' s study and
recommendations.
In moving toward this recommendation the committee has worked to
identify the current and projected population in need of housing
assistance, to review existing resources, and to sort out the scope
of unmet need. The Senior Housing Bond is one strategy the
committee feels is needed and should be done right away. Other
strategies in the report address longer-term actions, to include
support for family housing and a new staff member dedicated to
housing advocacy. In addition, the committee has been asked to
reconvene next spring to review the results of the bond campaign
(should Council decide to place it on the ballot) and to move
forward on the other housing needs.
In order to meet the County Elections deadlines, the Council would
need to decide to move forward on this at the August 15 meeting.
Staff recommends approval of the committee's recommendation, and
of a Council Resolution placing a $6.7 million bond on the November
ballot.
DS:JPH:ca
Attachment
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15, 1989
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: TRAFFIC MITIGATION TASK FORCE REPORT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: In November of 1987, Council recommended
the Chamber of Commerce form a task force to review the City's
traffic mitigation procedure and agreements. The task force was
co-chaired by Ted Knapp of Union Pacific Realty and Brent
McFall, City Administrator. Members of the task force included
Elmira Forner; John McCullough of Foster, Pepper & Riviera; Jack
Bennett of CPI; Suzette Cooke of Kent Chamber of Commerce; Tim
Schottman of CFS Continental; Mel Kleweno, attorney; Terry
McAleer of Trammell Crow; Larry Frazier of Seattle Master
Builders; Jay Terry Lewis of Boeing Company; Colin Quinn of
Centron; Art Kleppen of CPK Systematics; and Don Bogard,
architect. City staff participating on the task force were
Sandra Driscoll, Jim Hansen, Don Wickstrom, and Ken Morris.
During 1988, the task force reviewed the City's SEPA process,
the budget and bonding capacity, the street capital financing,
the Green River Valley Transportation Action Plan, the City's
Six Year Transportation Improvement Plan, the County's
Mitigation Program, and the State's Local Transportation Action
of 1988 . The recommendations and proposed environmental
mitigation agreement developed by the task force were presented
to the Chamber of Commerce in June of 1989 , who recommended
approval . The recommendations were also presented to the Public
Works Committee at their meeting of August 8 , 19891 -ate µ ��
recommended approval of the task force recommendations.
3 . EXHIBITS: Excerpt from Public Works Committee minutes of
August 8, 1989 ; task force minutes; Chamber of Commerce minutes;
excerpt from Chamber of Commerce newsletter; recommendations of
task force; summarization of Local Transportation Act of 1988 ;
proposed Environmental Mitigation Agreement.
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee City of Kent, Chamber of
Commerce Traffic Mitigation Task Force
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: None at this time
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:, `
Councilmember Vi6t moves, Councilmember seconds
to accept the Traffic Mitigation Task Force report into the
record, adopt the task force recommendations and direct City staff
to take the steps necessary to implement the recommendations.
DISCUSSION• '
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 4B
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
AUGUST 8, 1989
PRESENT: JON JOHNSON MARTIN NIZLEK
STEVE DOWELL TIM HEYDON
DON WICKSTROM JACK SPENCER
GARY GILL JOHN MARCHIONE
JIM HANSEN MIMI CASTILLO
SANDRA DRISCOLL TED KNAPP
KEN MILLER CHARLES PARSONS
LYLE PRICE
Construction Activities - Charles Parsons
Mr. Parsons commented he lives 6 miles east of Kent and uses 84th
every morning on his commute to work. He referred to the incident
detailed in his letter of June 19 regarding work being performed
by a construction company in the area prior to the work hours
specified in his permit with no traffic control thus creating worse
traffic congestion than the normal a.m. commute. Johnson asked
what we could do to assure the contractors work within the limits
of their permits. Wickstrom and Miller both responded that it is
important for the City to be notified when these instances do occur
so that we can send inspectors out at the time the violation is
occurring. We are currently revising the street cut permits to
specify working hours. Mr. Parsons urged that some sort of fine
be levied against the contractors when they violate their permit.
Miller responded the ordinance does address penalties as a
misdemeanor. Driscoll clarified a misdemeanor could mean a $1, 000
fine or 1 year in jail. The procedures followed now when we
receive such complaints were detailed for the Committee being that
when we receive such a call, we will send an inspector out
immediately and verify if there is a valid permit. It was
suggested the permit also reference the penalties for violation of
the conditions of the permit.
Traffic Mitigation Task Force Report
Ted Knapp, chair of the Traffic Mitigation Task Force, reviewed for
the Committee the direction and activities of the Task Force which
are detailed in the agenda packet (material made a part of these
minutes) . Dowell asked Knapp to explain the funding sources
anticipated. Knapp explained the basis of the Task Force
recommendations is the implementation of the provisions of the
Local Transportation Act of 1988 . Also continued involvement in
attempt to form a Transportation Benefit District is encouraged.
Other sources of income could come from possible State
Public Works committe
August 8 , 1989
Page 2
participation (gas tax, etc. ) , impact fees, LIDS, and voter
approved bond issue. Development of an environmental mitigation
agreement took some time to reach agreement of all parties.
Involved in the process was a local land use law firm, CPI ' s legal
representatives, Mel Kleweno, Boeing attorneys and Union Pacific
attorneys as well as Sandra Driscoll. The proposed environmental
mitigation agreement developed as a result of this process is
included as part of these minutes. It was clarified the agreement
has a fixed time period and a fixed maximum amount of commitment.
Knapp added that an additional recommendation of the Task Force
not shown on the attached material is to include the development
of the Transportation System Management (TSM) program as a
component in the Local Transportation Act (LTA) . Wickstrom added
that one of the key elements in implementation of these
recommendations is funding of the update of the Comprehensive
Transportation Plan in the 1990 budget. Johnson asked what the
next step would be on implementation if Council approves the
recommendation. Wickstrom indicated that some of the
recommendations can be implemented immediately, such as the
Environmental Mitigation Agreement. Next would be modification of
the SEPA ordinance to include the 10 peak hour trip threshold.
Third would be approval of the funding for the update of the
Comprehensive Transportation Plan in order to implement the studies
necessary to implement the LTA program. Driscoll added that the
recommendation is that these studies be completed and the LTA
program ready for implementation in one year. Dowell asked what
happens to the agreements already in effect. Knapp responded
there is a recommendation allowing renegotiation and execution of
the new agreement to the extent legally allowable. However, the
old agreements are probably better for the developers than the new
so there will probably be very few wanting to renegotiate. The
Committee unanimously recommended approval of the Task Force
recommendations and that City staff be directed to take steps
necessary to implement these recommendations.
Hansen commended Ted Knapp for the time he has contributed to this
program.
Surplus Vehicles
The list of vehicles for surplus was reviewed and the committee
unanimously recommended approval to surplus the vehicles as
included in the memorandum from the Fleet Manager.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
August 1, 1989
TO: Public Works Committee
FROM: Don Wickstrom
RE: Traffic Mitigation
In November of. 1987 , Council recommended the Chamber of Commerce
form a. Task Force to review the City's traffic mitigation procedure
and agreements. The Task Force was co-chaired by Ted Knapp of
Union Pacific Realty and Brent McFall, City Administrator. Members
of the Task Force included Elmira Forner; John McCullough of
Foster, Pepper & Riviera; Jack Bennett of CPI; Suzette Cooke, Kent
Chamber of Commerce; Tim Schottman, CFS Continental ; Mel Kleweno,
attorney; Terry McAleer, Trammell Crow; Larry Frazier, Seattle
Master Builders; J. Terry Lewis, Boeing; Colin Quinn, Centron; Art
_.. Kleppen, CPK Systematics and Don Bogard, architect. City staff
participating on the Task Force were Sandra Driscoll, Jim Hansen,
Don Wickstrom and Ken Morris.
During 1988 , the Task Force reviewed the City's SEPA process, the
budget and bonding capacity, the street capital financing, the
Green River Valley Transportation Action Plan, the City's Six Year
Transportation Improvement Plan, the County's mitigation program
and the State's Local Transportation Action of 1988 (a summary of
which is included in your packet) .
The recommendations and proposed Environmental Mitigation Agreement
developed by the Task Force were presented to the Chamber of
Commerce in June of 1989 who recommended approval.
These recommendations and Mitigation Agreement are presented to you
at this time for your; concurrence and further recommendation to
Council .
CITY OF KENT
TRAFFIC MITIGATION TASK FORCE
JUNE 2, 1989
PRESENT: Ted Knapp Suzette Cooke
Don Wickstrom Jack Bennett
Sandra Driscoll Don Bogard
Jim Hansen Terry McAleer
Marty Nizlek Larry K. Frazier
Fred Satterstrom Mel Kleweno
Ted Knapp reviewed the past experiences of the Task Force which
resulted in the development of some eleven recommendations (copy
of which is attached to these minutes) . Further action has been
delayed until agreement could be reached on the wording of the
environmental mitigation agreement. over the last several months
an agreement has been developed which has met the approval of the
City Attorney and Director of Public Works and with several members
of the Task Force. Copies of this agreement were distributed to
those present. Jack Bennett inquired about the lump sum payment
due if the LID were not formed within the ten year period and what
happens to that money. Wickstrom and Driscoll confirmed the money
would be deposited in a fund to be used only for those specific
improvements. Responding to Jack Bennett's question regarding the
traffic study, Driscoll indicated that opportunity specifically
relates to the LID assessment. Driscoll reviewed the latest
revisions to the agreement. After discussion of the question
raised by Larry Frazier, it was determined the term "public
hearing" used on pages 13 and 15 should be changed to "hearing" .
Kleweno wanted to go on record he is opposed to the whole idea of
mitigation agreements as he does not think it is a fair and
equitable method of dealing with the impact of traffic. He
continued he felt the burden should be spread further than to the
people coming in and developing now. Knapp responded that while
probably no one likes the process it is an attempt to develop a
fair and equitable treatment of the costs. Bennett responded that
this provides an alternative to the standard SEPA process which is
time consuming and expensive and could result in the same
conclusion so as an alternative could be better. He continued that
part of their comfort with it is the hope the City will implement
the LID process in a fair and equitable manner.
Knapp explained that since this is a Chamber of Commerce Task
Force, these recommendations will be presented to them for their
concurrence. From there it will be presented to the Public Works
Committee and then to full Council. Cooke raised a question as
to the rates. It was explained that the rates differ according to
the applicable corridor and would not be any higher than the amount
designated in the agreement but could be less. Bogard expressed
Traffic Mitigation Task Force
June 2 , 1989
Page 2
some concern regarding the process of determining the trip
generation for projects. Knapp added he felt the premise of the
Local Transportation Act (LTA) was to get away from arbitrary
negotiations dealing with the trips and this proposed mitigation
agreement offers three scenarios all of which are consistent with
the criteria established in the LTA.
Cooke asked about the threshold level of 10 peak hour trips that
is being recommended. It was explained that if this recommendation
is accepted by Council the new threshold would be included in the
SEPA review process. The 10 peak hour trips corresponds to the
County' s recommendations as well as that of ITE.
Knapp reviewed the eleven recommendations for discussion. Bennett
felt the level of 10 peak hour trips should be changed. He
commented he felt that allows a lot of trips to escape the process
and if there are concerns about particular types of development,
i.e. residential, they should be addressed as specific exceptions.
There was a question raised as what was realistic administratively.
Satterstrom stated that four years ago Council raised the
thresholds to eliminate the need for the smaller developments to
go through the SEPA process. It was clarified that lowering the
threshold would mean each development would have to go through the
SEPA checklist process. After lengthy discussion, it was
determined the recommendation of 10 peak hour trips should remain.
The words "peak hour trips" should be added after the number "loll
to the last sentence of this recommendation. Frazier suggested
that Recommendation #5 include the language that development refers
to existing as well as new. It was determined that the LID process
would address existing development and that the LTA process doesn't
allow you to go back to existing development. After discussion,
it was decided the recommendation would stand as written.
Knapp brought up the issue of the TSM ordinance and suggested it
be folded into the LTA study and that it become a component of this
program. The LTA includes a criteria to address how public
transportation and ridesharing can be used to improve off-site
transportation impacts of development. The Task Force concurred
with Knapp' s recommendation.
Bennett moved and the Task Force unanimously approved that the
recommendations as listed be accepted and that they be taken back
to the Chamber for review and approval before going to City of Kent
Public Works Committee and City Council .
RECOMMENDATIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION
TASK FORCE COMMITTEE
The committee recommends the following:
1. The City of Kent should use the attached environmental
mitigation agreement which conforms with the
requirements of ESHB 1817 .
2 , Environmental Mitigation Agreements should not be the
sole source of funding from the private sector. The
City should explore other sources for funding.
3 . The Environmental Mitigation Agreements should apply to
all new development with significant .traffic impacts as
applicable under the state Environmental Policy Act and
Kent City Code.
4 . The Kent: Environmental Policy ordinances should be -
amended to establish a minimum trip generation
threshold that would ensure that all new developments
with significant traffic impacts under the scope of the
State and Kent Environmental Policy Acts participate in
transportation improvements, it is recommended that
ten (10),be established as the minimilm threshold . --
5. The City should immediately commence a study of
establishing a transportation improvement program as
permitted by ESHB 1817 for the purpose of mitigating
the impacts of development. (The attached memorandum
summarizes this law) . The City will seek related
information from other agencies. This study should be
completed within one year and should include
involvement of the private sector in development of the
program.
6. The City should work to establish one or more _
transportation benefit districts with other local
jurisdictions. The transportation improvement program
may be a funding element of such a district.
7 . The City should, at the earliest possible election,
seek voter approval of a bond issue, the proceeds of
which would be used specifically to fund a portion of
the public sector's cost of the 227th, 196th, and 228th
projects. The City is encouraged to pursue such bond
issues in conjunction with other local governments.
The City is near to securing sufficient private sector
participation to build the west link of the 196th and
228th corridors and could proceed if local government
was able to fund its share of the projects.
s . The City should establish a policy that, upon the
formation and determination of assessments and special
benefits for any local improvement district, it shall
be in accordance with the statutory requirements.
9 . Those individuals and entities that have entered into
traffic-related environmental mitigation agreements
prior to the City's authorization of the attached
environmental mitigation agreement, should such occur,
should be allowed to renegotiate their existing
agreements at the request of the parties, to the extend
law allows such renegotiations.
10 . The City should develop and make materials available
that describe the City' s traffic mitigation program.
11. This task force should meet periodically to review
progress on these recommendations.
12 . Public transportation and ride sharing improvements and
services (Transportation System Management plans)
should be evaluated and if practicable be incorporated
into the overall transportation improvement program.
AFTER RECORDING MAIL TO:
Carol Storm, Property Management
City of Kent
220 Fourth Ave. S .
Kent, WA 98032-5895
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION AGREEMENT
This Agreement entered into by and between the City of Kent,
a municipal corporation, duly organized and existing under the laws
of the State of Washington, its successors and assigns,
(hereinafter referred to as the "City") and by
corporation, its heirs successors and assigns, (hereinafter
referred to as ("The Developer") .
WITNESS THAT:
1. PURPOSES AND RECITALS .
1. 1 This agreement is enacted pursuant to Chapter 43 . 21 RCW,
the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) , and Kent City Ordinance
2494 , to provide for the mitigation of existing, known and
anticipated environmental impacts at this time which are associated
with the development hereinafter. described. This Agreement is not,
and shall not be construed as, a voluntary agreement pursuant to
RCW 82 . 02 . 02 , . and the provisions of RCW 82 . 02 . 020 shall not be
0
applied hereto. This Agreement is in compliance with the
provisions of RCW This Agreement does not preclude
any evaluation and determination by the City of Kent that later
actions or proposals undertaken by the Developer may require a
determination of significance and environmental review under SEPA.
- 1 -
1. 2 The Developer is seeking permits to construct
in the vicinity ' of The legal
- description for the site is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
1.3 The occupation and use of will create
significant impacts on the City' s streets, roads, and traffic
system. The occupation and use will generate traffic which will
result in increased volumes reducing the available capacity at the
intersections of during the P.M. peak hour further
below the level identified as acceptable in the City of Kent
_ft1sa-
Transportation Master Plan (Resolution 1014) . Thrs mitigation
measures set forth herein are based on the Transportation Master
Plan and, if implemented, will allow said intersection to operate
at a level of service equivalent to that level of service existing
prior to the occupation and use of the above-referenced facility.
2 . MITIGATION MEASURES
2 . 1 The Developer shall pay its proportionate share of all
costs associated with the construction of the following
improvements if said improvements are encompassed within a Local
Improvement District (L. I . D. ) or one or more Transportation
Improvement Program(s) :
a. Installation of a four-lane bridge crossing of the
Green River at the westerly projected alignment of S. 228th.
Said bridge shall be widened sufficiently to accommodate
turning movements at the intersection with Russell Road.
2 -
b. S . to the bridge noted in paragraph 2 . 1. a above.
Said construction shall be sufficient to accommodate four
through lanes plus left turn lanes as necessary to provide
access to adjacent properties and turning movements at street
intersections.
C. The construction/extension of S. 228th Street from
the bridge noted in paragraph 2 . 1.a above, westerly of the
Green River shall be in a meandering alignment to eventually
connect with Military Road at approximately the 224th block.
The exact alignment of this section shall be determined at the
time when preliminary engineering design reports are prepared
by the City. Said roadway section shall accommodate a minimum
of four through lanes plus necessary turn lanes to provide
access to adjacent properties and adequate turning lanes at
street intersections as well as any bridges or structures
necessary for the crossing of Garrison Creek.
d. The reconstruction of Military Road from 224th block
to SR 516 . Said roadway section shall accommodate four
through lanes plus left turn lanes as necessary to provide
access to adjacent properties and to allow turning movements
at street intersections.
The total estimated cost thereof, calculated by the City and agreed
to by the Developer, in 1986 dollars is $7 , 834 , 100. The final cost
shall be based on actual expenses incurred at the time said
improvements are constructed.
3 -
2 .2 L. I .D. FORMATION - PARTICIPATION
Assessment and payment of the proportionate share of the
improvements described in Section 2.1 above by the Developer shall
be made pursuant to the provisions of RCW Chapter 35A.43 relating
to Local Improvement Districts (hereinafter L.I.D..) .
2 . 2 . 1 At the time of executing this Agreement, the
City has not initiated the formation of an L.I.D. nor has the City
adopted boundaries or a schedule for L.I.D., formation.
2 . 2 . 2 The Developer hereby agrees and covenants, such
agreement and covenant to run with the land for a period of ten
(10) years from date of execution hereof, to participate in and
not protest the formation of any L.I.D. which incorporates the
improvements identified in Section 2 . 1 and property described in
Exhibit A which may be contained within said L.I .D.
2 . 2 . 3 The Developer further agrees and covenants that
the lapse of the ten (10) year period without the L.I.D. being
formed does not release the Developer from..the financial obligation
described in Section 2 . 2 . 5 as such obligation is to provide for
partial mitigation of existing and known environmental impacts at
this time associated with this development.
2 . 2 . 4 The Developer agrees that one purpose of the
L.I.D. described herein is to provide the opportunity for the
Developer to satisfy the obligation reflected in Sections 2. 1 and
2 .2 .5 through the L.I.D. payment plan as complete or partial
mitigation of existing and known traffic environmental impacts at
4 -
this time associated with this development. The parties recognize
that, pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 35A.43 RCW relating to
Local Improvement Districts, the assessment for the Developer' s
the costs and expenses allocated in
proportionate share are
accordance with the special benefits conferred on the Developer' s
property by such improvements. The parties agree that should the
L.I.D. encompass all improvements set forth in Section 2 . 1 above
and the Developer pays its proportionate share of the costs and
expenses in accordance with the special benefits conferred on-the
Developer' s property for the L. I.D. improvements, the Developer is
deemed to have met its obligation herein in full. Should the
L.I.D. not encompass all improvements in Section 2. 1 and the
Developer is assessed for the costs and expenses of any special
benefit to it by the L. I. D. as referenced herein, the parties
further agree that shall not relieve the Developer of its
obligation to pay its proportionate share of improvements described
under Section 2 . 1 that are not included in the L. I.D. as set out
in this Agreement for purposes of mitigating existing, known and
anticipated environmental impacts at this time associated with the
development described herein. However, any assessment of the
Developer for the L.I.D. described herein shall reduce the
Developer' s payment obligation set out herein by the amount of that
assessment. The Developer covenants and concurs that any remaining
amount which has not been further reduced through payments of
Transportation Impact Fees through a Transportation Improvement
5 -
Program as set forth in Section 2 . 2. 3 below or by an amount agreed
to by the City at the sole discretion of the . City for other
_ transportation improvements constructed by Developer with the
City' s approval which mitigate traffic impacts which are the
subject of this agreement is due and payable in cash (U.S.
currency) to the City within thirty (30) days of demand for
payment, which demand may be made no sooner than thirty (3o) days
after the effective date of the ordinance confirming the final
assessment role, - nor later than ten (10) years after execution of
this Agreement..,, Notwithstanding any other provision contained
herein, the failure of the City to make demand for payment within
said ten (lo) . year period shall not constitute a waiver of the
City' s right to require said payment or of the Developer' s
obligation to pay. Such remaining amount shall be determined as
set forth in Section 2 . 2 . 10 below.
2 . 2 . 5 At the time that this Agreement is being
entered into, the City of Kent has not adopted or defined a benefit
area or boundaries for L. I . D. assessment purposes pursuant to RCw
Chapter 35A. 43 . However, for the purposes of mitigating impacts
vide notice
to the environment caused by the Developer and to pro
to all new developers of their possible future share of any L.I .D.
assessment, the City has estimated peak hour trips for specific
uses . To calculate the Developer' s possible future share of the
L.I.D. assessment or its financial obligation as described herein,
the peak hour trips of each individual use will be compared to the
6 -
total available peak hour trips that the improvements would
provide. The parties agree that the development described in
Section 1. 2 is anticipated to generate no more than peak
hour trips. The improvements described in Section 2 . 1 will reduce
the impact to Kent' s East-West corridor ( ) , which
includes the intersections referred to in Section 1.3 , by providing
an additional 31600 peak hour trip capability to Kent's East-West
system. The parties also agree that the improvements described in
Section 2 . 1 will mitigate the existing and known environmental
impacts at this time which are associated with the development.
Any special benefit to the properties for L.I .D. assessment
purposes will be determined by the City of Kent pursuant to RCW
Chapter 35A. 43 utilizing the criteria, values, and project costs
contained in the City of Kent' s Comprehensive Transportation Plan
of May 7 , 1984 , now or as hereinafter amended, and the Puget Sound
Council of Governments Green River Valley Transportation Action
Plan of January, 1987 , now or as hereinafter amended, which are
incorporated herein by
reference. For purposes of this
computation, the Developer' s proportionate share is estimated in
1986 dollars at $9s0 per peak hour trip. Notwithstanding any other
provision of this Agreement, for the development described in .
paragraph 1. 2 above, the Developer shall pay no more than the
currently estimated total of
Dollars
($ ) in 1986 U.S. Currency ($980 per peak hour trip times
peak hour trip equals $___) or that amount as
7 -
calculated in Section 2 . 2 . 10 below (whichever is less) . In the
event no L.I .D. is created and the property is not assessed under
any method other than that set out herein, the Developer shall pay
the lesser of
Dollars ($ ) in 1986
U.S. Currency within ten years after execution of this Agreement
subject also to Section 2 . 2 .9 or that amount as calculated in
Section 2 .2 . 10 below.
2 . 2 . 6 Pursuant to RCW Chapter 35A.43 in developing
any L.I. D. , the City shall evaluate all properties within the
proposed L.I .D. boundaries and determine whether they are specially
specially benefited will be included
benefited. All properties
within the boundaries of the L. I .D. and shall be assessed in a fair
and equitable manner as provided by law. All owners of properties
within those boundaries, including the Developer, may pursue
objection to the assessment pursuant to State Law. The City shall
set forth its basis for assessing all properties within the
boundaries of any L. I .D. anticipated by this Agreement. If peak
hour trip generation is utilized in the assessment process as a
method of determining special benefits and assessing the property
described in Exhibit A, the City shall notify the Developer at
least 180 calendar days prior to the public hearing on the
said notification, the Developer
formation of the L. I.D. Upon
shall have 120 days to submit to the City a traffic study, where
applicable, depicting actual peak hour trip generation for the
developer described in Section 1. 2 and shall have the opportunity
- 8 -
to submit peak hour trip generation information and data of other
properties specially benefited within the boundaries of the L.I.D.
Any traffic study submitted to the City must be certified as to its
validity and accuracy by a Washington State licensed civil engineer
generally. recognized as having expertise in transportation
engineering. Where the City concurs with the findings of said
study, the peak hour trips established therein shall take
precedence over that established under Section 2 .2 . 5. The terms
of this section shall, however, only be applicable for those
developments in which the building (s) therein are entirely utilized
at the' time of the study and the occupant (s) thereof have been
established therein for at least six (6) months or as otherwise
agreed to by the City. Failure to submit a certified traffic study
in accordance with these provisions shall constitute a waiver of
the right to alter, change, reduce, or modify any peak hour trip
generation.
2 . 2 . 7 With respect to the final project costs, it is
the City' s intent to share with the Developer any grants or other
agency financial participation the city may receive on this
project. The City shall make its best effort to obtain such grants
or other agencies financial participation. The split thereof,
however, shall be such that the City' s share not be less than that
of the Developer. The City shall share with the Developer all
final project costs of the project on a 50/50 split.
9 -
2 . 2 . 8 If the City implements a Transportation
Improvement Program, as provided in Chapter 179 of the 1988
Legislature, within ten (10) years of execution of this Agreement
that includes within its boundaries the improvements identified in
Section 2 . 1 and the property described in Exhibit A, the Developer
may meet its financial obligation herein for those improvements in
full through payment of those transportation impact fees that apply
to those improvements provided for in the Transportation
Improvement Program. Should the Transportation Improvement Program
not encompass all improvements in Section 2 . 1 and the Developer
pays the fees through the Program for the portion of the
improvements covered by the Program, the parties further agree that
shall not relieve the Developer of its obligation to pay its
proportionate share of the costs of improvements described under
Section 2 . 1 not included in the Program for purposes of mitigating
existing, known and anticipated environmental impacts at the time
associated with the development described herein. However, any
assessment of the Developer under the Program for a portion of the
improvements described herein shall reduce the Developer' s payment
obligation set out herein by the amount of the fees. The Developer
covenants and concurs that any remaining amount which has not been
further reduced through payments of L. I. D. assessments as set forth
in Section 2 . 2 . 4 above or by an amount agreed to by the City at the
sole discretion of the City for other transportation improvements
constructed by Developer with the City' s approval which mitigate
10
traffic impacts which are the subject of this agreement is due and
payable in cash (U.S . currency) to the City within thirty (30)
days of demand for payment, which demand may be made no sooner than
thirty (30) days after the effective date of the ordinance
confirming the final assessment role, nor later than ten (10) years
after execution of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other
provision contained herein, the failure of the City to make demand
for payment within said ten (10) year period shall not constitute
a waiver of .the City's right to require said payment or of the
Developer' s obligation to pay. Such remaining amounts shall be
determined as set forth in Section 2 . 2 . 10 below.
2 . 2 . 9 The Developer' s currently estimated total of
($ = $980 per peak hour trip times
peak hour trips) identified in Section 2 . 2 . 5 shall be increased in
the proportion to the increase in the Consumer Price Index (United
States City Average for All Urban Consumers) , all items, or the
substituted index, as prepared by the United States Department of
Labor for the year preceding the year in which either the final
assessment roll is approved pursuant to the Local Improvement
District or ten years after execution of this Agreement, whichever
is sooner over this Index for 1986 in order to adjust for any
inflation in the value of the dollar.
2 . 2 . 10 Should the Developer' s participation in the
L. I .D. and/or the Transportation Improvement Program not fully
encompass all improvements set forth in Section 2 . 1 above, the
- 11 -
Developer shall meet its remaining obligation by paying the amount
to be calculated as set forth below. If said amount is greater
than that amount calculated as set forth in Section 2 .2 .51 the
Developer shall pay the lesser amount. To determine the remaining
amount due and owing to the City by Developer, the City shall:
1. identify the geographic boundaries of the area
generally benefited by the remaining improvements not covered by
L.I.D. or Local Transportation Program;
2 . calculate the costs of the remaining
improvements based on an adopted, long term transportation plan
identifying, among other things, the remaining improvements, which
plan shall include any necessary acquisition of right of way,
construction and reconstruction of all minor and major arterial and
intersection improvements, and identify design standards, levels
of service and capabilities ;
3 . calculate the developer' s proportionate share
of costs of improvements described under Section 2 . 1 of this
Agreement.
4 . give credit to the Developer for participation
in public transportation and City adopted program for ride-sharing
improvements and services ;
5 . give credit to the Developer for an amount
agreed to by the City at the sole discretion of the City for other
transportation improvements constructed by Developer with the
City' s approval which mitigate traffic impacts which are the
12 -
subject of this Agreement;
6. the remaining amount due and owing shall not
exceed the amount that the City can demonstrate is reasonably
necessary as a result of the proposed development.
The Developer may appeal the City' s specific calculation of
the remaining amount due and owing to the City by the Developer
under Section 2 .2 . 10. Such appeal shall be in writing and
submitted to the Public Works Director seeking a determination by
the City Hearing Examiner. Such appeal must be received by the
Public Works Director no later than thirty (3o) days of receipt by
the Developer of the notice from the City of specific amount owing
by the Developer. The appeal shall set forth the specific item or
items being appealed and the specific reason(s) for the appeal.
The Developer shall have the opportunity to present information to
the Hearing Examiner supporting such appeal . The City shall have
the opportunity to present information to the Hearing Examiner on
appeal . The Examiner ' s consideration and decision shall be limited
to the specific appeal items. The public hearing on the appeal
shall be held within fourteen (14) days of the filing of the appeal
with the Public Works Director. A Hearing Examiner shall issue a
written decision within ten (10) days of conclusion of pub is
hearing on the appeal . The Examiner' s determination ma be
appealed to the City Council within ten (10) days of receipt of the
Examiner' s final determination. The appeal shall set forth the
specific item or items being appealed and the specific reason(s)
- 13 -
for the appeal. The City council Is consideration and decision
shall be limited to the specific appeal items. The City Council 's
determination shall be final and binding.
3 . SATISFACTION OF CONDITIONS - REMEDIES
3 . 1 The mitigation measures identified in Part 2 constitute
those conditions necessary to completely or partially mitigate the
environmental impacts on traffic and the City' s system of streets
and roads as a result of the identified development. The City
shall not deny or otherwise condition approval of the identified
development on the basis of traffic or vehicle trip generation
except as required by the Environmental Checklist Determination of
Nonsignificance issued by the City of Kent on
3 . 2 Failure to comply with the mitigation conditions and
measures set forth herein shall result in revocation of permits and
forfeiture of all rights to occupy or otherwise use the identified
development. Should the City determine that the Developer has
failed to so comply, the City shall provide the Developer with
written notice of such failure, setting forth the specific item or
items of failure, and provide the Developer an opportunity to cure
the defect or defects. All permits and rights shall be null and
void if not cured within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of
the notice from the City by the Developer. The Director of Public
Works shall determine if Developer has cured such defect or defects
and so notify the Developer in writing within the thirty (30) day
opportunity to cure. The Developer may appeal the determination
- 14 -
3 . 3 If, by any reason of any default or breach on the part
_. of either party in the performance of any of the provisions of this
Agreement, a legal action is instituted, the parties shall be
responsible for their respective attorney' s fees any is in
connection therewith. It is agreed that the venue of any legal
action brought under the terms of this Agreement shall be in King
County, Washington. This A reement shall be overned b the
a licable laws rules and re ulations of the State of Washing-ton
and the City of Kent.
3 . 4 ' This Agreement shall be binding upon the heirs,
successors, assigns and all other parties legally empowered with
or all of the parties hereto.
signatory rights of any
demand required or permitted to be given
3 . 5 Any notice or
ll be sufficient to be given in writing and
under this Agreement sha
if sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested,
to the address of the parties set forth below. Any party may give
notice in the manner provided in this paragraph to the other
parties of a change of address. Any notice shall be deemed to have
been given on the date it is deposited in the U.S. Postal Service
mail with postage prepaid.
Names/Addresses
3 . 6 Should the term, provision, condition or other portion
16 -
of the Agreement be held to be inoperative, invalid, or void, the
same shall not affect any other term, provision, condition or other
portion of this Agreement; and the remainder of this Agreement
shall be effective as if such term, provision, condition or portion
had not been contained herein.
3 .7 Upon execution, this Agreement shall be recorded with the
King County Auditor' s office.
CITY OF' KENT
Developer
By: Director of Public Works
(Address) 220 4th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
UPRC\A05229 .jmg
t
17 -
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
I
DATE: March 23, 1988
TO: Transportation Mitigation Task Force
ROM: Sandra Driscoll , City Attorney
SUBJECT: SUMMARY OF THE LOCAL TRANSPORTATION ACT
SUMMARY
The Local Transportation Act states that it is the legislative intent to
"enable local governments to develop and adopt programs for the purpose of
jointly funding, from public and private sources, transportation improvements
necessitated in whole or in part by economic development and growth ."
Basically, the Act (1 ) permits local governments to establish transportation
improvement programs; and (2) revises the laws related to local or road
improvement districts and transportation benefit districts.
The Legislature declared that local transportation programs that are
established should provide a fair and equitable method for allocating
the cost of necessary transportation improvements between the public and
private sectors. The programs should include consideration of public
transportation as a method of reducing off-site transportation impacts from
the development." The Act also provides that the authority to create local
transportation programs through the Local Transportation Act is intended to be
supplemental to existing authority and responsibilities of cities to regulate
development and provide public facilities..
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM
Local governments are authorized, but not required, to develop and adopt
programs called local transportation programs (LTPs) . This must be done by
ordinance after giving notice and holding public hearings. Each program must
have the following elements:
1 . Identify the geographic boundaries of the entire area generally benefited
by the proposed off-site transportation improvements.
2. The LTP applies to off-site transportation improvements, not on-site
improvements.
3. The program must be based on a comprehensive, long-term transportation
plan adopted by the city.
4. The comprehensive long-term plan must:
a. identify proposed off-site transportation improvements that are
1 . reasonable;
2. necessary to meet the future growth needs of the designated
plan area;
3. intended to be covered by the joint funding program;
b. plan must include acquisition of right-of-way, construction and
reconstruction of all major and minor arterials and intersection
improvements;
C. identify design standards;
d. identify levels of service;
e. identify capacities;
f. identify costs applicable to the program;
g. indicate how the transportation plan is coordinated with applicable
transportation plans for the region and adjacent jurisdiction;
h. indicate how public transportation and ride sharing improvements
and services will be used to reduce off-site transportation impacts
from the development.
5. This LTP must include a six-year capital funding program that is updated
annually. The capital funding program must:
a. identify the specific public sources of revenue;
b. identify the specific amounts of revenue necessary to pay for that
portion of the cost of all off-site transportation improvements in
the plan that will not foreseeably be funded by the impact fees;
C. propose a schedule for construction;
�_. d. propose a schedule for expenditure of funds;
- 2 -
e. consider additional local tax revenue estimated to be generated by
l
new development within the plan area if all or a portion of the
revenue is proposed to be earmarked as future appropriations for
such off-site transportation improvements.
6. The program must authorize transportation impact fees to be imposed on
new developments within the plan area. The purpose is to provide a
portion of the funding for reasonable and necessary off-site
transportation improvements to solve cumulative impacts of planned growth
and development in the plan area.
7. The off-site transportation impacts must be measured as a pro rata share
of the capacity of off-site transportation improvements being funded
under the program.
8. The impact fees cannot exceed the amount that the city can demonstrate is
reasonably necessary as a direct result of the proposed development.
9. The program must provide that the funds collected from a particular
developer shall be used in substantial part to pay for improvements
mitigating the impacts of the development. If they are not, they must be
refunded to the property owners of record.
10. Fees paid to more than one improvement may be pooled and expended by the
city on any one of the improvements mitigating the impact of the
development.
11 . The funds must be spent within six years of collection by the city. The
unspent monies must be refunded.
12. The program must describe the formula, timing, security, credits and
other terms and conditions affecting the amount and method of payment of
the fees.
13. The city must give credit for the developer's participation in public
transportation and ride sharing improvements and services.
- 3 -
14. An administrative element of the program must be developed. It is
t '
- required to:
a. include an opportunity for administrative appeal before an
independent examiner on the amount of the fee;
b. establish a designated account for the public and private funds
appropriated or collected for the improvements identified in the
plan; .
C. set forth methods to enforce collection of the public and private
funds identified in the program;
d. designate the departments or entities , responsible for
administrating the program; and
e. provide for future amendments of the program including the addition
of other off-site transportation improvements.
15. The program cannot be amended to relieve the city of any contractual
obligations made to prior developers.
16. The program must provide that the fees cannot be collected from the
developers for any off-site improvement that is not capable of being
reasonably carried out because of lack of public funds or " . other
foreseeable impediment. "
17. The program must provide that no fee may be imposed on a development when
mitigation of the same impacts for the development is being required by
any government agency pursuant to any other local , state or federal law.
The legislation also sets forth specific requirements related to the
transportation impact fees authorized under the transportation improvement
program. These requirements must be set out in the program itself. They are
as follows:
1 . The program must describe the formula for calculating the amount of the
fees to be imposed on the new development.
- 4 -
2. There may be a requirement in the LTP that the developer pay a
transportation fee for improvements not yet constructed and those
jointly-funded improvements constructed since the beginning of the
program.
3. The program must define that moment in the development approval process
that triggers a determination of the amount of the fee. The program must
define the event in the process of approving a development that triggers
the obligation to make actual payment of the fees.
4. The program must provide that a payment obligation cannot begin before
the date the developer obtains a building permit. In the case of
residential, subdivisions or short plats , the payment obligation cannot
commence either before the date the developer obtains a building permit
or at the time of final plat approval , at the developer's option.
5. If the developer of a residential subdivision or short plat elects to pay
at the 'date the permit is obtained, the option to pay the fee by
installments is waived by the developer.
6. The developer must be given the option to pay the fee in a lump sum
without interest or by installment with reasonable interest over a
five-year period. This period may be extended by the city through the
program.
7. The city must require security for the obligation to pay the fee. This
is in the form of a recorded agreement, deed of trust, letter of credit,
or other instrument designated by the city.
8. The developer must be given credit against its obligation for fees for
the fair market value of any off-site land or improved transportation
facilities dedicated to the city.
9. If the value of the dedication exceeds the amount of the fee obligation,
the developer is entitled to reimbursement from the fees attributable to
the dedicated facilities and paid by subsequent developers within the
plan area.
- 5 -
10. The program must define the criteria for establishing periodic fee
� _. increases attributable to construction and related cost increases for the
improvements designated in the program.
11 . The developer must be entitled to a credit against other fees, LID
assessments, or other monetary impositions made specifically for the
designated off-site improvements intended to be covered by the fee.
INTERLOCAL COOPERATION
The Act encourages cooperation through interlocal agreements between the local
governments to accomplish regional transportation planning and development.
The municipalities are also required to seek, within the area of practicality,
consistency between jurisdictions and the terms and conditions of the program.
VOLUNTARY AGREEMENTS -
The legislation also adds language to existing RCW 82.02.020 that allows for
voluntary agreements or payment in lieu of dedication. The new language
provides that a city cannot use the voluntary agreements for off-site
transportation improvements within the boundaries or area covered by the
adopted transportation improvement program.
TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICTS
The laws related to transportation benefit districts were amended to provide
that the district may impose a fee for the construction or reconstruction of
certain buildings, but only if done in accordance with a local transportation
program.
LID/RID
The laws related to local improvement districts and road improvement districts
were substantially amended. If an owner enters into an agreement with a city
waiving the owner' s right to protest the formation of a local improvement
district, that agreement must specify the improvements to be financed and must -
- 6 -
set forth the term of the agreement, which cannot exceed ten years. The
agreement must be recorded in the county in which the property is located.
It also provides that an owner cannot, by agreement, as a condition imposed in
connection with proposed property development, waive his or her rights to
object to the owner' s individual assessment, including a determination of
special benefits, or the right to appeal to a superior court the decision of
the city affirming the final assessment roll .
The Act authorizes a city to contract with property owners to provide for
payment by the owners of the cost of preparing the engineering plans, surveys,
studies, appraisals, legal services and other expenses associated with the
improvements that will be financed by a local improvement district. The
owners and the city may contract for reimbursement to the owner of those costs
from the proceeds of the bonds issued by the district after formation from
assessments paid to the district, as appropriate, or by credit in the amount
of such costs against future assessments assessed against the property under
the local improvement district. The reimbursement must be made to the owner
of the property at the time of the reimbursement. It must provide that the
cost cannot be reimbursed to the owner if the district is not formed within
six years of the date of the contract. Any preformation work that is
conducted must be done only under the direction of a city.
A city is authorized to provide, as part of the ordinance creating the
district, that monies paid or the cost of the facilities constructed by the
property owner in satisfaction of obligations under a transportation
improvement program shall be credited against assessments due from the owner
of such property at the time the credit is made if the monies paid or
facilities constructed directly defray the costs of the specified improvements
under the district and if credit for such amounts is reflected in a final roll
confirmed for the district.
Cities are authorized to provide through their ordinance creating the local
improvement district that payment of an assessment on underdeveloped
properties may be made by owners of other properties within the district if
those owners so choose. This is subject to the terms of reimbursement that
- 7 -
are set forth in the ordinance. Those terms must require the owners of the
-- underdeveloped property to reimburse the assessment payments to the party who
made them when the properties are developed or redeveloped together with
interest at a rate specified in the ordinance. The ordinance may provide, but
is not required to provide, that reimbursement is made on a one-time lump sum
basis or over a period not to exceed five years. 'It may also provide that the
reimbursement shall be made no later than the time of dissolution of the
district or that no reimbursement is due if the underdeveloped properties are
not developed. These reimbursement amounts are considered liens upon the
underdeveloped property.
PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION
This Local Transportation Act specifically states that it is intended to be
prospective, not retroactive, in its application.
3812L-05L
- 8 -
J Uly �'•I �C 1�`-5-�"F'�L)lvl
KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE /
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING MINUTES
June 20, 1989 CITY OF KENT
President Dee Eklund opened the meeting at 6:00 p.m. at the •Kent Library. JUN 2 8 1989
BOARD
µ PRESENT: Dee Eklund, John Lindseth, Jerry Oppliger, Gerry Anderson, ENGINEERING DEPT.
Ted Knapp, Bill Dawson, Paul Morford, Ron,Ricketts, Mark McKay
BOARD ABSENT WITH NOTICE: MaryAnne Kendall, Steve Mariotti, Chris King,
Terry Lewis, Claudia Otey, Joyce Rawley, Larry Schreiter, Dee Moschel,
Jack Meredith
BOARD ABSENT WITHOUT NOTICE: Lorraine Glen, Bill Denney, Sr. , Laurel Whitehurst
OTHERS PRESENT: Tom Gilmer, Steve Burpee, Jim Torina, Bill Kramer,
Doug & Stephanie Klapenbaugh, Don Wickstrom, Jim Hansen, Suzette Cooke,
and Barbara Simpson
MINUTES: Approved. (M. McKay, J. Lindseth)
s
* Motion to drop February and March past dues, as well as those businesses
who've requested to drop. (G. Anderson, T. Knapp) . Approved.
Barbara Simpson reported that 1988-89 year-to-date shows:
203 new members at $30,095.84
148 drops at $20,535.00
Ellen MacDonald brought in 156 of the new members for $23,609.00 in dues.
Her commission to date is $9,610.54.
VEWV"�TTONMENTAI;--`(Traffic)`•MITIGATION Task Force Report: (Ted Knapp)
Ted Knapp summarized the makeup, methodology and position of the task force.
Kent should commence the study (to be completed in one year) of establishing
a transportation improvement program pursuant to the Local Transportation
Act of 1988.
Kent should work with other jurisdictions to establish one or more TBD's.
Kent should seek voter approval of a bond issue for transportation
improvements.
Impact fees should not be the only source of private sector funding.
The_ threshold for minimum trips for SEPA determination should ba
reduced to 10.
Informational packets should be developed and made available to explain
the program.
Public transit and ride sharing programs should be considered in the program.
In the interim, the Mitigation Agreement should be used.
* Motion to accept recommendations of Economic Development Committee.
Approved. (J. Lindseth, M. McKay)
APRIL FINANCE REPORT: (J. Oppliger)
Membership dues strong in April and May.
* Motion to accept financial statement. Approved. (R. Ricketts, G. Anderson) .
* Motion to change Kent Chamber of Commerce checking account from Fist
Interstate to SeaFirst Bank. Passed. (G. Anderson, M. McKay)
VOLUME 18 NO. 1 AUGUST 1989
Dent Commerce [ "..
PUBLISHED MONTHLY BY THE KENT CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
CHAMBER URGES NEW TRANSPORTATION FUNDING
1 & i
King County fII Proposed
Ia a 277th
Auburn Extension
Protect
Ted Knapp, Union Pacific Realty _________
277th Extension Project, one of three proposed cross-valley corridors.
Major Transportation Mitigation Agreement Proposed by Chamber
The Kent Chamber's traffic mitigation transportation from the public sector to the development is paying its own way."
task force hammered out a landmark private. "Federal dollars aren't there The interim agreement worked out by
agreement with City Hall in June to deal anymore for transportation projects," said the Chamber task force assigns developers
with the Kent Valley's traffic problems. Knapp. "We've worked for more predict- a pro rata share of brtitigation,in particular
The agreement calls for major new fund- able and equitable funding for construction of a portion of a cross-valley
ing mechanisms and a more even split bet- everybody." corridor. It also states that developers will
ween developers and the public sector to The task force, in a year-long negotia- not protest formation of a LID for im-
pay for new roads and transit services. ' tion process with the.City Public Works provements and will pay their pro rata
The task force,comprised of both public department and the City attorney, exam- share. Other facets of the agreement set
and private interests, recommended the ined the transportation corridors proposed forth maximum fees for projects and
City of Kent begin a one-year. study by Kent,their costs,and all potential fund- authorize developers to perform their own
leading to a Local Transportation Program ing sources. In addition to formation of a traffic studies to determine actual peak
(LTP) as authorized by the state LTP, the task force proposed Kent work hour trip generation.
legislature's Local Transportation Act of with other jurisdictions to establish one or The task force's recommendations will
1988. The task force also recommended more Transportation Benefit Districts be reviewed by the City Council Public
that the City move on construction of three which allow application for state funding Work's committee, and if approved, will
cross-valley corridors, which are and the opportunity to raise taxes for Please see page 6.
estimated to cost in excess of$50 million. regional transportation projects. The task
"The task force's report puts Kent in the force also urged Kent seek voter approval
forefront of local jurisdictions in of a bond issue for transportation INSIDE THIS ISSUE . . . . .
Washington," said Ted Knapp, director of improvements.
Union Pacific Realty and traffic mitigation "This is a big step in the right direction Chamber Events.............Pg.2
task force chair.Knapp also co-chaired the for Kent," said Knapp. "The decision to Beautification Winners........Pg.3
Seattle-King County EDC committee adopt a standard interim transportation Business Briefs..............Pg.4
which initiated the original Transportation mitigation agreement for all new develop- New Member List ........... Pg.5
Act legislation and lobbied for its passage ment is significant. It means a more level Welcome Teachers Breakfast .. Insert
in Olympia. playing field for all developers when it
The impetus for the study grew out of a comes to paying for street improvements. Small Business Conference....Insert
strong 1980's trend shifting payment for It also assures the taxpayer that new
august, tyoy nent Cornmerce
New Member in the News: YOUR COMMITTEES
IN ACTION
Frozen Lightning Products The twelve standing committees and
various task forces of your Chamber
provide the source of our plans, policies
and activities. They are open for all
Science and serendipity have met in the
members to attend. For information,
formation of Frozen Lightning Products. mation, call
the committee choir, or the Chamber
For nine and a half years Chuck Kalkwarf,
owner of Frozen Lightning, battled an office at 854-1770.
unlooked-for result of manufacturing BOARD OF DIRECTORS
leaded shielding windows. He was, and Dee Eklund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 854-4600
remains, partner in a business which pro-
duces shielding windows that protect per- Accepted proposed changes in
sonnel working with radioactive materials. newsletter format to be included in
run
onll
"It was difficult to obtain uniform and r printers bid. Newsletter will
consistent results with our manufacturing run only the banner masthead in two
colors, all other copy will run 0 black
process," said Kalkwarf. At any time a ink. Paper will change from
dielectrical discharge could run a fracture to 60
through the structure of the glass itself, pound weight. These changes alone will
leaving a permanent impression of a light- result in projected annual savings of
ning bolt. By 1982, Kalkwarf was con-
sidering creating a gift item out of his • Accepted interim operating budget for
lightning bolts from leaded glass, but the period of July 1 to October 1, 1989.
technology necessary to assure a consis
tent result lagged. a Please see page 7.
Meanwhile, the U.S. government, for
reasons of its own, was experimenting
with the same process. In order to learn how to prevent random dielectrical Transportation agreement...
discharges, government scientists tried appeal to students. Frozen lightning is Continued from page 1.
learning how to produce the 'flaw' on created by bombarding a piece of acrylic
command. with over 10 million electron volts. The be brought before the Kent City Council in
"When they'd achieved control over the electrons become trapped within the acry- August.
process," related Kalkwarf, "it occurred lic, creating an electrical field. A con- The traffic mitigation task force included:
to the U.S. government that people might trolled discharge of the electrical field pro- Chair Ted Knapp, Union Pacific Realty
be interested in it as a gift item. They ap- duces a loud bang that sounds like a rifle, Terry Lewis, Boeing
plied for a patent and published notices in followed by a series of lightning flashes Don Minot, Centron
a federal register." within the acrylic. This produces a unique Jack Bennett, CPI
Kalkwarf, aware of the work being piece of 'frozen lightning' permanently Don Bogard, Architect
done, was definitely interested. He began captured in time." Mel Kleweno, Curran, Kleweno &
start-up on a new company, and called it The product will be in distribution in Johnson, P.S.
Frozen Lightning. mid-August on the West Coast. Frozen Art Kleppen, Dairy Queen
After test marketing an acrylic piece of lightning products, which will retail for Don Wickstrom, City of Kent
'frozen lightning' backlit in various col- under $50, are available by contacting: Jim Hansen, City of Kent
ors, Kalkwarf decided to market two Frozen Lightning Products Sandra Driscoll, City Kent
Mstr.
types: streak and sheet lightning. 8628 So. 228th Larry Frasier, Seattle row
"Each one is unique," said the owner. Kent, WA 98031 Terry orris,McCl i Trammell Crow
"And the product itself has great scientific (206) 854-6560 Ken Morris, City City
Kent
Fred Satterstrom, City of Kent
ArvorzV &cAtffFF VOLVO
1157 North Central Kent.WA 98032
} SHERMAN BROWN
.y!•T. M 0 STAFF SERGEANT
(9
, STATION COMMANDER
SALES• J".ERV/CE i MRTS• .44T0 /�E/I//LO
852.1480 852.3340 852.1050 U. S. ARMY RECRUITING STATION
-. 25847 104TH AVE.SE OFFICE PHONE 1206)854-7503
RAY MAZZONI KENT.WA 98031 HOME PHONE(206)854-7504
FLEET LEASE AND 852-1480
HEAVY TRUCK MANAGER Seattle 622.5240 I'm available anytime:Guest Speaker,Exhibits and Displays,
Chamber of Commerce Member.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15, 1989
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: CIVIL SERVICE FOR MEMBERS
OF KENT POLICE DEPARTMENT.
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: On May 2 , 1989, the City Council directed
the Kent Civil Service Commission to include non-uniformed
police personnel within the coverage of Civil Service. The City
has met with representatives of collective bargaining units and
the Commission has provided for amendments of its rules to
provide for coverage of non-uniformed police personnel. This
ordinance is to provide the necessary amendments to the Kent
City Code to carry out the prior direction of the City Council
and to authorize agreements with collective bargaining units
representing non-uniformed police personnel.
� �,�,� had beenUSGc csSed
Coo vvvwuz e a, V L '"
kcLco
3 . E BITS: Ordinan e
4 . RECO NDED BY:
(Comm'ttee, aff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED ISCAL PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL PE NNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDI UIRED•
SOURCE OF FUN S:
7 . CIT COUNCIL A ION: ( '
.._____; ,,,, �,�.,.r �tt�e ves Councilmember second
J- e ruoho [cvr�'e
to adopt Ordinance to provide for Civil Service for
members of the Kent Police Department and authorize the execution
of necessary revisions to collective bargaining agreements with
affected bargaining units.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION-
Council Agenda
Item No. 4C
i
i
ORDINANCE NO.
i AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent,
Washington, relating to Civil Service; amending
sections 2.20.010 and 2.23.030 Kent City Code
to provide for civil service for members of the
Kent Police Department.
� THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES i( HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
III i
Section 1. Recitals.
II
1.1 Civil service has been mandated by Washington Law
Ilsince 1935 for city and town firefighters, and since 1937 for city;
i
land town police officers.
1.2 Current City of Kent ordinances and civil service j
rules provide for coverage of law enforcement officers and city
police officers as defined in KCC 2.22.020 ("police officers" or
"uniform personnel") , but do not provide for coverage of I
non-uniform police personnel.
i
1.3 On May 2, 1989 the City Council directed that the
City of Kent Civil Service include non-uniform police personnel.
The City has met with representatives of collective bargaining
units concerning the implementation of civil service for
( non-uniform police personnel. On July 20, 1988, the Kent Civil
iService Commission provided for amendment of its Rules to provide
for coverage of corrections officers, police specialists and other)
non-uniform police personnel.
i
1.4. The City has met with collective bargaining units
representing non-uniform police personnel to negotiate changes to
collective bargaining agreements related to such coverage.
1.5 It is the intent of this Ordinance to provide
() necessary amendments to the Kent City Code to carry out the prior
( direction of the City Council, and to authorize agreements with
I
I
collective bargaining units representing non-uniform police
personnel.
I
2.20.010. CREATION - COMPOSITION - DUTIES. The Kent
iCivil Service commission for all full-time law enforcement police
II officer and civilian (non-law enforcement and non-police officer)
Ij employees of the Police Department, created pursuant to Chapter
41.12 of the Revised Code of Washington, shall be composed of
three members who shall be appointed by the Mayor. The members of,
the Commission shall hold office as provided in, and shall have
and exercise all powers and duties prescribed by, said Chapter.
! I
i
Section 3. Section 2.23.020 Kent City Code is amended as
ifollows:
I
II 2.23.030. POSITION CLASSIFICATION. The person filling
the position of Parking Enforcement Aid shall not be deemed to be
a "law enforcement officer" as that term is used in the Law
Enforcement Offices and Firefighters Retirement System ( (, nor
shall the position be a classified position within the civil
service system of the City) ) .
I
Section 4. Collective Bargaining Agreements. The Mayor
or designee is authorized to execute necessary revisions or
amendments to collective bargaining agreements with affected
bargaining units to carry out the purposes of this Ordinance.
I
Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take
effect and be in force five (5) days from and after its passage,
I approval and publication as provided by law.
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK
III
- 2 -
I
I
Y
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15. 1989
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: KIWANIS TOT LOT #2. e`f`
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: On July 18, 1989, the Council rejected
the only bid received for the Kiwanis Tot Lot #2 project, as it
was over the budget. The Parks Department then worked with the
architect and sole bidder, Golf Landscaping, Inc. , to modify the
project so that it could be completed within budget.
iftw1W65 k-C"A
3 . EXHIBITS• Memo
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Colie Hough As ciates• Housing and Community
Development Block Grant
(Committee, Staff, Examiner Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL PERSONNE IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Re ommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: 2 194 plus state sales tax
SOURCE OF FUNDS: A ro ed bv Housincr and Community Development
Block Grant
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
____� y _ move1, second#]
4In .
wolion Garrfe-cL
that a contract be awarded to Golf Landscapine amount
of $22 , 194 for the Kiwanis Tot Lot #2 project
rul
DISCUSSION:
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 4D
RENT PARRS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 8, 1989
TO: Mayor, Council and City Administrator
FROM: Barney Wilson
PREPARED BY: Helen Wickstrom
SUBJECT: RIWANIS TOT LOT #2 CONTRACT
-----------------------------------------------------------------
On July 18 , 1989, we requested that the City Council reject the
sole bid of $27,823 for the Kiwanis Tot Lot project, as it exceeded
the available Block Grant funds.
The City Attorneys office advised that we did not have to rebid the
project, as the total dollar amount was below the required bidding
threshold of $35, 000.
The Parks Department then worked with the architect and sole
bidder, Golf Landscaping, Inc. , to modify the scope of the project
so that it could be completed within the budgeted amount. This has
been accomplished, and we recommend that you award a contract to
Golf Landscaping, Inc. in the amount of $22 , 194, plus Washington
State sales tax.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date Auaust 15, 1989
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: BRIDGEWATER,PZ4qTZ1BW
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: A petition containing 41 signatures has
been received concerning traffic conditions in the Bridgewater
II and III section of The Lakes.
3 . EXHIBITS: Petition
4 . RECOMMENDED BY:
(Committee, Staff, Exami er, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL PERSO L IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: ecommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: None
SOURCE OF FUNDS: A r ved bv HousincLand communj*17 Develo ment
Block Grant
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moved-; ^^' '"-ber seconds
-4-kM,$ a d
to refer �e matter to the Public Works Committee. C(L41v,e
DISCUSSION• (w
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 4E
LM AUG 31989
CITY OF KENT �
CITY CLERK L�!
14:7 rAJ6;,
'Ex C t s S 2014 z) auo i s . xekxo
� Per C-Z) lN �J
ALklctJ CS
<2L 'x
Lu
a
<,7 n 7 4s
3
A � d
�. Z3 6 0- SSA
z3 73 -1 d
1,.5-7 S9%N-Ls 2!s D.? /OI k9 6a32
l4 Gw ,23q 13 S C
a3 y/ 3 57 c%s
A L,) �39°8 5`�
aj9032
Ck
.L ° Gas A ` 5
�a
, ^
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15, 1989
Category Bids
1. SUBJECT: DITCH CONSTRUCTION•
ti a s Le'L 0>-7
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Bid opening August 11,
1989 . The Director of Public Works = ' 3 1L� lL 2{ v�,[4 '
E7 re c,ei o eJ c -"\�CP -I-ha_7t- i--h e.
f ` ^ ' I\occ P IQ� t�e eTa cD.
3 . EXHIBITS: I U v Lz
4 . RECOMMENDED BY:
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED:
SOURCE OF FUNDS :
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
recommendation of Director of Public Works as to award of
contract for the ditch construction project be accepted.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 5A
s�-
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
August 14, 1989
TO: MAYOR KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DON WICKSTROM
RE: DITCH CONSTRUCTION
Bid opening was August 11 and five bids were received. The low bid
was submitted by Gary Merlino Construction in the amount of
$249, 667 . 50 .
The project will construct ditch sections necessary for adequate
drainage in conjunction with construction of L. I.D. 328 West Valley
Highway Improvements, L. I. D 330 64th Avenue Improvements and L. I.D.
306 Valley Detention Improvements. Construction costs are
estimated to be $274 , 634 . 25. It is recommended the bid submitted
by Gary Merlino Construction in the amount of $249, 667 . 50 be
accepted.
BID SUMMARY
Gary Merlino Construction $249 , 667 . 50
Lloyd Enterprises $279 , 342 . 50
Scoccolo Construction $292 , 530. 00
R.W. Scott Construction $314 , 311. 50
Westwater Construction $379 , 950 . 00
Engineer' s Estimate $301, 015 . 00
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15 , 1989
Category Bids
1. SUBJECT: PICKUP AND CARGO VAN
was helc/ Or�
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Bid opening is -_`_','_' ___ August 10,
1989 . The Director of Public Works
rk�vvx-.cQ ailu ivaii _ _�a.,1. __ as to & R-o4e_d -�-AQ-f
I C4CJ been r_eCeWed 1(0s +41f- (P, C-LU-F. !%Lg� ✓e_can, nno �CV-0-10
c 4-U-o- (cn.J 6,k rQ C .�nAr�
Gt c' Lj i c-.(Cs-+,ro n a 4-e
+�U'r. the. C- Uay._ was rec e t'ied - ern I30we� .Scn rFf
f- S) C"*1Cj rec-oMrne.r'C-0ed v"C'j be
3 . EXHIBITS:
tA)00. MOv�D ( �LUn , (✓ e Q
WaVjvj SeC.on� ec� QLnY e ✓hDhon Corned
4. RECOMMEND D BY
(Committ\FISCAL
f, Examiner, Co mission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETEDPERSONNE IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL PERSONNEL N E: Re ommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED:
SOURCE OF FUNDS :
7 . CITY COUNCIL /CTION:
C/lumen
moves, Coun4imember seconds
rn of Director of Public Wo s as to award of
cthe pickup and cargo van be ccepted.
DISCU \
ACTIO \
Council Agenda
Item No. 5B
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
August 14, 1989
TO: MAYOR KELLEHERR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DON WICKSTROMO
RE: PICKUP AND CARGO VAN BIDS
Bid opening for these two pieces of equipment was held August 10.
Two bids were received for the pickup and one bid for the cargo
van.
BID SUMMARY - PICKUP
Bill Hazelett Chevrolet $12 , 726. 97
Bowen Scarff Ford $13 , 615 . 20
It is recommended the bid submitted by Bill Hazelett Chevrolet be
accepted for the Pickup. Funds totaling $11, 977.75 have been
established in the Equipment Rental fund for this equipment. The
additional $749 is available in Equipment Rental Reserve.
BID SUMMARY - CARGO VAN
Bowen Scarff Ford $14, 050. 84
Adequate funds have been approved in the Water Department Operating
budget for purchase of this vehicle. It is recommended the bid
from Bowen Scarff be accepted.
ACTION
e the bid submitted by
Bill Hazelett Chevrolet in the amount of $12 , 726 . 97 for a 3/4 Ton
Pickup and the bid submitted by Bowen Scarff Ford for the 1/2 Ton
Cargo Van in the amount of $14 , 050. 84 be accepted.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15, 1989
Category Bids
1. SUBJECT: LAKE FENWICK PARK,
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: mod"^ oPerCe�-an raay `— '
he k d p t• n
a-ncT recomm
3 . EXHIBITS: Sketch and description of proposed work; bid
tabulation and recommendation to be distributed at the meeting.
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Proiect architect; Parks and Recreation staff
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED:
SOURCE OF FUNDS: Budgeted CIP project which includes a $120 , 000
IAC grant.
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
that the low bid by be approved
in the amount of $ for the Lake Fenwick
development project.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 5C
S�
- Sicn
_
Cc
❑ CL
0
MIX N Q
4 U
O
C
N �
o -cal
I _
i o w
� o n o w
ILL -1 Oa
O
I, w
W -a�O ®� 6.m m LLo 0-
L_tH •®�Gs z
00
1 eFa� i.
G
Q -Y
wN nr
aLL a m-j Ilf
w
a
m<� W � e
w w 1
16 �Q _ ��z
f L v 1 C _
T ow 1 wN O _
0 3 r.-.-.-.-....... p .
! \ w 1 c: m v
1 U H 5Jy C y l f- QU
F W 13 i c lL O 1 m 6A J
!C < y
p Q ; 2 = m
1 i U-
1 1
CHAColie Hough Associates
LAKE FENWICK
ADVERTISEMENT FOR THE NEWSPAPER
The City of Kent is requesting construction bids for the development of a park project
located on Lake Fenwick. This project consists of several wood fishing floats and docks,
wood floating walkways, two bridges, 1,600 linear feet of crushed rock paths, 200 linear
feet of asphalt paths, picnic sites with furniture, and improvements to the existing
parking area.
Copies of the Plans and Specifications are available for a non-refundable payment of
fifty dollars ($50.00). The Contract Documents are on file in the office of Park and
Recreation Department located at Kent City Hall, 220 Fourth Avenue South. Sealed bids
will be received on August 14, 1989 up to 10:00 a.m. All bids will be opened and read
publicly aloud at 10:15 a.m.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15 , 1989
Category Bids
1. SUBJECT: 800 MHz TRUNKING RADIO AND MOBILE DATA TERMINAL
SYSTEM BIDS
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: The Public Safety Bond Issue provided
funds to initiate two significant communications systems
projects for the Police and Fire Departments, an 800 MHz
Trunking Radio System and a Mobile Data Terminal (MDT) System.
On April 28, 1989, bids for these systems were opened. Motorola
Inc. was the only bidder for the trunking radio system and
review of their proposal finds that it meets our specifications
and is economically viable. The MDT proposal from Mobile Data
International Inc. was also found to meet our specifications and
provide the most economical alternative of the five (5) MDT
proposals received. The funding dedicated in the Public Safety
Bond Issue is sufficient to allow installation of these system
backbones, with a limited number of mobile and portable units
for initial operations. As was established at the time of the
original Bond Project planning, funds generated from other users
buying into the system will be applied equally to the Police and
Fire Departments to move toward full system implementation.
3 . EXHIBITS: An Executive Summary and Project Report attached.
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Fire Chief and Police Chief
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: Radio & MDT Project Funds $1 320,000
including sales tax
SOURCE OF FUNDS: Public Safety Bond Issue
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember &� moves, Councilmember seconds
to authorize the Fire and Police Department to enter into
contractual agreements with Motorola, Inc. in an amount not to
exceed $1, 120, 000 ; and with Mobile Data International Inc. in an
amount not to exceed $200, 000; and4)authorize the Mayor to
execute these contracts, and site lease contracts, subject to
prior review of the City Attorney's office; and that funds
generated from other users buying into the system be applied
equally to the Police and Fire Departments to move toward full
system implementation.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 5D
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DATE: August 15, 1989
TO: Kent City Council
Mayor Kelleher, Councilmembers Biteman, Dowell , Houser, Johnson,
Mann, White, and Woods
FROM: Norm Angelo, Fire Chief
Rod Frederiksen, Police Chief R�
SUBJECT: Recommendations for Implementation of Communications Systems
-------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANT FEATURES
The attached Project Report represents the culmination of over two years of work
by a joint Police and Fire Project Team in the research and design of an
effective public safety communications system. The recommended systems are
consistent with the goals established in the Public Safety Bond Issue to provide
increased coverage, increased channel availability, growth potential , and
alternative methods of data transfer. These systems have been designed to allow
incremental growth in capacity and capability to meet the future needs of our
Departments, and to allow additional users to be added in the future.
As with all the Bond Issue projects, the funds available will not be sufficient
to meet the needs for functionality or number of mobile and portable units
identified at the time of adoption of the Bond Project budgets. As has been
noted during previous bid awards, it will be necessary to address these needs
in future CIP requests.
During the original planning and adoption of the Public Safety Bond Issue,
direction was established that funds derived by allowing other users to 'buy in'
to these systems be reverted to the Police and Fire Departments to be used to
acquire additional radio and MDT equipment to meet their full system needs. If
such other users are added, funds derived form this will help minimize the
pressure on the CIP to fund completion of the systems.
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
We are forwarding to you our recommendation to proceed with this work, and to
take the following actions:
AWARD the 800 MHz Trunking Radio system bid to Motorola Inc. for an amount
not to exceed $1,120,000.
AWARD the Mobile Data Terminal system bid to Mobile Data International Inc.
for an amount not to exceed $200,000.
I
CONCLUDE and EXECUTE agreements for MDT software and site leases.
CONFIRM the direction established during the original planning and adoption
of the Public Safety Bond Issue, that funds derived by allowing other users
to 'buy in' to these systems be reverted to the Police and Fire Departments
on an equal basis. These funds are to be used to purchase equipment in
order to move toward full system implementation.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
We are recommending an implementation plan that fits within the allocated funds
of the Public Safety Bond Issue. This plan calls for a lower number of mobile
and portable radios than was identified as our minimum needs when the project
was originally established. Because of this, the Police and Fire Departments
will be seeking other future funding to add to these systems to reach our needed
level of equipment.
Potential future supplemental funding sources are listed below:
1. Adopt an aggressive policy to encourage the other Valley Com public safety
agencies to buy into these systems, and channel all re-captured funds to
the acquisition of mobile and portable equipment for the Police and Fire
Department.
2. Allocate funds in the Capital Improvement Plan.
3. Finance additional equipment acquisition in the future utilizing the
lease/purchase financing offered by Motorola.
2
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 7, 1989
TO: Norm Angelo, Fire Chief
Rod Frederiksen, Police Chief
FROM: Lt. Kevin Kearns, Radio and MDT Project Manager
Capt. Jim Miller, Kent Police Department
SUBJECT: 800 MHz Trunking Radio and MDT System Recommendations Summary
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND
The attached Project Report documents the past two years of work effort of the
Radio and MDT project team. This team has expended considerable effort to
carefully analyze the present and future communication needs of the Police and
Fire Departments and to design systems to meet these needs.
Throughout this project we have worked to achieve the four specific improvements
that were identified as a part of the original Public Safety Bond Issue planning.
The first priority was to improve system coverage throughout our service area.
Secondly, we identified the need to increase the number of channels available
to us. It was also identified that we needed to design a system with adequate
expansion potential to meet the future demands of a growing City. Finally, we
identified the need to find alternative methods of transferring information to
and between field units that improve accuracy and minimize future growth
pressures on the voice radio system.
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
It is the recommendation of the project team that we now proceed to implement
these systems with the following City Council actions:
AWARD the 800 MHz Trunking Radio bid to Motorola Inc. , for an amount not
to exceed $1, 120,000 for the base system (with add and delete options) and
a quantity of mobiles and portables to be determined by available funds.
We further recommend that this award action include authorization for the
Mayor to sign the resulting contract, subject to the prior approval of the
City Attorney's office.
AWARD the Mobile Data Terminal bid to Mobile Data International Inc. , for
an amount not to exceed $200,000 for the base system, and a quantity of
mobile and portable terminals to be determined by available funds. We
further recommend that this award action include authorization for the
Mayor to sign the resulting contract, subject to the prior approval of the
City Attorney's office.
1
AUTHORIZE the Project Manager to begin formal contract negotiations with
PRC/PMS, the Valley CAD system vendor, for the MDT software interface and
MDT project prime contractor services, and receive authorization for the
Mayor to sign the resulting contract, subject to the prior approval of the
City Attorney's office.
AUTHORIZE the Project Manager to finalize lease negotiations with the
chosen transmitter site owners and receive authorization for the Mayor to
sign the resulting leases, subject to the prior approval of the City
Attorney's office.
CONFIRM the direction established during the original planning and adoption
of the Public Safety Bond Issue, that funds derived by allowing other users
to 'buy in' to the system be reverted to the Police and Fire Departments
on an equal basis. These funds are to be used to purchase equipment in
order to move toward full system implementation.
BUDGETARY IMPACTS
The funding for these projects has been allocated in the Public Safety Bond
Issue. As is identified in the Project Summary, the level of funding available
is not adequate to fulfill what was defined as our minimal requirements for
mobile and portable equipment. Obviously, adjustments need to be made in our
implementations of these systems, and the ultimate number of mobile and portable
units will depend on the final total costs of establishing the system backbone
including site development, MDT software development and a minimal project
contingency.
The Project Team recommends that we adopt an aggressive policy to encourage the
other Valley Com public safety agencies to buy into these systems and convert
their fleets to this more advantageous technology. It is our opinion that this
approach is the most reasonable way to expect the Police and Fire Department to
re-capture a portion of their capital investment. These funds could then be
utilized by both departments to complete the implementation of these systems to
meet their needs.
Should the City choose to consider it, Motorola has offered a Lease/Purchase
financing option. Since MDI is a Motorola company, this option can also apply
to equipment purchased from them. This option would allow us to cover a $450,000
funding shortfall with 5 annual payments of approximately $116,000, which could
then be split between each of our Departments depending on the actual equipment
acquired.
2
PROJECT REPORT
DATE: August 7, 1989
TO: Norm Angelo, Fire Chief
Rod Frederiksen, Police Chief
FROM: Lt. Kevin Kearns, Radio and MDT Project Manager Ra
Capt. Jim Miller, Kent Police Departmment
Joe Blaschka P.E. , Adcomm Engineeriif
SUBJECT: 800 MHz Trunking Radio and MDT Project Report
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BACKGROUND
As a result of the Public Safety Bond Issue, the Police and Fire Department
formed an internal project team to conduct a thorough analysis of our existing
communications systems and to formulate recommendations for system improvements.
This team has spent a considerable amount of time and effort in this research
and has utilized the services of a radio systems engineering and consulting firm
to provide technical advice and guidance. This report provides a summary of this
activity and makes specific recommendations on the implementation of new systems
to meet our current and future public safety communications needs.
Throughout this project we have worked to achieve the four specific improvements
that were identified as a part of the original Bond Issue planning. The first
priority was to improve system coverage throughout our service area. Secondly,
we identified the need to increase the number of channels available to us. It
was also identified that we needed to design a system with adequate expansion
potential to meet the future demands of a growing City. Finally, we identified
the need to find alternative methods of transferring data to and between field
units that improve accuracy and productivity, and minimize future growth
pressures on the voice radio system.
1
An important consideration that was kept in mind at all times during our work
was the City's involvement in the Valley Com dispatch and communications system
and our existing mutual and automatic aid agreements with neighboring
jurisdictions. Up to this point, the Kent Police and Fire departments have
essentially been 'users' of an established radio communications system. This
project will be placing our organizations 'in' the radio systems business and
therefore need to be carefully considered. Any new systems introduced to meet
the direct needs of the City of Kent need to be designed and implemented in such
a way as to eliminate any degradation of service to the other users and maintain
our ability to operate in the Valley Com system.
Our work has taken us through a variety of interim decision points which led us
to the final system designs. These steps have included several internal reviews
and validations, on-site inspections of existing systems of similar architecture,
external review and validation by the Valley Com users, and final bid
specification drafting and review. In February of this year, the specifications
were issued and bids were received through the end of April . One proposal was
received in response to our 800 MHz Trunking Radio Specification and five
proposals were received in response to our Mobile Data Terminal (MDT)
Specification.
The months of May through July have been spent reviewing the submitted bid
proposals and analyzing the various features, advantages and disadvantages of
the proposed systems and designs. We are now prepared to go forward to you, and
the City Council , with our recommendations on the project and to request
authority to award bids and begin implementation of these systems.
2
800 MHZ TRUNKING RADIO SYSTEM DESIGN
Channel availability
Due to the limited amount of radio spectrum available for license in the VHF and
UHF public safety bandwidths (none) , and the inherent lack of coverage range in
the existing VHF simplex (point-to-point) system, we have determined that
implementation of a repeater system in the 800 MHz frequency band provides the
only available method to accomplish the identified improvements. Further, in
order to attain maximum benefit from a limited number of actual radio frequencies
licensed, we have determined that the application of 'trunking' technology is
appropriate.
Through digital control of repeater assignment, trunking allows a large number
of distinct communications 'groups' to share the communications system in a
manner that behaves as if they each were using their own private radio frequency.
This technology greatly improves the efficiency of spectrum utilization and more
fully matches the organizational needs of the Police and Fire Departments. We
have determined that we will initially install a six-channel trunking system.
Five of these channels are used for voice communications while the sixth is used
by the trunking controller (a computer) to coordinate the entire system.
Coverage
In order to provide reliable mobile and portable coverage in the service area
of the Fire and Police Departments, we have also determined that two repeater
sites will be needed and simulcast technology will be employed. Negotiations
are under way with King County Water District #75 to establish a lease agreement
for a site at their Mansion Hills tank farm, located at approximately S 216th
Street and Interstate 5. This site will be the 'prime' site for the system and
provide coverage to the area west of Pacific Highway South while also providing
high saturation coverage of the valley floor. This is essential to providing
reliable portable radio coverage in our service area. This site will be
developed by the City of Kent under separate contract. It is estimated that
total site development costs should be approximately $50,000.
3
We will also be developing a repeater site at a 'high' location to provide
coverage to the areas east of the valley and for wide area communications
coverage in the region we work in. This high site will be located at either
Cougar Mountain at a site operated by Ratelco, Inc. , or on Squak Mountain at a
site operated by the King County Police. We are presently negotiating with both
of these site owners to determine the most cost effective location. Since each
of these sites is already developed for radio service, front-end development
costs will be lower than the 'low' site and are projected to not exceed $20,000.
Both sites will involve leasing arrangements for the on-going use of the site.
The combined annual lease costs are anticipated to not exceed $30,000.
System Compatibility
The implementation of a multi-channel , multi -site, 800 MHz trunking system
answers our needs for increased coverage and available communications paths.
The design of the system presented two significant engineering challenges
however. First, the system design needed to maximize our ability to maintain
communications with the other Valley Com agencies. Secondly, we based our design
on the principle that there would be limited or no impact on the operations of
Valley Com or impact on existing inter-agency automatic and mutual aid
agreements.
To accomplish this, the new radio system will utilize cross-channel patching
technology to maintain system inter-operability. The cross-channel patching
approach will allow Kent Police and Fire units to continue to operate in the
Valley Com dispatch and communications system in a manner that preserves all
existing communications capabilities. There is a significant drawback to this
approach however. The mechanics of accomplishing this system interface prevents
Kent units from realizing the full benefit of the trunking system features. It
has been decided however that it is worthwhile to accept these limitations in
the near term to preserve our working relationship with Valley Com and the other
valley agencies.
4
We will also continue to operate VHF voice radios in all of our fleet. This
will provide redundant radio capability on all of the existing VHF frequencies
as well as provide communications capabilities on common VHF channels used in
major incidents such as the LERN, MARS, RED-NET, and OSCCR systems.
MOBILE DATA TERMINAL SYSTEM DESIGN
The fourth primary goal of this project was to implement alternative methods of
transferring information to and between field units that minimize future growth
pressures on a voice radio system. Our research led us to investigate the
implementation of Mobile Data Terminals (MDT's) in Police and Fire vehicles.
Through considerable market research and on-site inspection of working systems,
we have determined that the most appropriate design is to implement an MDT system
with its host computer system being the Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system
operating at Valley Com.
This design will allow direct access from field units to information contained
in the CAD system. Police and Fire units will be able to perform such functions
as: determine the status and assignment of other units; access premise related
information such as on-site hazards, owner contacts, and event histories; and
send and receive messages between field units. In addition, Police units will
have direct access through the CAD system to the State WACIC system to allow them
to run various records checks on persons, vehicles and property.
The MDT system will utilize a dedicated 800 MHz radio channel for transmission
of data to and from field units. This radio system has been designed to be fully
compatible with the proposed 800 MHz Trunked radio system. The MDT system will
employ only one transmitter location, that being the 'low' site on the west
hill . While this design will not provide the same degree of coverage as the
voice radio system, the economics of developing only one site at this time
outweigh this weakness. The system design allows additional repeater sites to
be added in the future as need dictates.
5
FUTURE EXPANSION AND SYSTEM POTENTIALS
The design approaches utilized in both systems provide for future expansion to
allow them to serve other users. The majority of the jurisdictions we studied
who have implemented 800 MHz trunking systems have used them to support their
entire City's needs for radio communications, including (along with Police and
Fire) such other functions as Public Works, Parks, etc. This approach may merit
future consideration within the City of Kent.
More likely candidates for future use of the systems are the other public safety
agencies in the Valley Com system. Each of these agencies are experiencing the
same communications problems that motivated Kent to undertake this project. Each
of these agencies are closely watching this implementation and evaluating the
potential benefits to their operations of moving to this technology. The logical
extension of this discussion is that Valley Com itself may determine that this
system approach makes the best sense for the entire Valley Com system and begin
the process of migrating all of its users to this technology. In the long run,
this would get Kent out of the radio 'provider' business and return it to one
of being a user of an operating and maintained radio system.
BUDGETARY IMPACTS AND RESTRICTIONS
When the scope of the Public Safety Bond Issue was originally defined, the City
possessed only a limited knowledge of alternative radio system designs and
implementation strategies. Final system architecture could not be determined
without going through the various processes and analyses of the past year and
a half. The project cost estimates prepared for both the 800 MHz trunking radio
and MDT system were based on the best knowledge at the time.
Because of this limited knowledge, it was identified at that time that actual
costs would ultimately determine the level to which each of these systems would
be implemented. The primary goal established was to implement a reliable voice
radio system. It was determined that the implementation of the MDT system would
be minimized if funds were needed to assure that this occurred.
6
Total Public Safety Bond Issue funding for the 800 MHz trunking system has been
set at $946,000 ($483,000 for Police and $463,000 for Fire) . Total funding for
the MDT system has been set at $374,000 ($187,000 for each department) , bringing
the combined project total to $1,320,000. The Fire Department also has some
additional funds budgeted for radio equipment in their new apparatus equipment
budgets. At the bid prices however, the Kent Police and Fire Departments would
need approximately $1,8869000 to implement both systems to what we originally
planned as our "base" equipment needs. Obviously, adjustments need to be made
in our implementations of these systems, and the ultimate amount of mobile and
portable equipment will depend upon the final total costs of establishing the
system backbone including site development, MDT software development and a
minimal project contingency.
BIDDING RESULTS
The City of Kent received only one response to our bid call for the 800 MHz
Trunking Radio System. This proposal was from Motorola Inc. Prior to going out
to bid, we were of the opinion that there were only 3 potential vendors who had
systems that could meet our specifications. For what ever reasons, neither of
the other two vendors elected to bid this work. We have carefully reviewed
Motorola's bid proposal and have found it to provide a system design and features
that meet or exceed our specifications.
Our bidding specifications separated the base system components (trunking
controllers, base stations, antennas, etc) and the mobile and portable radios
to allow us to tailor the quantity and capability of our mobile and portable
procurement to fit our operational needs and budget. The base system bid from
Motorola was $774,212. With the addition and deletion of options called out in
our specification, the total base system price will be $700, 133. Mobile and
portable radios ranged in price from a low of $1,950 to a high of $3,250,
depending on capability, optional equipment and installation method (dash or
trunk mount) .
7
While funding will not allow us to reach the number or capability of mobiles and
portables we had planned for in the beginning, we have put together an equipment
distribution plan that will provide basic system functionality in the primary
portion of our fleets. At this time it is anticipated that approximately
$137,000 will be spent on Police Department mobiles and portables and the Fire
Department will spend approximately $166,000. Any cost savings achieved in the
initial development of the transmitter sites or base system installation will
allow us to add to this plan.
We received a total of five proposals to our MDT specification. Three of these
proposals were eliminated in our initial review for economic or specification
compliance reasons. The two proposals remaining (Kustom Electronics and Mobile
Data International/Motorola (MDI)) offered slightly different approaches to MDT
functionality and system architecture. Each of these proposals has its merits,
and each is compliant with our specification. Kustom Electronics is the low
bidder for the system backbone equipment and also offers the lower per unit cost
for MDT units.
However, since our design calls for the MDT system to be served by the CAD system
in operation at Valley Com, we feel it is important to consider the "total cost
to implement" when evaluating these proposals. To accomplish this, we have
received pricing from PRC Public Management Services, the CAD system vendor, to
design and implement the MDT interface software. PRC/PMS has quoted
significantly different prices for each of these vendors for this programming
effort. This is due to the fact that PRC has considerable experience utilizing
the MDI terminal on several previous jobs and can therefore pass on a lower cost
to implement. PRC is presently in the process of installing its first Kustom
MDT system and is therefore bidding a higher level of work effort for this
interface due to their lower familiarity with this system.
8
The following information outlines the economics of the two MDT proposals.
MDI KUSTOM
Base System/Fixed Equipment $ 106,396 $ 68,415
PRC CAD System Interface 782771 140,416
PRC Prime Contractor Services 20,000 20,000
Base System Sub-Total $ 205, 167 $ 228,831
Kustom has bid mobile MDT's at $3,750 each for a Police vehicle implementation
and $3,850 each for a Fire vehicle implementation. MDI has bid a flat $4,280
each for mobile MDT's. At these prices, the City of Kent would need to purchase
over 40 units before Kustom's bid would represent a better economical choice.
Present and near term future funding will not allow this level of implementation.
The bottom line is that the MDI system presents an overall lower cost to
implement at this time and therefore maximizes the number of mobile MDT's we can
install now. The MDI alternative also offers advantages in installation and
maintenance service since, as a Motorola company, installation and servicing will
be conducted by the same radio service shop being used for the 800 MHz trunking
system. This is the same radio service shop that currently provides radio
maintenance for the City.
9
The following table provides a total project summary:
800 MHz Trunking_Radio System
Site Development Costs $ 709000
800 MHz System Backbone 700,133
Police Department Mobiles & Portables 1372000
Fire Department Mobiles & Portables 166,000
TOTAL $ 1,0732133
Mobile Data Terminal System
Base System/Fixed Equipment $ 106,396
Police Department MDT's 27,500
Fire Department MDT's 23,500
PRC Software & Prime Contractor Services 98,771
TOTAL $ 256,167
Project Contingency (5%) $ 49,030
TOTAL PROJECT ESTIMATE $ 17378,330 -
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
It is the opinion of the project team that the City of Kent has received
competitive and complying proposals to our bidding specifications. We feel that
the 800 MHz trunking system proposed by Motorola Inc. meets our operational needs
and represents an appropriate technology to serve the future needs of our
Departments. It is also our opinion that the proposed MDT system from Mobile
Data International Inc. represents the best overall MDT system approach for the
City.
We therefore recommend that the City proceed with the implementation of the
systems at a level supported by the available funds as outlined in this summary.
We recommend that we now move forward to the City Council for the following
actions:
10
AWARD the 800 MHz Trunking Radio bid to Motorola Inc. , for an amount not
to exceed $1,120,000 for the base system (with add and delete options) and
a quantity of mobiles and portables to be determined by available funds.
We further recommend that this award action include authorization for the
Mayor to sign the resulting contract.
AWARD the Mobile Data Terminal bid to Mobile Data International Inc. , for
an amount not to exceed $200,000 for the base system, and a quantity of
mobile terminals to be determined by available funds. We further recommend
that this award action include authorization for the Mayor to sign the
resulting contract.
AUTHORIZE the Project Manager to begin formal contract negotiations with
PRC/PMS, the Valley Com CAD system vendor, for the MDT software interface
and MDT project prime contractor services, and authorize the Mayor to sign
the resulting contract.
AUTHORIZE the Project Manager to finalize lease negotiations with the
chosen transmitter site owners and authorize the Mayor to sign the
resulting leases, subject to the prior approval of the City Attorney's
office.
CONFIRM the direction established during the original planning and adoption
of the Public Safety Bond Issue, that funds derived by allowing other users
to 'buy in' to the system be reverted to the Police and Fire Departments
on an equal basis, to be used to acquire additional radio and MDT equipment
to meet their full system needs.
11
ALTERNATIVES AND OPTIONS
Motorola has offered a 5 year lease/purchase financing option if the City should
choose to fund any portion of this project in this manner. Since MDI is a
Motorola company, this option also applies to equipment purchased from them.
The rate quoted through June was 8.75% per year. Revised quotations are
available if we deem this to be a viable alternative. At this rate, the City
could finance a $450,000 budget shortfall for 5 annual payments of approximately
$116,000, which could be divided by our Departments based on the actual equipment
purchased by each.
The bid specifications also provided a 4 year price hold provision to allow the
City of Kent (and other Valley Com participants) to purchase additional system
components, and mobile and portable equipment at guaranteed prices. This was
done with the expectation that we would likely not have adequate funding in the
Bond Issue to implement these systems to the level we feel is appropriate. It
is the recommendation of the project team that both the Police and Fire
Departments begin to budget (both operationally and in the CIP Program) for
additional radio and MDT equipment to complete their system implementations.
We also recommend that we adopt an aggressive policy to encourage other radio
users, particularly the other Valley Com public safety agencies, to buy into
these systems and convert their fleets to this more advantageous technology.
It is our opinion that this approach is the most reasonable way to expect the
Police and Fire Department to re-capture a portion of their capital investment.
These funds could then be utilized by both departments to complete the
implementation of these systems to meet their needs.
12
Kent City Council Meeting
Date August 15 , 1989
Category Bids
1. SUBJECT: EQUIPMENT, FIRE APPARATUS
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Bids were opened on July 14 to purchase
equipment for existing fire apparatus. Specifications were
prepared which would allow the City the option of accepting the
lowest total bid or the lowest bid for each line item.
+1,4 f1re bept 5
After analysis, i4-4;s recommended that the line item, multiple
vendor approach be approved, saving the City $2 , 214 . 51.
3 . EXHI I Executive summary; bi tabulation.
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Fire Chief
(Committee Staff, Exa ner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCA RSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAL PERSONNEL OTE: Recommended Not Recommended
i
6. EXPENDITURE UIRED:
SOURCE OF DS: Public et Bond Issue
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTIOON::
C.Ourwai1l nh seeends-
to award the apparatus bids, in accordance with the attached
tabulation, as follows:
Halprin Supply CO. $ 3 , 497.09
L. N. Curtis & Sons 26, 142 .80
Wajax Pacific 5, 271. 80
Total $34,911. 69
DISCUSSION• �
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 5E
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AUGUST 151 1989
TO: MAYOR KELLEHER, COUNCIL PRESIDENT 'WHITE, COUNCILMEMBERS
BITEMAN, JOHNSON, WOODS, ROUSER, DOWELL, MANN
FROM: NORM ANGELO, FIRE CHIEF
SUBJECT: EQUIPMENT FOR FIRE APPARATUS
----------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
In 1986 a public safety bond issue for 12. 3 million was passed.
Included in this Bond project were funds to purchase equipment for
the fire apparatus funded by this project.
It was decided that in order to provide the best purchasing \�
position for the city, the equipment that could be commonly
provided by fire equipment vendors be let out to bid. The bids were
prepared allowing the city the option of accepting one vendor and
the lowest total bid or lowest line item bid using multiple
vendors.
Three vendors returned bids and the bids were opened on July
14 , 1989.
The bids were analyzed, selecting the lowest bid for each item and
assuring that the equipment that was specified was bid.
Consideration was given as to the ability of the vendor to be able
to deliver the equipment. All of the vendors are reputable
companies and we anticipate no problems with their ability to
deliver the equipment that was bid. -
Quotes will be obtained for the equipment that could not be
commonly bid by the fire equipment vendors. the equipment will be
purchased from the supplier quoting the lowest price, using local
suppliers as much as possible.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that we use the line item, multiple vendor
approach for purchasing the equipment. Purchasing the equipment
through this method will save the city $ 2,214 .51 over the single
vendor total package approach.
The vendors are:
Halprin Supply Company $ 3,497 . 09, L.N. Curtis and Sons $ 26, 142 .80
Wajax Pacific Fire Equipment Company $ 5, 271.80, for a total of
$ 34 ,9ll. 69.
Executive Summary to Mayor Kelleher and Councilmembers
Page 2
SIGNIFICANCE
In order to keep with in the dollar amount that was budgeted for
this project we must purchase wisely, this approach will help us
reach that goal.
BUDGETLECONOMIC IMPACT
We will be able to complete the purchase of equipment within the
dollar amount that was budget for in the bond project.
HALPRIN CITY BID
ITEM AMOUNT NUMBER TOTAL
CF, BAR $21.30 3 $63.90
DO9LE FEMALE 2 1/2 $14.50 4 $58.00
DOUBLE MALE 3 1/2 $54.50 6 $327.00
DOUBLEFEMALE 2 1/2 X 3 1/2 $69.90 2 $139.80
ELBOW 2 1/2 $76.60 4 $306.40
ELBOW 3 1/2 $129.60 4 $518.40
HOOLIGAN TOOL $96.00 3 $288.00
HYDRANT WRENCH (ADJ) $9.90 6 $59.40
INCREASER 1 1/2 X 2 1/2 $13.45 2 $26.90
INCREASER 2 1/2 X 3 1/2 $37.20 4 $148.80
INCREASER 4.828 X 7THREADS $145.45 2 $290.90
NOZZLE 1 1/4" $18.00 2 $36.00
NOZZLE 1" $18.00 2 $36.00
NOZZLE 5/8 $18.00 2 $36.00
SHOVEL SQUARE POINT $29.45 6 $176.70
SPANNER WRENCH SET $34.95 3 $104.85
SUCTION HOSE 5" X 25' $309.00 2 $618.00
SUB TOTAL $3,235.05
SALES TAX $262.04
TOTAL $3,497.09
L N CURTIS CITY BID
TEM PRICE NUMBER TOTAL
XE, PICKHEAD $68.60 6 $411 .60
,XE BELT $60.50 4 $242.00
,XE LADDERMANS $67.50 4 $270.00
(LOWER (SMOKE 1811) $595.00 2 $1,190.00
SLOWER (SMOKE 2411) $880.00 2 $1,760.00
IEWATERING PUMP $643.50 4 $2,574.00
iISTRIBUTATOR MALE $480.00 2 $960.00
'ISTRIBUTOR FEMALE $480.00 2 $960.00
OUBLE FEMALE 3 1/2 $68.80 4 $275.20
SATE VALVE 2 1/2 $100.40 4 $401 .60
;ATED WYE 2 1/2 X 1 1/2 $131 .75 4 $527.00
_ADDER BELT $110.50 4 $442.00
JOZZLE 1" FORESTRY $8.25 2 $16.50
4OZZLE TSM30 $237.00 4 $948.00
)IKE POLE 10' $43.50 1 $43.50
)IKE POLE 16' $62.00 1 $62.00
PIKE POLE 20' $70.00 1 $70.00
RUBBISH HOOK 10' $53.40 4 $213.60
RUBBISH HOOK 6' $43.25 4 $173.00
SAFTY CAN $37.40 6 $224.40
SALVAGE COVER $94.00 16 $1 ,504.00
SHUTOFF 2 1/2 X 1 1/2 $144.25 6 $865.50
SIAMESE 2 1/2 X 3 1/2 MALE $370.25 2 $740.50
SQUEEGEE $51 .40 9 $462.60
WHEEL CHOCK $49.85 4 $199.40
FIRE HOSE 1 3/4" $1 .75 1500 $2,625.00
FIRE HOSE 2 1/2" $2.55 150 $382.50
FIRE HOSE 3 1/2" $4.70 1200 $5,640.00
TOTAL $24, 183.90
SALES TAX 1958.90
TOTAL $26, 142.80
WAJAX PACIFIC CITY BID
ITEM PRICE NUMBER TOTAL
30LT CUTTER $62,50 3 $187.50
X REEL $271.50 3 $814.50
)dMLE FEMALE 1 1/2 $15.05 2 $30.10
30UBLE MALE 2 1/2 $13.25 4 $53.00
DROP BAG $15.00 $0.00
HOSE CLAMP $111.25 4 $445.00
MALLET * $9. 10 3 $27.30
NOZZLE TSM20 $112.00 12 $1,344.00
PIKE POLE 5' $31 .50 3 $94.50
REDUCER 1 1/2 X 1 $12.25 2 $24.50
REDUCER 2 1/2 X 1 1/2 $12.25 4 $49.00
REDUCER 2 1/2 X GHT $12.75 2 $25.50
REDUCER 3 1/2 X 2 1/2 $33.90 4 $135.60
SHOVEL ROUND POINT $22.90 4 $91 .60
SHOVEL SCOOP $21.17 4 $84.68
SHUTOFF 1/1/2 X 1 1/2 $122.50 12 $12470.00
.SUB TOTAL $4,876.78
SALES,TAX $ 395.02
TOTAL $ 5, 271.80
HALPRIN L N CURTI ; WAJAX PACIFIC
ITEM NUMBER * PRICE TOTAL i PRICE TOTAL * PRICE TOTAL
AXE LADDERMANS 4 * $71.20 $284.80 * $60.50 $242.00 * 114$67.50 $458$270.00
AXE BELT 4 * $72.00 $288.00 * S6D.5D 5242.00 * f114.50 f458.00
AXE,BELT
6 * $73.25 $439.50 * $60.60 $411.60 * $73.35 $440.10
BLOWER (SMOKE) 4 * 5690.00 S2,760.00 * $595.00 52,380.00 * $715.00 $2,860.00
BOLT CUTTER 3 * $77.00 $231.00 * f71.00 $966.00 * 271.$62.50 $814$187.50
CORD REEL 3 * $297.00 $891.00 * $322.00 5$66.00 * $$23.25 S$64.75
CROW BAR 3 * $21.30 $63.90 * $22.00 566.00 * f23.25 f69.75
DISTRIBUTATOR MALE 2 * $708.00 $1,416.00 * 5480.00 $960.00 * $482.50 965.00
$
DISTRIBUTOR FEMALE 2 * $708.00 $1,416.00 * $480.00 $960.00 * 5482.50 965.00
DOUBLE FEMALE 1 1/2 2 * $16.50 $33.00 * $18.00 $36.00 * $15.05 $30.10
4 * $14.50 $58.00 * $26.00 $104.00 * $23.15 $92.60
DOUBLE MALE
4 L ALE 2 1/2 3 1/2 4 + $69.25 $277.00 * $68.80 $275.20 * $72.40 S289.60
DOUBLE 2
DOUBLE MALE 2 1/2 4 " 524.00 f96.00 * f15.50 562.00 * $13.25 $53.
00
DOUBLE MALE 3 1/2 6 * $54.50 $327.00 * $56.60 $339.60 * $55.88 $335.28
DOUBLEEMALE 2 1/2 X 3 1/2 4 * $69.90 16.00 f$64.00 * $16.50 f$66.00 * $15.00 f$60.00
142.50 DROP BAG
4 * $76.60 $306.40 * $78.50 $314.00 * f7B.75 $315.00
ELBOW 2 1/2 4 * $129.60 S51B.40 * 5130.60 $522.40 * $132.50 $530.00
ELBOW 3 VALVE
4 * $162.10 $648.40 * $100.40 $401.60 * $122.50 $490.00
GATE VALVE 2 1/2 +
GATED WYE 2 1/2 X 1 1/2 4 * f133.20 5532.80 + $101.00 $303.00 $117.00 $550.00
HOOLIGAN TOOL 3 * $96.00 $288.00 * 5101.00 5303.00 * 5111.00 $445.00
HOSE CLA14P 4 * $220.00 $880.00 * $399.65 51,598.60 * $111.00 f$96.00
HYDRANT WRENCH (ADJ) 6 * $9.90 $59.40 * $10.95 $65.70 * f13.00 $27.00
INCREASER 1 1/2 X 2 1/2 2 * $13.45 $26.90 * $29.00 $50.00 * $13.50 S21.00
INCREASER 2 1/2 X 3 1/2 4 * $37.20 $140.80 * $76.80 $307.20 * $36.50 $146.00
INCREASER 4.828 X 7THREADS 4 * $125.00 $500.00 * 5110.50 $442.00 * $113.25 $453.00
LADDER BELT 3 * $10.35 $31.05 * $24.80 $74.40 * $9.10 $27.30
MALLET 2 $18.00 $36.00 * $78.40 $156.80 * $30.00 $60.00
NOZZLE 1 1/4" 2 • $18.00 $36.00 * 531.50 $63.00 * $30.00 $60.00
NOZZLE 1" 2 . $11.00 $22.00 * 58.25 $16.50 * $8.75 $17.50
NOZZLE 1" FORESTRY
NOZZLE 5/8 2 * $18.00 $36.00 * $26.75 412.50 * 112.00 344.
NOZZLE TSM20 12 * $207.40 $2,488.80 * $201.00 f2,412.00 * $246.00 $1$98 .00
NOZZLE TSM30 4 * $243.65 $974.60 * $237.00 5948.00 * 5246.25 5985.00
0' 1 * $80.00 $80.00 * 543.50 f43.50 * $46.10 $64.50
PIKE POLE 10' 1 * $111.00 $111.00 $62.00 $62.00 * $64.50 564. 0
PIKE POLE 1
PIKE POLE 16' 1 * $127.00 $127.00 * $70.00 $70.00 * $74.40 $74.40
PIKE POLE 5' 3 * $37.60 $112.80 * $35.00 $105.00 * $31.50 $94.50
DE-WATERING PUMP 4 * $799.00 $3,196.00 * $643.50 $2,574.00 * $677.50 $2,710.00
1 1/2 X 1 2
REDUCER * $13.45 $26.90 * $13.00 $26.00 * $12.25 $24.50
REDUCER 2 1/2 X 1 1/2 4 * $13.25 $53.00 * $13.25 $53.00 * $12.25 $49.00
REDUCER 2 1/2 X GHT 2 * $24.25 $48.50 * $33.25 566.50 * $12.15 525.50
REDUCER 3 1/2 X 2 1/2 4 " $39.10 5156.40 * $40.45 $161.80 * 533.90 $135.60
HOOK 10' 4 * $88.00 $352.00 * $53.40 $213.60 * $54.00 $216.00
RUBBISH,REDUCER
RUBBISH HOOK 1 4 * $46.45 $185.80 * $43.25 5173.00 * $44.75 $179.00
SAFTY CAN 6 * $40.30 $241.80 * $37.40 $224.40 * $37.65 $225.90
SALVAGE COVER 16 * $105.40 $1,686.40 * $94.00 $1,504.00 * $124.20 $1,987.20
SHOVEL ROUND POINT 4 * $24.40 $97.60 * $25.00 5100.00 " $22.90 $91.60
68
SHOVEL SCOOP 4 " $21.75 $87.00 * $23.00 $92.00 * $21.17 $57$84.50
SHOVEL SQUARE POINT 2 * $29.45 $58.90 * $30.00 $60.00 * 120.50 470.50
SHUTOFF 1/]/2 % 1 1/2 12 * $148.20 $1,778.40 * $144.25 $1,731.00 * 1122.50 $1,470.00
SHUTOFF 2 1/2 X 1 1/2 6 * 5190.70 $1,192.20 * $144.25 5865.50 * $150.70 f904.20
SIAMESE 2 1/2 X 3 1/2 MALE 2 * $372.25 $744.50 * $370.25 $740.50 * $435.25 $870.50
SPANNER WRENCH SET 3 * $34.95 $104.85 * $44.50 $133.50 * $3D.5D $115.50
SQUEEGEE 9 * $52.00 $468.00 * $51.40 $462.60 * $53.50 $481.50
SUCTION 5" X 25' 2 * f3D9.DD $618.00 * f370.00 $740.00 * $220.00 $440.00
WHEEL CHOCK 4 * $33.00 $132.00 * $49.85 $199.40 * 557.00 5220.00
FIRE HOSE 1 3/4" 1500 * DID'NT BID SPEC. $1.75 $2,625.00 DID'NT BID SPEC.
FIRE HOSE 2 1/4" 150 * D1D'NT BID SPEC. * $2.55 1382.50 DID'NT BID SPEC.
FIRE HOSE 3 1/2" 1200 * DID'NT BID SPEC. * $4.J0 $S,b40.00 OlD'NT BID SPEC.
* * *
* SUB TOTAL $28,268.50 * SUB TOTAL $35,116.90 * SUB TOTALf25,008.81
* SALES TAX $2,289.75 * SALES TAX $2,844.47 * SALES TAX $2,025.71
* TOTAL $30,558.25 * TOTAL $37,961.37 * TOTAL $27,034.52
LESS HOSE $8,647.50
TOTAL $29,313.87
TOTAL LOW BID $27,034.52
TOTAL OF LOW BID PER LINE ITEM $24,820.01
SAVINGS
R E P O R T S
A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT
B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
C. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
D. PLANNING COMMITTEE
E. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
F. PARKS COMMITTEE
G. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
�o
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
AUGUST 8, 1989
PRESENT: JON JOHNSON MARTIN NIZLEK
STEVE DOWELL TIM HEYDON
DON WICKSTROM JACK SPENCER
GARY GILL JOHN MARCHIONE
JIM HANSEN MIMI CASTILLO
SANDRA DRISCOLL TED KNAPP
KEN MILLER CHARLES PARSONS
LYLE PRICE
Construction Activities - Charles Parsons
Mr. Parsons commented he lives 6 miles east of Kent and uses 84th
every morning on his commute to work. He referred to the incident
detailed in his letter of June 19 regarding work being performed
by a construction company in the area prior to the work hours
specified in his permit with no traffic control thus creating worse
traffic congestion than the normal a.m. commute. Johnson asked
what we could do to assure the contractors work within the limits
of their permits. Wickstrom and Miller both responded that it is
important for the City to be notified when these instances do occur
so that we can send inspectors out at the time the violation is
occurring. We are currently revising the street cut permits to
specify working hours. Mr. Parsons urged that some sort of fine
be levied against the contractors when they violate their permit.
Miller responded the ordinance does address penalties as a
misdemeanor. Driscoll clarified a misdemeanor could mean a $1, 000
fine or 1 year in jail. The procedures followed now when we
receive such complaints were detailed for the Committee being that
when we receive such a call, we will send an inspector out
immediately and verify if there is a valid permit. It was
suggested the permit also reference the penalties for violation of
the conditions of the permit.
Traffic Mitigation Task Force Report
Ted Knapp, chair of the Traffic Mitigation Task Force, reviewed for
the Committee the direction and activities of the Task Force which
are detailed in the agenda packet (material made a part of these
minutes) . Dowell asked Knapp to explain the funding sources
anticipated. Knapp explained the basis of the Task Force
recommendations is the implementation of the provisions of the
Local Transportation Act of 1988 . Also continued involvement in
attempt to form a Transportation Benefit District is encouraged.
Other sources of income could come from possible State
Public Works Committe
August 8 , 1989
Page 2
participation (gas tax, etc. ) , impact fees, LIDS, and voter
approved bond issue. Development of an environmental mitigation
agreement took some time to reach agreement of all parties .
Involved in the process was a local land use law firm, CPI ' s legal
representatives, Mel Kleweno, Boeing attorneys and Union Pacific
attorneys as well as Sandra Driscoll . The proposed environmental
mitigation agreement developed as a result of this process is
included as part of these minutes. It was clarified the agreement
has a fixed time period and a fixed maximum amount of commitment.
Knapp added that an additional recommendation of the Task Force
not shown on the attached material is to include the development
of the Transportation System Management (TSM) program as a
component in the Local Transportation Act (LTA) . Wickstrom added
that one of the key elements in implementation of these
recommendations is funding of the update of the Comprehensive
Transportation Plan in the 1990 budget. Johnson asked what the
next step would be on implementation if Council approves the
recommendation. Wickstrom indicated that some of the
recommendations can be implemented immediately, such as the
Environmental Mitigation Agreement. Next would be modification of
the SEPA ordinance to include the 10 peak hour trip threshold.
Third would be approval of the funding for the update of the
Comprehensive Transportation Plan in order to implement the studies
necessary to implement the LTA program. Driscoll added that the
recommendation is that these studies be completed and the LTA
program ready for implementation in one year. Dowell asked what
happens to the agreements already in effect. Knapp responded
there is a recommendation allowing renegotiation and execution of
the new agreement to the extent legally allowable. However, the
old agreements are probably better for the developers than the new
so there will probably be very few wanting to renegotiate. The
Committee unanimously recommended approval of the Task Force
recommendations and that City staff be directed to take steps
necessary to implement these recommendations.
Hansen commended Ted Knapp for the time he has contributed to this
program.
Surplus Vehicles
The list of vehicles for surplus was reviewed and the Committee
unanimously recommended approval to surplus the vehicles as
included in the memorandum from the Fleet Manager.
Public Works Committe
August 8 , 1989
Page 3
A_areement with State Relocation of Sanitary Sewer SR 515 _ (S.E.
220th - S.E. 196th)
Wickstrom explained that in conjunction with the State' s rebuild
of SR 515 (which is on hold until the State gets gas tax approval)
a City of Kent sanitary sewer main will need to be relocated. The
State will pay the costs involved. The agreement authorizes the
State to proceed with this work. The Committee unanimously
recommended approval for the Mayor to sign the agreement.
Pavement Marking for Pedestrian Access - lllth Avenue S.E.
Wickstrom explained this is in the vicinity of Sequoia Jr. High
responding to the request from the Kent School District. The
pavement is wide enough to place a 4-inch white stripe providing
a 4-foot walkway on the easterly side of lllth. The cost is
estimated to be $900 which could be funded from the Asphalt Overlay
funds. Johnson asked about the additional 20 MPH sign requested
by the School District. Wickstrom stated the proposed cost did not
include the sign which would be an additional $200 . IBC has
indicated this would not need to go to Council as it can be funded
from existing funds. The Committee directed staff to proceed with
placement of the white stripe and the additional 20 MPH sign.
Pavement Management Program
Wickstrom explained that the Pavement Management Program is a
sophisticated computerized program which provides analysis of the
City' s street system resulting in a detailed report for maintenance
purposes. We currently have the old version of the program on line
which is difficult to run. The software has recently been upgraded
making it more "user friendly" and we are requesting purchase of
this upgrade, temporary data entry personnel and vehicle rental and
fuel for data collection. IBC has recommended approval since the
costs will be funded from existing Operating budget. The Committee
unanimously approved the request.
Purchase of Microfilm Reader/Printer
Wickstrom explained IBC concurred with request for purchase of this
equipment as long as it could be purchased from our operating
budget. Gill explained the 1989 Operating budget included $7 , 000
to microfilm all our as-built construction plans and purchase a
reader. After the microfilming is completed, we anticipate having
approximately $2, 000 remaining to purchase equipment. A reader
would only allow us to look at the microfilm but not make a copy.
Public Works Committe
August 8 , 1989
Page 4
In researching equipment, we have found equipment which would meet
the needs not only of the design section but also of the other
divisions in Public Works using microfilm. The existing reader
printer used in Property Management is about ten years old,
unreliable, and emits obnoxious odors due to the chemical process
used. An upgraded version of that piece of equipment would cost
approximately $4 , 000; however another type of equipment utilizing
bond paper, thus saving money in copy costs, and no chemicals would
cost approximately $6, 000. It is anticipated we would be able to
meet the additional costs through reduction of our operating
expenditures. The Committee unanimously approved the request.
City Clerk
PARRS COMMITTEE MINUTES
July 19, 1989
Councilmembers Present: Steve Dowell, Chair.
Staff Present: Mr. Chow, Barney Wilson, Chief
Frederiksen, Carolyn Lake, Alana
McIalwain, Nancy Woo, Helen Wickstrom,
Nancy Leahy, Neil Sullivan, Patrice
Thorell , Jack Ball , Cheryl Fraser, Karen
Michel, Pam Rumer, Doreen Higgins.
Note: As Councilmember Dowell was the only councilmember
present, Councilmember Houser was available by telephone
to vote on those issues that needed immediate attention.
Parking Ordinance
Karen Michel presented a parking ordinance proposed by the
department that would allow limited law enforcement commission for
parking violations only, for the Park Security staff. Duties would
include overtime, double parking, parking on the wrong side of the
street or in restricted areas. Michel explained that passage of
the ordinance would reduce the calls made to the Police Department
to enforce parking violations in the park system.
Chief Frederiksen spoke in favor of the ordinance and reported that
the Police Department has been working closely with the Parks
Department in creating this ordinance.
Dowell moved to accept the Ordinance as presented; Councilmember
Houser seconded the motion by telephone.
Special Populations Gold Medal Slide Show
Nancy Leahy explained that the Special Populations division has
been selected as one of the top four finalists for the National
Gold Medal Award. Helen Wickstrom added that the competition for
this award was very tight, as the department competed with cities
with populations of up to 200, 000 .
Leahy then presented the 1989 Special Populations Gold Medal Slide
Show. Wilson credited Leahy and Fraser for the nice job done on
the slide show.
-2-
Golf course Rates
Wilson explained that the new golf course has been open for a month
and the department is taking a look at rates and how adjustments
can be made to accomodate requests made by the community. Some
adjustments that the department are investigating for next year
include: raising the weekend rates at the 18-hole from $15 to $18 ;
raising weekend rates at the par-3 by $1; and giving senior rates
at select times during the week of $12 or $13 to anyone 55 and
over.
Sullivan also reported that the golf complex is in need of
additional staff, as the present staff are overworked and unable
to keep the complex in acceptable condition. Sullivan requested
permission to hire 2 of the 4 maintenance staff immediately that
are included in the 1990 budget.
After discussion, it was agreed that the staff are needed
immediately. Mr. Chow gave the department permission to begin the
screening and hiring process, while at the same time, the issue is
going through the proper channels and committees for approval . *
Parks Committee chairman, Steve Dowell, instructed the Committee
to submit the issue to the operations Committee for approval .
*The department has had to delay advertising of the positions until
Council approval at the August 1 City Council meeting.
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES f� n
August 1, 1989 D Ip n- (S f, WELD
D
L5 lUJ L� u
AUG 7 1989
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Christi Houser CITY OF KENT
Steve Dowell
Paul Mann CITY CLERK
STAFF PRESENT: Ed Chow
Jim Hansen
Mike Webby
Sandra Driscoll
Rod Frederiksen
Tony McCarthy
Lori Brown
Sue Viseth
Neil Sullivan
May Miller
Priscilla Shea
Alana McIalwain
Charlie Lindsey
John Marchione
Tom Vetsch
Karen Siegel
Teri Mertes
GUESTS PRESENT:
APPROVAL OF VOUCHERS
All claims for the period ending July 31, 1989 in the amount of
$808, 067 . 20 were approved for payment.
CITY CODE CODIFICATION CONTRACT
City Attorney Driscoll stated that the city reviewed 3 proposals
for the codification of the city' s code. She recommended to the
Operations Committee a contract with Municipal Code Corporation for
the codification of City ordinances. The cost is not to exceed
$16, 500 to be spread over a two year period. $8, 000 for the first
year is included in the 1989 budget.
The Operations Committee recommended this request to the Council
by a vote of 3-0.
RIVERBEND GOLF COMPLEX PERSONNEL- MAINTENANCE WORKER POSITIONS
Golf Course Superintendent Sullivan informed the Committee that
the golf course is projecting revenues of $1, 562 , 000 which could
pay for the needed assistance in meeting the increased maintenance
demands of opening the new 18 hole golf course. The original
request was for 3 new full-time maintenance workers for the
remainder of 1989 .
Budget Analyst Marchione presented a survey indicating the staffing
status of other city golf courses. The survey showed that
Riverbends current staff level of 7 outside employees compares
adequately to other courses for the winter months but is low in the
summer months.
Finance Director McCarthy suggested hiring 6 part-time people for
the 5 summer months from May to September. One option presented
involved transferring maintenance workers from Parks Maintenance
help for the summer of 1989 and have Parks Maintenance hire part-
time help for the remainder of the summer. This would allow
already qualified people to service the golf course. City Attorney
Driscoll presented a possible problem with this option being that
the golf course employees are non-union and the parks maintenance
employees are union and the city may be unable to transfer them.
Councilmember Houser was not comfortable with hiring full-time
employees based on revenue figures from just 2 months of golf
course activity because alot of people play a new course once to
try it out.
The Operations Committee recommended to Other Business the
authorization to hire temporary part-time maintenance employees,
as decided by city staff, at a cost of $17 , 000 until the end of the
year by a vote of 3-0 .
HATCHING OF SALMON EGG REQUEST
Executive Assistant McIalwain presented the implementation of a new
program involving the purchase of 4 aquariums to be set up in 4
Kent elementary schools. Salmon eggs would be acquired, hatched
and released into streams within the City of Kent boundaries. The
City was asked to fund this program with funds already appropriated
for salmon enhancement within the drainage utility.
The Operations Committee recommended to the Council the
authorization to fund this program by a vote of 3-0 .
RESOLUTION RELATING TO PROPOSED KING COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL
RATES
City Attorney Driscoll informed the Committee that the King County
Solid Waste Division recommended a Solid Waste Disposal rate
increase of approximately 83%. The Suburban Cities Association
analyzed the proposal and made certain recommendations including
refunding energy resource recovery fund monies to the city, ceasing
the collection of such monies, the lack of a need for a rate
increase and the solid waste recycling program not be funded
through the disposal fee so as not to duplicate cost to the cities
that already have recycling programs.
The Operations Committee recommended to the Council adopting a
resolution endorsing the recommendations of the Suburban Cities
Association related to the solid waste disposal rates.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
City Administrator Chow adjourned the Operations Committee Meeting
to a Executive session dismissing unauthorized individuals.
MINUTES FROM PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING
AUGUST 1, 1989
PRESENT: Paul Mann Hal Rees
Christi Houser Karen Michel
Ed Chow Dennis Byerly
Alana McIalwain Priscilla Shea
Rod Frederiksen Mary Ann Kern
Carolyn Lake
Chief Frederiksen removed Item 2 , Telephone Revenue, from the
agenda. He indicated that Finance Department had requested further
discussion on this item and that it would be brought back to the
Committee at a later date.
LIMITED LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMISSION FOR PARK SECURITY PERSONNEL
Karen Michel from the Parks Department indicated that there were
two Parks security positions funded in the 1989 budget and that
those positions have been filled. The proposed ordinance would be
granting a limited law enforcement commission to the Parks Security
Officers, authorizing them to issue and serve parking citations and
complaints. Michel reviewed through Sections 4 and 5 of the
proposed ordinance, indicating that they may be possible areas of
concern and also briefly related some statistics supporting these
positions. Chief Frederiksen stated that the Police Department
supports the program and that they have contributed to the training
of these individuals. He also indicated that the Parks Security
Officers would have radio communication with the Police Department
in order to assist with potential hazardous situations. Paul Mann
expressed his concern that he felt that maybe this wasn't enough,
maybe there should be police officers. Chief Frederiksen indicated
that having sworn officers specifically assigned to a park would
be much too expensive. The Parks Security Officers were not
intended to take the place of police officers, but help with the
parking problems that occur in the parks and to have faster
communication with the Police Department in potentially hazardous
situations. Christi Houser expressed her concern regarding the
safety of the Parks Security Officers if they were to become too
involved in police related activities. Chief Frederiksen indicated
that the Police Department would also still be continuing with
their parks related activities such as the park walk-thrus.
Christi Houser moved to accept the ordinance as presented and have
it put on the City Council consent calendar. Paul Mann seconded
the motion. Motion passed unanimously.
BRIEFING ON HENDRICKSON/HANSEN INVESTIGATION
- Chief Frederiksen asked Captain Hal Rees to provide the Committee
MINUTES FROM PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING, Continue Page -2-
August 1, 1989
with a briefing of what was occurring in the Hendrickson/Hansen
investigation. Capt. Rees indicated that approximately 2 months
the first search warrant was served. To date they have seized and
burned approximately 5 million dollars worth of marijuana, seized
8 pieces of property, approximately 30 vehicles, 1 1/2 tons of
precious metals, and 6 pages of other assets. About 1 1/2 weeks
ago search warrants were served on Auburn Precious Metals and
Northwest Territorial Mint and the case was currently being
reviewed by Federal U.S. Attorney's office. Captain Rees also
briefly related that there were other civil areas of concern that
were occurring with Auburn Precious Metals.
Meeting adjourned at 2 : 30 p.m.