Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 03/07/1989
City of Kent City Council Meeting Agenda osri<e of the City Clerk CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 7 , 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 A. Employee of the Month 2 . PUBLIC HEARINGS A. LID 330 - 64th Avenue S. Improvements B. Sale of Surplus Property 3 . CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes B. Bills C. Task Force Contributions D. Board of Adjustment Appointment E. Street Vacation - Resolution Joint Venture for Affordable Housing - Resolution Housing Work Program and Budget H. Daybridge Day Care - Bill of Sale I. Meadowland East - Bill of Sale J. Water Main Charges K. Green River Pipe Line No. 5 Project Transfer of Public Works Funds Canyon Drive Improvements N. Golf Course Banner Project O. Elevator Maintenance Contract �... P. Dance Club Ordinance Q. Police Department Word Processing Positions 4 . OTYJER BUSINESS B . vetoed Ordinance (2833- Kent Hill Apartments Rezone) 5. BIDS h� rt E:(7�t�.,��� A. f&i"pactor Body 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. A. Employee of the Month Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7 , 1989 Category Public Hearings 1. SUBJECT: LID 330 - 64TH AVENUE S. IMPROVEMENTS 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been set for the public hearing on the formation of LID 330; for improvements to 64th Ave. S. The City Clerk has given the proper legal notice. The Public Works Director will review the scope of the project and the assessments. 3 . EXHIBITS: vicinity map and memorandum from the Director of Public Works 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: OPEN HEARING: PUBLIC INPUT: CLOSE HEARING: 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds the City Attorney be directed to prepare the formation ordinance for LID 330. DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 2A DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS February 22, 1989 TO: Mayor Kelleher City Council FROM: Don Wickstrom 4D RE: LID 330 - 64th Ave. S. Street Improvements (Meeker St. to S. 212th St. ) March 7th has been set for the public hearing for the formation of L. I. D. 330 - 64th Avenue S . Street Improvements. BACKGROUND The transportation element of the 1980 Valley Studies program identified 64th Ave. S. as a future arterial route essential for development of this portion of the valley. The actual timing for the installation of 64th Ave. S. has been tied to the pressure for development along this corridor and the willingness on behalf of the property owners to fund the construction. For some time now, property owner support for the improvement of 64th Ave. S. has been expressed. As such the City has been pursuing the development of a Local Improvement District (LID) for the implementation thereof. In fact, due to the expressed support level, the City has actually proceeded with the roadway design work and right-of-way acquisition. The City is now ready to initiate the actual LID formation process. As such, an informal property owner meeting was held February 61 1989 . Sufficient interest was indicated. Therefore, Resolution #1192 was passed on February 7 , 1989 and the public hearing was scheduled. PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS The proposed project is the construction of 64th Ave. S. from James St. to S. 228th St. and from approximately S. 226th St. to S. 212th St. Also included is the improvement and widening of 64th Ave. S. from James St. to Smith St. Traffic signals shall also be installed at S . 212th, S. 228th, W. James and W. Meeker Streets. The project includes the following improvements: 1. Four to five lane roadway, two lanes each direction with turn lanes or landscaped medians. The roadway section varies within 1 the project limits. 2 . Curb and gutter 3 . Cement concrete sidewalks on both sides 4 . Storm drainage system 5. Street lighting 6. Street trees and grass planting strips 7 . Sanitary sewer and watermain extensions; stubs as required 8 . Traffic signals 9 . Landscaped medians (north of S . 236th St. ) NEED FOR IMPROVEMENTS 1. Drainage: Currently there is an inadequate drainage system in the project area. Ponding of storm water occurs often. A complete and adequate drainage system for the area is needed to provide for disposal of storm water. A complete drainage system is planned for the area including stubs to the adjacent properties for future connections. 2 . Street: The existing road is substandard or non-existent. Improvements such as curbing, sidewalks, lighting, landscaping, signalization and additional paving width are required to bring the street up to code to meet both functional and visual requirements . Therefore, these improvements are planned into the new road. 3 . Utilities: Various properties within the area are not currently hooked up to City water and sanitary sewer or are not fully serviced for their potential highest and best use. Prior to constructing the roadway, these utilities must be extended outside of the roadway to avoid future cutting and excavation thereof for these services. In some cases this will involve extending of the utility main line. Future cutting and excavation of the road will be strongly discouraged if not prohibited. Therefore, the utility construction must take place now. 4 . Development Requirement: The above described needs have been identified for the area. Any future development in the area will have to address these needs. Commitments to meet these needs are required to obtain building permits and are usually conditions of other developmental procedures. A number of properties have already made these commitments. The project area contains a substantial amount of undeveloped property or underdeveloped property. These properties will be faced with satisfying these needs in order to develop to their maximum potential. 2 PROJECT FUNDING It is proposed that the project be funded 100% by the Local Improvement District Number 330. It should be noted that the project as described above includes various features not normally required. However, since these extra improvements were requested to be included by a specific property owner, Union Pacific Realty Company (U.P.R.C. ) , the additional costs for these additional features are assessed directly to U.P.R.C. and are not included in the assessment distribution throughout the L. I.D. The City of Kent is also sharing in the additional costs. For assessment distribution purposes, the street cost is based on a maximum five lane road section without the landscaped median or eight foot planter strips. Costs not included in the basic L.I.D. distribution include: 1. Landscaped median 2 . Extra street tree expense for number, size and type 3 . Extra wide planting strips behind the curb 4 . Additional street lighting required because of the median 5. Additional right-of-way needed for the wider roadway section The total cost breakdown is as follows: Basic L. I.D. distribution (all properties) $6, 117 , 688 . 23 Costs Directly Assessed (U.P.R.C. & City only) 785 , 008 . 56 L. I.D. Total $6, 902 , 696.79 COST SUMMARY CATEGORY TOTAL COST Street $5,264 , 037 .71 Watermain 689 , 785. 60 Sanitary Sewer 301, 486. 16 Traffic Signals 647 , 387 . 32 Total $6, 902 , 696.79 CITY FUNDS There are no City funds directly associated with this project, however there are several City properties which are assessed under the L. I.D. 3 CITY ASSESSMENT SUMMARY LANDSCAPING - ASSESSMENT PROPERTY BASIC MEDIANS AND PRELIMINARY NO. DESCRIPTION ASSESSMENT FEES ASSESSMENT 10 and it Abandoned Sewer $673 , 683 .41 $271, 183 . 76 $944 , 867 . 17 Lagoon 13 Puget Power Right- 82 ,736. 16 24, 871. 88 107, 608 . 04 of-Way Acquisition 96 City Shops & Russell $ 12 , 022 .70 -0- $ 12 , 022 .70 Road Park TOTAL CITY ASSESSMENT $768, 442 . 27 $296, 055. 64 1, 064 , 497 .91 BOND RESERVE FUND A Bond Guarantee Fund is required to protect the bond holders in case L. I.D. assessments are not paid. The City's current fund is just sufficient to cover existing outstanding assessments. Additional L. I .D. formations will require generation of more guarantee funds. This is being accomplished through the L. I. D. assessments via a larger bond issuance for L.I.D. 330. Therefore the costs herein and proposed preliminary assessments include an additional 10 percent to provide the Bond Guarantee Fund. FORMATION OF THE LID To defeat an L. I. D. proposal, there must be protest from property owners representing 60 percent or more of the proposed L. I.D. assessments. However the City as a property owner, has no say in the matter. Therefore the assessment to City property is subtracted prior to figuring the protest percentage. In this case the total project cost for calculating protest percentage is $5 , 838 , 198 . 88 . The 60 percent protest amount is $3 502 , 919 . 33 . Should the protests received tally less than the amount, it will then be a Council decision whether or not to proceed with the formation ordinance for L. I .D. 330. METHOD OF ASSESSMENT The project costs and assessments (except signal) were calculated separately for each significantly different section as follows: North: S . 212th Street to S. 226th Street Central: W. James Street to S. 228th Street South: W. Smith Street to W. James Street The costs under each category of assessment are distributed to each property benefiting as follows: 4 1. Street - The assessments are based on square footage within the assessment boundary. The assessment rate decrease with 100 foot zones back from the public right-of-way with a maximum of seven zones. The front zone rate is seven times the rear zone rate; the second zone from the front is six times the rear zone and so on. Property further than 700 feet from the edge of the right-of-way is not assessed. 2 . Sanitary Sewer - In the south and central portions of the project, the assessments are based on square footage within the assessment boundary based on a 350 foot maximum depth zone. Property further than 350 feet from the right-of-way is not assessed. In the north section the project consists of installing stubs only. Therefore the cost of the stub or stubs is assessed directly to the property or properties being serviced. No stub means no assessment. 3 . Watermain - The assessments are based on square footage within the assessment boundary with a 300 foot maximum depth zone. Some properties (#12 and #14) , for example, are receiving only a stub and are therefore assessed for only the stub costs. 4 . Traffic Signals - The traffic signal assessment also involves properties outside the street assessment area. Besides properties with frontage on 64th Ave. S. , properties on side streets with a significant portion of their access provided via 64th Ave. S . were also included. However, those properties which approach the 64th Ave. S. signalized intersections via a major route (such as Meeker St. , the proposed 228th corridor or S. 212th St. ) were not included since the signals at 64th Ave. S. are for the benefit of the traffic on the side street which in these cases is 64th Ave. S. However, in the case of James St. , 64th Ave. is considered the through street and James is the side street. An exception is the properties east of 64th Ave. S. which are located on side streets but which have access to West Valley Highway. It is assumed in this case that the primary access is from West Valley Highway and that the trip generation to 64th Ave. S. is very minor. Therefore these properties were not included. The costs for each area signal is allocated to various sub- areas within the overall L. I. D. boundary as follows: 5 AREA INTERSECTION ASSESSED 1. North of S. 212th St. (Boeing) 1/2 of S. 212th signal 2 . S. 228th St. to S. 212th St. 1/2 of S. 212th signal 1/2 of S. 228th signal 3 . W.James St. to S . 228th St. 1/2 of S. 228th signal 1/2 of W. James St. signal 4 . W.Meeker St. to W. James St. 1/2 of W. James St. signal 1/2 of W. Meeker St. signal 5. South of Meeker St. 1/2 of W. Meeker St. signal The cost within each sub-area is distributed to the properties included based on the following factors: 1. Square footage of property 2 . Zoning of property 3 . Location of property and configuration of street system. In general, the larger the property the higher the potential for traffic generation. The property square footage is modified by weighting factors. The traffic generation potential is directly related to the zoning of the property. The following weighting factors are used, based on ITE' s trip generation values. ZONING FACTOR Single Family 0. 4 Elementary School 0. 8 Multiple Family & Mobile Home Park 0. 9 Industrial 2 .9 Office 2 .9 Commercial 10. 0 Weighting factors for locations and roadway configuration are as follows: LOCATION/CONFIGURATION FACTOR Property has access only from 64th Ave. S. 1. 0 (Must use 64th Ave. S. ) Property accesses 64th Ave. S. but also 0. 5 has frontage on side street leading away from 64th Ave. S. for an alternate direction of access; or Property is located on side street which allows use of 64th Ave. S. but also provides alternate direction of access. (1 diversion points away from 64th Ave. S. ) 6 Property is located on side street which 0. 25 routes traffic toward 64th Ave. S. but also allows alternate direction of access and route toward 64th Ave. S. splits to allow traffic to continue to 64th Ave. S. or to use alternate direction of access. (2 diversion points away for 64th Ave. S. ) EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION The construction of the project will require property acquisition in some locations to provide the right-of-way. Also slope and construction easements are required. Each property involved will be appraised followed by negotiation between the City and owner. Final settlement can be a direct payment or can be a credit toward the assessment thereby reducing the amount of the yearly payments. PROJECT SCHEDULE (PROPOSED) Property Owner Meeting February 61 1989 Resolution (Approved by City Council) February 7 , 1989 Public Hearing (During Council Meeting) March 71 1989 Project Design Phase Has been initiated Property Acquisition Has been initiated Approve formation Ordinance (City Council) March 21, 1989 Advertise for Bids April 71 1989 Open Bids April 28 , 1989 Award Contract (City Council) May 16, 1989 Final Assessment Hearing (During Council May 16, 1989 Meeting) Construction Begin June 1989 It should be noted that it is essential that the above schedule be followed without delay. The geotechnical report indicates that the soils along the roadway alignment are sensitive to moisture, and recommends construction during the summer season. Therefore it is important that construction begin as soon as possible this summer. A significant delay would lead to increased construction costs during the winter or delaying construction until the 1990 construction season. In either case complaints from the property owners would result. PAYMENT OF ASSESSMENT Upon Council passing the ordinance confirming the final assessment roll, there is a 30-day period in which any portion or all of the assessment can be paid without interest charges. After the 30-day period, the balance is paid over a fifteen-year period wherein each year' s payment is one-fifteenth of the principal plus interest on the unpaid balance. The interest will be what the market dictates. 7 27 I 24 1P22 -J >,. 2 'S J 29 19 ze 29 le L 11 10 IY -- 29 1_ _ 12 34 33 32 ]0 2! 3 i 91 36 ����"' Y1 YY VS Ye Y1 Ye YS Si 'ua 53 SO r 10 YI 7 5 54 Rom_ L 1 o a- i m o m c z � a ! 5 0SL 9 M W / ! V1 ! _ S2 SCALE: 1"=600' : 3 w 55 Me Fn \ 94 I se 59 y Y 25 LEGEND •-- n ee _ 9e ^^L.LO. BOUNDARY � 11 u fl 101 i —'PROPOSED ROAOPVAY \ 100 s 102 lea • PROPOSED SIGNAL �\ 104 1\ 107 75 ASSESSMENT NUMBER r -iu 539 NOT ASSESSED r� ^s s � ux L.I.D. 330 64TR. AV . STREET IMPROVEMENT l MEEKER ST. TO S. 212TI1. ST. Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7 . 1989 Category Public Hearings 1. SUBJECT: SURPLUS PROPERTY - S. 218TH AND SR 167 , 2 . This date has been set for the public hearing to surplus City property in the vicinity of 218th and SR 167 for which proper legal notice has been given. �` �l pnz. II Rd Qk i k+. Y"61c � -c 1-u_ it 61HA.Su ,�'iUL) Y) �2x; 'Tri(�tw�t:: titi�� � t t'w�- t-.�,�� it �a ti� r-�ti�t'E' c�n-��c�✓ i 3 . E�IIBITS: Vicinity �iap and copy of a ;4morandum from the ec.t.A4, L Director of Public Works to the Public Works Committee 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: OPEN HEARING: PUBLIC INPUT: CLOSE HEARING: 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: that the property be declared surplus and for the City to offer same for sale with a minimum acceptable bid being the appraised value. DISCUSSION• ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 2B SURPLUS PROPERTY 218th and SR 167 1 •_—'—J I_ I 1 , � I •----'1 29.25 29.27 I = 6.89 •---�.ar.48 I 1 1 1 1 • _I \ \ I 1 � 1 S. 218TH. 5T. 1 -- ------------ - - -- - L! 28. 4 IL'1 35.49 '---' 23.32 ; jG5.91 29 06 `�. \'\\ `\ r\ \�, .•, .'N`\i \ W' Al i i rr ,r L -L 0.75 / S. 222N0. ST. 1 DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS October 21, 1988 TO: PUBLIC WORKS C07ITTEE FROM: DON WICKSTROM-Q RE: PROPERTY ACQUISITION VICINITY OF 72ND AVE. AND 196T1I ST. This matter was brought before the Committee on August 23 , 1988 (See attached minutes) . As a result thereof, we have now obtained a purchase option on the property (see attached option agreement and map of property) . The sale price is $360, 000. 00 which is the value established by our appraiser, Gary Volchok. The option is dependent on City Council approval which we have 90 days to secure.. Presently we are having our consultant, R.W. Beck, who is also overseeing the Western Processing cleanup for us, review the site for potential contaminants and the ramifications thereof. Their report is due in thirty days. To finance this purchase, we propose to use the $450, 000 reserve fund of the Capital Improvement Fund. To replace said funds, we propose that: 1. The $150, 000 anticipated in the 1989 Budget for the East Valley Highway Improvement (192nd to 180th) project be kept in the reserve fund; 2 . We surplus a parcel of property acquired in the vicinity of 218th Street and SR 167 (see map) for the SCS drainage channel right of way and the proceeds therefrom be allocated to the reserve fund. Said estimated value thereof, as appraised in 1986, was $87 , 000; and 3 . The remaining balance ($123 , 095) in project fund #3169 - SR 515 Improvement (242nd to 250th) be transferred to this fund. Staff recommendation is that the Public Works Committee approve the acquisition and the associated funding package and recommend same to the full City Council. It should be noted that formal Council action would not be sought until the consultant' s analysis regarding site contamination has been completed. Also, should the conclusion therein warrant re-evaluation of the option, then this matter would be brought back to the Committee. r Duane Wells Inc. REAL ESTATE EVERGREEN BUILDING - 15 SOUTH GRADY WAY RENTON, WASHINGTON 98055 (206) 255-1293 February 20,1989 G. B. McCaughan Property Manager City of Kent 220 4th Avenue South Kent, Washington 98031 RE: Appraisal, 218th street & SR 167 Dear Mr McCaughan I have reviewed the referenced appraisal dated May 51 1986 to form an opinion as to the current value of the property as of February 20, 1989. A new appraisal was not made on this site howewver an adjustment of the original appraised value for "time" indicates the value of the site as of February 20, 1989 is: One Hundred Twelve Thousand Dollars {�ery Truly Yours/ Duane A. Wells Duane Wells Inc Pres. CONSENT CALENDAR 3 . City Council Action: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds that Consent Calendar Items A through Q be approved. Discussion Action 3A. Approval of Minutes. Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of February 27 , 1989 . 3B. Approval of Bills. Approval of payment of the bills received through March 7, 1989 after auditing by the Operations Committee at its meeting at 2 : 00 p.m. on March 15, 1989 . Approval of checks issued for vouchers: Date Check Numbers Amount 2/16 - 2/24 77055 - 77077 82 , 123 . 68 2/28/89 77088 - 77433 1, 082 , 279 . 53 1, 164 , 403 . 21 Approval of checks issued for payroll: Date Check Numbers Amount 2/17/89 115525 - 116145 733 , 306. 54 Council Agenda Item No. 3 A-B Kent, Washington February 21, 1989 Regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at 7 : 00 p.m. by Mayor Kelleher. Present: Councilmembers Biteman, Dowell , Houser, Johnson, Mann, White and Woods, Acting City Administrator Harris, City Attorney Driscoll , Public Works Director Wickstrom, Acting Planning Director Satterstrom and Finance Director McCarthy. Also present: Police Chief Frederiksen, Fire Chief Angelo and Assistant City Administrator Hansen. Approximately 40 people were at the meeting. PRESENTATIONS Engineer's Week. The Mayor read a proclamation declaring the week of February 19-25, 1989 as Engineer' s Week in the City of Kent. The Mayor commended engineers for their work in the community and presented the proclamation to Public Works Director Don Wickstrom. CONSENT BITEMAN MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A through CALENDAR V be approved, with the exception of Items E, G, M, N, and T which were removed. Houser seconded and the motion carried. MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3A) Approval of Minutes. APPROVAL of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of February 7 , 1989 . STREETS (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3J) LID 327 - West Valley Highway Improvements. AUTHORIZATION to set March 21 as the date for the hearing on the final assessment roll for LID 327 - West Valley Highway improvements. (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3L) Crow Road at S. 260th Street. AUTHORIZATION for the City to quit claim deed back to the property owner that portion of unused right of way for the Crow Road alignment project to clear title, as approved by the Public Works Committee. .- 1 February 21 , 1989 STREETS (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 30) SR 516/SR 99 Intersection Improvement. AUTHORIZATION for the City to participate in the State ' s SR 516/SR 99 signalization improvement project, establishment of a budget to transfer $27 , 385 into this project budget from funding sources identified in the funding analysis prepared by the Director of Public Works and AUTHORIZATION for the Mayor to sign the agreement with the State, as approved by the Public Works Committee. (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3P) LID 331 - SE 240th Street Improvement (108th to 116th) . ADOPTION of Ordinance No. 2834 , authorizing staff to proceed if needed on condemnation proceedings for right of way for LID 331, as approved by the Public Works Committee. STREET Glacier Park Company Street Vacation No. STV-89-1. VACATION This public hearing will consider an application filed by Glacier Park Company to vacate a portion of 80th Place South at South 180th Street. The City Clerk has given proper legal notice. The Mayor declared the public hearing open. Don Corson . Property Manager for Glacier Park Company, 1011 Western Avenue, Suite 700, Seattle, spoke in favor of the vacation, and proposed that rather than having the entire 45 ' area proposed as a utility easement, that it be reduced to mirror the existing water line. Corson also suggested that the size, configuration, and the easement itself be recognized in calculating the value of the property. Bill Doolittle, 412 N. Washington, stated that, as parent company of Burlington Northern Railroad, Glacier Bay should take responsibility for maintenance of the railroad crossings in Kent. There were no further comments from the audience and WOODS MOVED that the public hearing be closed. Johnson seconded. The motion carried. WOODS THEN MOVED to approve Street Vacation No. STV-89-1 with two conditions as recommended by staff and to direct 2 February 21, 1989 STREET the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance VACATION upon receipt of compensation. Johnson seconded and the motion carried. SEWER (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3K) Riverview RV Park (Cantor RV Park) . AUTHORIZATION for the Mayor to sign the agreement for the City' s financial participation for the oversizing and extra depth costs associated with the construction of the sanitary sewer main extension to service the Riverview RV Park development and establishment of a budget to transfer approximately $21, 925 . 00 from the unencumbered sewerage utility funds, as approved by the Public Works Committee. SURPLUS (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3D) PROPERTY Surplus Property. ADOPTION of Resolution No. 1194 declaring certain property as surplus located in the vicinity of S . 218th Street and SR 167 and setting March 7 as a date for a public hearing on the sale of such. -• PUBLIC WORKS (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3H) FUNDING Establishment of Project Budgets. AUTHORIZATION to proceed with the following projects and establish budgets for same to transfer the specified amounts from the funding sources identified in the funding analysis prepared by the Director of Public Works, as approved by the Public Works Committee. 1. Frager Rd. and S . 212th St. channelization, $5 , 000 . 2 . 240TH St. at Safeway driveway and channelization, $4 , 000. (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS 3G, 3M, 3N) Public Works Projects Funding. After a brief discussion, it was agreed to refer the following Consent Calendar items to the Public Works Committee for further review: 3 February 21, 1989 PUBLIC WORKS (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3G) FUNDING REMOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER MANN Transfer of Funds. AUTHORIZATION to establish budget for transfer funds for the following projects from the funding sources identified in the funding analysis prepared by the Director of Public Works, as approved by the Public Works Committee: 1. 72nd Ave. acquisition, $30, 000 . 2 . Green River bridge replacement, $52 , 024 . (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3M) REMOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE Canyon Drive Improvement AUTHORIZATION for staff to apply for fall funding and establish a budget therefore, as approved by the Public Works Committee. (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3N) REMOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER MANN Canyon Drive Improvement - Placement of Pylons AUTHORIZATION for staff to replace the pylons on Canyon Drive at a cost of approximately $5, 000 and to establish a budget for the transfer of funds from the unencumbered funds of the Reith Rd. construction project, as approved by the Public Works Committee. LEGISLATION (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3I) 1989 Legislation. APPROVAL of recommended positions as Council policy direction to staff in discussing legislation before the 1989 legislature, as outlined in the City Attorney' s memo of February 15, 1989 . DANCE CLUBS (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3T) REMOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE Dance Club Ordinance. Adoption of ordinance regulating dance clubs. Councilmember White requested that this item be held for two weeks and referred to the Public Safety Committee. ZONING CODE (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3E) AMENDMENT REMOVED AT THE REQUEST OF EDWARD COSTELLO Transitional Housing Facilities ADOPTION of Ordinance 2832 amending the Kent City Code to define ' 4 February 21, 1989 ZONING CODE transitional housing facilities and allow such AMENDMENT facilities as principally permitted uses in the GC, General Commercial zone. Edward Costello, 14514 N.E. 3rd Street, Bellevue, submitted a letter on behalf of his mother, Mrs. Mary Costello, who lives at 1333 West Morton Street. DOWELL MOVED that the letter be made a part of the record. White seconded and the motion carried. Mr. Costello stated that he is concerned that there has never been a public hearing which involved the residents and property owners of the area, and requested that such a hearing be held before the Council approves this item. Upon Dowell ' s question, Costello stated that the property is valued at $250 , 000 - $275, 000 . Dowell noted that one of the reasons given for eliminating the hearing in this zone was to do away with the $650 application charge and said it seems a small amount for a $275 , 000 piece of property which may or may not cme off the tax rolls. Dowell noted that the proposed Housing Element Update states that citizens and community organizations have legitimate concerns about the impact of assisted housing projects and should have the opportunity to express their concerns before the plans are finalized. He stated that he objects to changing the code and concurs with Mr. Costello. Mayor Kelleher clarified that Dowell had stated he did not object to the use but to the fact that the requirement for a public hearing would be eliminated. The ordinance proposed tonight would permit transitional housing facilities as principally permitted uses in the GC (General Commercial) Zone. WOODS MOVED to approve Ordinance 2832 . Mann seconded. Woods stated that the hearing had been held at the Planning Commission level, and that the process could be changed in the future if needed. She also pointed out that this provision addresses only those uses for transitional housing for 20 or fewer people and that hearings would be held for any transitional housing projects for 20 or more people. 5 February 21 , 1989 ZONING CODE She also pointed out that other uses such as bowling AMENDMENT alleys and auto body shops are provided outright, without a hearing. Woods said that under current conditions the house could be rented to 20 people, without a hearing, and that the only issue is that it is going to be a home operated by an agency. She urged the councilmembers to vote for the ordinance. Dowell stated that to eliminate the public hearing for one specific use seems discriminatory. Costello denied that there is any concern about a public agency using this facility for the intended purpose, and said the problem is whether it will work. He pointed out that the house was built in the 1920 's and is in extremely marginal condition. He asked that this item be reviewed in a public manner before a decision is made. The motion to adopt Ordinance 2832 amending the Kent City Code to define transitional housing facilities and allow such facilities as principally permitted uses in the GC, General Commercial Zone carried with Dowell voting nay. REZONES (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3F) Kent Hill Apartments. ADOPTION of Ordinance No. 2833 providing for the conditional rezone of the Kent Hill Apartments from single family residential to garden density residential. Ruth/Kent East Hill Shopping Center Rezone The Mayor noted that Ordinance 2838 provides for the conditional rezone of the Kent East Hill Shopping Center from MRM, Medium Density Residential and 0, Professional and Office to CC, Community Commercial . Acting Planning Director Satterstrom noted that since discussion of the issue at the last Council meeting, a new condition has been added, which deals with fire protection. This condition is #14 in the rezone ordinance and reads as follows: 14 . Additional fire protection measures, including requiring the building to be equipped with 6 February 21, 1989 REZONES sprinklers, may be applied at the time of development plan review, if so determined by the Fire Department. Satterstrom stated that this condition was inadvertently omitted from the conditions considered by the Hearing Examiner, and noted that the applicant has agreed to the condition. WOODS MOVED that Ordinance 2838 be approved, including Condition #14 . Johnson seconded and the motion carried. PRELIMINARY Canterbury Preliminary Subdivision No SU-88-5 SUBDIVISION This public meeting will consider the Hearing Examiner' s recommendation of conditional approval of a 20 lot single-family residential preliminary subdivision located on the northeast corner of proposed 100th Ave. S .E. and S.E. 248th St. Laurie Anderson of the Planning Department noted that the site is approximately 4 . 5 acres, and that the minimum lot size is 7200 sq. ft. WOODS MOVED to adopt the findings of the Hearing Examiner and to concur with the Hearing Examiner' s recommendation of conditional approval . Johnson seconded and the motion carried. ANNEXATION East Hill Well Annexation No 2 Area C - Zoning ZONING On March 15, 1988 the Kent City Council adopted (EAST HILL Ordinance 2771 establishing the zoning for East Hill COMMUNITY Well Annexation No. 2 . A question has been raised WELL #2 as to whether or not the ordinance reflects the AREA C) Council intent as stated at the March 1, 1988 meeting as it relates to the zoning for the undeveloped portion of the Stratford Arms property. Ordinance 2837 is presented amending Ordinance 2771 to reflect the Council ' s intent that the undeveloped Stratford Arms property be zoned medium density multifamily residential . BITEMAN MOVED that Ordinance 2837 amending Ordinance 2771, clarifying the council ' s intent that the undeveloped portion of the Stratford Arms site be zoned medium density multifamily residential . Houser seconded. 7 February 21, 1989 ANNEXATION Biteman pointed out that the intent of the motion ZONING was to include a piece of property and because of (EAST HILL the complexity of the issue, in the re-writing of COMMUNITY the ordinance it became diverted from the original WELL #k2 intent and instead of taking the entire property AREA C) into consideration, the individual ' s property was split. He said that when an administrative error has taken place it should be rectified, and that is the intent of the ordinance presented tonight. Johnson pointed out that he had made the motion adopting Ordinance 2771. He said that the transcript is clear as to what the wording was and what the zoning intent was. He disagreed with Biteman that if was an administrative error, and said it is Council error if the Council misinterpreted the motion they were voting on. He said that the Council should not now alter the process. Johnson said that the Council had discussed definitions of developed and undeveloped property. He defined development as "a thing that is developed, specifically a number of structures on a large tract of land built by real estate developers . " He said that if seems clear that the portion which was not developed should be zoned single family as was stated in the record. He recommended that the Council vote against the motion, and said that the correct process would be for the property owner to apply for a rezone if he so desires, which would require a public hearing. Mann stated that the transcript was not clear and the Council did not get the full context of the dialogue. Jim Orr, 24909 114th Avenue S.E. , played an audio tape of the portion of the March 1, 1988 Council meeting dealing with this issue. Referring to the map, Johnson explained the intent of his motion, and pointed out that when the City Administrator asked about multifamily development in that area he said that would exclude that area. 8 February 21, 1989 ANNEXATION Orr explained that he had played the tape to show ZONING Mr. Johnson' s intent. He said the key words are (EAST HILL already zoned or developed multifamily. Orr said COMMUNITY that he noticed that as he was playing the tape, WELL #2 some Council people were doing other things and said AREA C) that they were probably not paying attention to Mr. Johnson that night. He suggested that Councilmembers prepare themselves better with the issues and review what they have voted on before 11 months have passed. The Mayor pointed out to the Councilmembers that the issue of Johnson's intent or the issue of the Council ' s intent is irrelevant; that it is not legal for the Council to change the ordinance based upon a belief that it was passed inadvertently, when something else was intended. He stated that in order to revoke or alter the action adopting Ordinance 2771 the Council must believe that the public record indicated that a different ordinance should have been passed. Such action should be based upon the public record, not based upon a difference in intent. Leona Orr, 24909 114th Avenue S .E. , voiced concern about the way the ordinance is being handled. She said that there should have been public notification, and pointed out hearings are required for rezones, but that in this case an ordinance was prepared which would change zoning set last March. Orr stated that rezoning this parcel opens the way for the whole neighborhood to be zoned multifamily and that that was not the intent of the Council last March. Orr said that staff did not recommend multifamily for the extension of Stratford Arms ; that the only one who did was the Hearing Examiner, who clearly defined the two separate areas as developed and undeveloped portions of Stratford Arms. Orr said Johnson's amendment excluded the undeveloped part when he said only the already zoned, already developed site. Orr pointed out that the first certificate of occupancy for Stratford Arms was issued in the summer of 1984 , and that the 9 February 21, 1989 ANNEXATION piece of property in question was not purchased ZONING until October, 1986, and was zoned single family at (EAST HILL the time. COMMUNITY WELL #2 AREA C) Tom Sharp, 11126 S .E. 256th St. , one of the owners of Stratford Arms, said the Hearing Examiner' s recommendation tied these two pieces of property together, whether purchased two years apart or not. He said that the property was in the annexation process at the time it was purchased, and that the County had it zoned multifamily. Sharp said that no one is trying to circumvent the process, but that that it takes this long to go through the process. Pam Alamos , 25207 lllth Avenue S .E. , stated that she is disappointed to have to come to the Council and ask them to uphold an ordinance that was passed a year ago. She said that the property involved is not a continuation of the original development for Stratford Arms. She said that there should be a public hearing and notification to residents of Area C and asked that the rezone request be denied. Bill Dinsdale, 11126 S .E. 256th St. , one of the owners of Stratford Arms, said that there was no question in his mind that the Stratford Arms property very clearly included the property under discussion tonight. He said there were video tapes presented which showed that property as part of Stratford Arms property. He pointed out that the Hearing Examiner and the staff tied it together. He said that the night the Council passed the zoning ordinance he had received clarification from Councilmembers that those properties were tied together and that it was part of the property that was clarified by the City Administrator was the Stratford Arms property. He said the only time they imagined it wasn't one parcel of property was after the ordinance was written and documented, and that it has taken a long time and numerous requests to get this properly documented. Upon Dowell ' s 10 February 21, 1989 ANNEXATION question, Dinsdale pointed out the property on the ZONING map, and stated that the legend says the brown area (EAST HILL is multifamily. COMMUNITY WELL #2 Mann stated that his understanding was that AREA C) Stratford Arms development was all inclusive and he had voted with that understanding, and believes other Councilmembers had the same intention. He pointed out that the wording was questionable, and as far as staff was concerned it was interpreted as being separate. He pointed out that there are many ramifications of Council ' s action tonight. He said the process should be followed now that the ordinance is in effect, and that the owners of the property who are contesting this should go through the process following rules and regulations that have been set up. Woods concurred with Mann, and noted that with a new sound system in the Council Chambers, there would be less risk of having issues come to the Council which aren't completely legible on the public record. Mann directed the Operations Committee to look into the possibility of purchasing a large screen TV and VCR for the Council Chambers. There was no objection from the Chairman of the Operations Committee. Biteman pointed out that the Council takes these kinds of deliberation very seriously and noted to Orr that even if they seem to not be paying attention, they are in fact reviewing the material and listening to the presentation. He said that the Council has been through oral and visual tapes and that there is a distinct separation of interpretation. He noted that the words used by Council when instructing the staff could have been misinterpreted. Bob MacIsaac, 25001 116th Avenue S .E. , said he is opposed to multifamily in this area, but that he had attended the meetings and that it was clear to him that the intent was to zone it multifamily. »•.• 11 February 21, 1989 ANNEXATION Leona Orr said that in a staff report dated August ZONING 19, 1987 , Recommendation #2 says for the area south (EAST HILL of S .E. 252nd St. , R1. 72 residential except the 4 . 8 COMMUNITY acre Marcel known as Stratford Arms , and that WELL #2 Recommendation #3 says Stratford Arms, MRM Medium AREA C) Density Multifamily Residential . She said this clearly distinguishes between the properties by the reference to the 4 . 8 acres which was already developed. Orr said that the Hearing Examiner' s Findings and Recommendations, say "Stratford Arms, MRM Medium Density Multifamily Residential, allowing 23 units per acre (entire Stratford Arms site including the undeveloped portions) " . She pointed out that when Johnson made an amendment to the motion, he clearly said "the already zoned multifamily" and when McFall asked for, clarification, Mr. Kelleher' s words were "the existing development" . Orr said the property is clearly separated in staff reports. A man from the audience stated that the records show there are two pieces of property, and that the Council zoned one single family and that is how it should stay. Upon Dowell 's request, the man pointed out the property on the map and indicated that one of the pieces was colored tan and the other dark brown. When Dowell asked if both colors were represented on the legend, Kathy McClung of the Planning Department clarified that although the two parcels are slightly different in brown tones, it is only because she used two different pens, and noted that they were handled as two separate parcels throughout the entire hearing. She also pointed out that the map shows the Hearing Examiner' s recommendations, and that this map was at the Council meeting the night the matter was discussed. Tom Sharp pointed out that the Hearing Examiner' s recommendations say "the entire Stratford Arms site including the undeveloped portions" . He also said that all through the council 's deliberations, Stratford Arms was never separated. 12 February 21, 1989 ANNEXATION Chris Grant, 26302 Woodland Way S . , pointed out that ZONING the Council ' s actions tonight can be very precedent (EAST HILL -setting. He said a legal process is provided to COMMUNITY remedy these kinds of issues and that it must be WELL #2 followed. Grant also said that these issues need to AREA C) come before the public, and that there was insufficient public notification of this rezone. He pointed out that if Ordinance 2771 went on the books as protecting the subject property as single family, it should stay that way until the full rezone process has been net, including a new public hearing. Biteman clarified for Orr that the tapes he had referred to were audio tapes, that there were no video tapes of Council meetings at that time, only visual narratives . Leona Orr said that there is another piece of property near Stratford Arms and it was changed to single family zoning, 12 , 000 square feet per acre. The Mayor clarified that the motion before the Council is to approve Ordinance 2837 amending Ordinance 2771, clarifying the Council ' s intent that the undeveloped portion of the Stratford Arms site be zoned Medium Density Multifamily Residential. He reminded the Council that it is proper and legal to vote in favor of this motion if they believe that the public record indicates that an incorrect ordinance was drafted and that Ordinance 2771 did not reflect the wording in the motion that was put forward by Councilmember Johnson 11 months ago. He noted it would not be proper or legal to vote in favor of the motion if they merely feel that it was not their intent. The motion to adopt Ordinance 2837 carried with White, Houser, Biteman and Dowell in favor and Mann, Johnson and Woods opposed. "' 13 February 21, 1989 COMPREHENSIVE Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Housing Element No. PLAN CPA-88-4 . Council Resolution No. 1172 directed the Planning Department to develop a proposed update of the Housing Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The extensive proposed amendments were developed in part through a citizens advisory committee appointed by the Mayor and representing diverse housing interests. At it ' s January 30 public hearing, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended that the Council approve the Housing Advisory Committee proposal for the Housing Element update. Dan Stroh of the Planning Department noted that the amendments are fairly extensive and that they were developed with a good deal of citizen participation. He then gave a brief summary of the report. Upon Biteman's question, Stroh noted that solar access had been a major consideration of the committee. WOODS MOVED to approve the Planning Commission' s recommendation to approve the Housing Advisory Committee 's proposal for the Housing Element update of the City' s Comprehensive Plan. Dowell secnded. The motion carried. PERFORMING Performing Arts Facility - School District/City ARTS CENTER Cooperative Project. The City Attorney noted that a representative from the Kent School District has information regarding a performing arts facility to present to the Council, and noted that information involving possible property acquisition would have to occur in executive session. Gerry Winkle of the Kent School District noted that they have been involved in the development of Kent Meridian High School and a performing arts center within the school . He noted that they had come up with some opportunities which could benefit both the city and the district in terms of joint acquisition, and possibly result in a larger facility which would serve the entire community. Winkle inquired whether the City would be interested in pursuing the study of this joint project. The Mayor then noted that discussion of the project could be continued in executive session. 14 February 21, 1989 POLICE (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3C) Drinking Driver Task Force. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT of donations from Trent Jonas, Manager, Puget Sound National Bank, Kent Area Council PTA, and United Steel Workers Local 1088-Kent Police. These donations will be used for the "Game of Life 89" youth awareness conference to be held March 8 , 1989 at the Kent Cypress Inn. FIRE DEPT. (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3S) Emergency Ground Ladders Testing and Replacement. AUTHORIZATION for the Fire Department to proceed with testing of all emergency ground ladders and for replacement of ladders that fail . There have been recent changes in the NFPA Standards that the Fire Department uses to test ground ladders. The testing for older ladders is less stringent than that for the newly constructed ladders. The Fire Department will endeavor to cover the expense out of this year' s budget by using salary funds of a firefighter who resigned and delay in hiring a replacement. North Industrial Fire Station. The Mayor stated that as part of the construction of the new fire station, bids were let for needed furniture, office equipment and appliances. The bids were broken down into appropriate categories. The Fire Department Administration has reviewed the various packages and is recommending a combination of the low bid vendors. Fire Department recommends bid to be awarded to the low bidder in the following categories : Appliances: Pickering Appliance and Television, Inc. in the amount of $5, 373 . 61 ; Office furniture and equipment, meeting room chairs and tables . etc. : Western Office Furniture in the amount of $16 , 287 .86; -•• 15 February 21, 1989 FIRE DEPT. Kitchen tables , chairs and bed: Oak Tree Decorating Center in the amount of $7 , 221. 02 ; Day room furniture , chairs , etc. : Van' s Furniture in the amount of $3 , 960 . 80 . Writing surfaces : Weyel International in the amount of $2 , 557 . BITEMAN MOVED that bids as recommended by Fire Administration be awarded to the respective low bid vendors, with the overall total not to exceed $35 , 400 . 29 . Mann seconded and the motion carried. PERSONNEL (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3Q) Parks and Recreation Department Reorganization/ Reclassification. AUTHORIZATION of the salary reclassifications as presented by the Personnel Department. The effective date of the reclassification shall be January 1, 1989 . (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3R) Police Department and Fire Department Reclassification. AUTHORIZATION of the reclassification of the positions of Captain and Lieutenant in the Police Department and Assistant Chief in the Fire Department, and AUTHORIZATION of uniform allowance for positions of captain and lieutenant in the Police Department. The effective date of these modifications and compensation shall be January 1, 1989 . FINANCE (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3B) Approval of Bills_ APPROVAL of payment of the bills received through February 21, 1989 after auditing by the Operations Committee at its meeting at 8 : 30 a.m. on March 1, 1989 . Approval of checks issued for vouchers: Date Check Numbers Amount 1/11 - 1/13 68427 - 68433 8,243.17 1/17 - 1/26 68909 - 68948 143,187.06 1988 - 2/3/89 68964 - 69190 522,410.87 1989 - 2/3/89 69191 - 69402 648,636.18 1/27 - 2/3 68949 - 68963 80,239.09 2/3 - 2/14 69403 - 76659 281,358.07 2/13/89 76674 - 77054 900,216.67 1,261,813.83 16 February 21, 1989 FINANCE Approval of checks issued for payroll: Date Check Numbers Amount 2/3/89 114882 - 115513 685,508.00 (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3U) Public Safety Training Center/272nd-277th Corridor Bond Ordinance and Purchase Contract. ADOPTION of Bond Ordinance 2835 and AUTHORIZATION for the Mayor to sign a purchase contract in the amount of $2 , 980 , 000, as discussed with the Operations Committee at their February 15, 1989 meeting. The funds will be used to complete the construction of the public safety training center for $980, 000 and to provide initial bond funding for the 272nd-277th Corridor Project in the amount of $2 , 000, 000 . Both projects had been previously committed to by Council resolution. The purchase contract with Shearson Lehman Hutton is at a net interest rate of 7 . 14% and a gross underwriting spread of $15 . 00 per $1, 000 bond. • (CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 3V) CLID 322 Bond Ordinance and Purchase Contract. ADOPTION of Bond Ordinance 2836 and AUTHORIZATION for the Mayor to sign a purchase contract in the amount of $1, 070, 605. 79, as discussed with the Operations Committee at their February 15, 1989 meeting. The funds will be used to reimburse the City for expenses incurred in the construction of three LID projects ; Westview Terrace sewers, Olympic View Heights sewers and 76th Ave. Street improvements . The final assessment roll ordinance on these LID' s have been adopted and a 30 day prepayment period has been provided. The purchase contract with Shearson Lehman Hutton is at a net . interest rate of 7 .76% and a gross underwriting spread of $21. 42 per $1, 000 bond. 17 t February 21, 1989 REPORTS Council President. White noted that a letter has been received from Merrily Manthey and MOVED that it be made a part of the record. Houser seconded and the motion carried. White said that the letter thanks the Council and staff for improvements in street lighting and Police foot patrol, but expresses concern about water main and sewer improvements on Scenic Way. He asked that Administration look into the matter and report back as soon as possible. White noted that he will be in Olympia this week as a Boardmember of the Association of Washington Cities and also to lobby for additional transportation money. Operations Committee. Houser noted that the meeting time for the Operations Committee has been changed to 2 : 00 p.m. on the 1st and 15th of each month. EXECUTIVE At 9 : 00 p.m. , Acting City Administrator Harris SESSION announced that there would be an executive session of approximately 15 minutes to discuss property acquisition and potential litigation. At 9 : 40 p.m. , the Council reconvened. WOODS MOVED that the Council reiterate it's interest in pursuing a joint project with the Kent School District for a performing arts center and request that the Kent School District prepare specific proposals to accomplish this. White seconded and the motion carried. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was then adjourned. Brenda Jactob, r Deputy City Clerk 18 Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7 , 1989 Category Consent Calendar DRINKING DRIVER TASK FORCE CONTRIBUTIONS 2 , Acknowledgment of contributions to the Task Force to be used for the 1989 Youth Drug/Alcohol Awareness Conference as follows: Kiwanis Club of Meridian, $3 , 500; Bell Anderson Agency, $150. 3 . EXHIB TS• None 4 . RECOMMEN D BY- (Commit e, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) i 5. EXPENDITURE RE UIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUND 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTI Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• e ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3C Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7 . 1989 / 1 Category Consent Calendar BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT APPOINTMENT r iz .r 2 .-ZAR4K*RY . Confirmation of the Mayor's reappointment of Tracy Faust to the Board of Adjustment. This term will be effective through February 19 , 1994 . 1 3 . EXHIBITS• None I 4 . RECOMMENDE BY: (Commit e, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) I I 5. EXPENDITUIRE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS : I i 6. CITY COUNdIL ACTION: Councilme�ber moves, Councilmember seconds i DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 3D �L a/ Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7. 1989 L Category Consent Calendar 1 --Sn EE'I VAeA-T ii — RESOLUTION O n 1 Gll Adoption of Resolution setting a public hearing for April 18, 1989, on the vacation of property located at 63rd Ave. So. adjacent to the south side of So. 212th St. as requested by Union Pacific Realty Co. 3 . EXHIBI S• None 4 . RECOMMENDED BY (Commi tee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURE RE UIRED: $ SOURCE OF DS: 6. CITY COUNCIL CTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3E f !� Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7 , 1989 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: JOINT VENTURE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING - RESOLUTION 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adopt Resolution No. directing the Planning, Public Works, Fire and Legal Departments to explore the City's participation in the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Affordable Housing Program and to report their findings to the City Council Planning Committee. This item is being discussed at the Planning Committee meeting of March 7, 1989 . 3 . EXHIBITS: Resolution, staff memo, Planning Committee minutes, staff report 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Planning Committee (anticipated March 7 1989) (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS- 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3F KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT MARCH 11 1989 MEMO TO: MAYOR KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: FRED SATTERSTROM, ACTING PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: DEMONSTRATION SINGLE FAMILY PROJECT WITH HUD In January, HUD in conjunction with a developer came to the Planning Committee with a proposal to develop a family housing project of 36 lots. The proposal would require special consideration from the City because the subdivision proposed may not meet current Zoning, Fire and Engineering standards. The Planning Committee has discussed this project at their January 17, February 7 and 21st meetings and it is on the agenda for their March 7 meetingfor action. The Committee's endorcement is anticipated. A resolution has been drafted that directs the staff to work with HUD in exploring the feasibility of the project. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, directing the Kent Planning, Fire, Public Works, and Legal Departments to explore the City's participation in the Department of Housing and Urban Development's affordable housing program, and directing those departments to report their findings to the Kent City Council Planning Committee. WHEREAS, there now exists a national crisis in affordability of housing; and WHEREAS, home ownership provides benefits to the individual, the community, the state and the nation; and WHEREAS, there is evidence that some local, state and national regulations may duly impact the cost of housing; and WHEREAS, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, as part of the "Joint Venture for Affordable Housing" has initiated an "Affordable Housing Demonstration Program"; and WHEREAS, the City of Kent desires to investigate participation in the "Affordable Housing Demonstration" so as to expand housing opportunities within it's community; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City of Kent Planning, Public Works, and Fire Departments are directed to work with representatives from the Department of Housing and Urban Development to fully explore the potential of Kent's participation in this program. Section 2. The City of Kent Legal Department is directed to work with the Planning Department and representatives of the Department of Housing and Urban Development to explore the legal permissibility and appropriateness of waiving or modifying local procedures and code requirements, as may be requested by the builders of the demonstration project. Section 3. The Planning and Legal Departments are directed to report to the Kent City Council Planning Committee with an outline of the program, as it specifically relates to the particular needs of the Kent Housing Community, in achievement of the goals of the Kent City Council. Section 4. The City of Kent joins with the Department of Housing and Urban Development to have as one of it's prime objectives the achievement of safe, decent and affordable housing for the residents of the City. Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington this _ day of 1989. Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this day of , 1989. DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR ATTEST: MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: SANDRA DRISCOLL, CITY ATTORNEY I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution No. passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, the day of 1989. (SEAL) MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK 7040-250 2 - CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1989 communities. Chairwoman Woods asked that this item be placed on both the Planning Committee and City Council agendas for March 7, 1989 . AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEMO PROJECT - RESOLUTION The draft resolution which was in the agenda packet states that the Planning, Public Works and Fire Departments will work with HUD and the developer to explore the potential for Kent's participation in the Affordable Housing Demonstration Project. In addition, it directs the City Attorney to work with the departments and HUD to explore the legal appropriateness of waiving or modifying local ordinances and codes. The resolution basically speaks to a commitment of a working relationship to explore the potential for this project. Bob Stettner of HUD confirmed the resolution was representative of HUD' s objective, which is to have the policy-making body enter into a working relationship with HUD to seek ways to establish affordable housing. Fire Marshal Webb confirmed that the resolution is acceptable to the Fire Department. In response to Councilman Dowell, Mr. Stettner stated that HUD will screen the project from an engineering, architectural and cost perspective to ensure the proposal is reasonable. Then HUD will set a time to meet with staff to present the proposal and develop an approach which is acceptable to the City of Kent. The long-range goal is to make permanent and open to all developers any regulatory reform which is acceptable for this project. The normal development time is seven months. Mr. Stettner stated the project will take probably three additional meetings with staff to explore whether it is an acceptable concept; then it will proceed as a normal development project. Councilman Dowell stated he cannot support the resolution for two reasons: 1) time involved for staff, and 2) the resolution gives a signal that the Council is in favor of the project. Chairwoman Woods wants this item placed on the Planning Committee meeting of March 7 for a vote and placed also on the City Council agenda of that same date (under Other Business) . HOUSING COMMITTEES WORK PROGRAM Fred Satterstrom stated staff had considered three alternatives for completing the work program for the Mayor's committees on housing: 1) using consultants for the entire program, 2) hiring additional staff to complete the entire program in-house and successively, not concurrently, and 3) using a combination of consultant and in-house staff to complete the projects concurrently. Staff recommends alternative 3 and suggests using a consultant to conduct the needs analysis and hiring permanent staff to complete the other tasks related to special populations, group homes and incentives for single-family housing. Staff desires to hire a permanent staff person not 3 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1989 only because it is difficult to recruit for and keep a temporary person but also because of the work overload in other areas of the department, particularly long-range planning. Staff is requesting $56, 000, which reflects projected one-year costs for a staff person as well as consultant fees. Councilman Dowell recommended the Committee approve a fourth alternative, i.e. , have the Mayor re-establish priorities within the Planning Department ' s work program in order to accommodate this additional work program without expending additional dollars. Mr. Satterstrom stated he had reviewed with the Mayor some of the priorities in the Planning Department work program and there were no projects the Mayor felt were suitable to put on hold. In addition, the department is looking at demands from SEPA and other areas. The Planning Department had requested some additional staff (1/2 time) for 1989 and it was not funded. After seeing the Council 's target issues, there appeared to be even more work to be done than was anticipated. Chairwoman Woods stated it becomes a problem when the budget is passed first, then the Council establishes target issues to be addressed that same year. Assistant City Administrator Hansen suggested that the City Council could establish target issues in April of each year which is before the budget process begins. Discussion occurred on the level of building activity in 1988 and 1989 and what that means for the Planning Department. Acting City Administrator Harris stated that if, at the Committee's suggestion, the Mayor reviewed the Planning Department's work program, he doubted there would be any project the Mayor would wish to defer. Chairwoman Woods stated she is in favor of recommending the additional funds for completing the work program for the Mayor's committees on housing and Councilman Dowell is in disagreement; she asked Mr. Satterstrom to poll Councilman Johnson before tonight's City Council meeting to obtain a direction on this issue. PONNSON HOUSE This item was added to the agenda. Dan Stroh stated the Ponnson House is located at the corner of Alder and Central and is identified on both the county and city inventories as an historical structure. Mr. Stroh distributed a memo outlining alternatives for preserving this structure. Shaughnessy Movers in Auburn reviewed the feasibility of moving the structure and determined it could be moved but not without a great deal of difficulty. Cost estimates are $20, 000 to move the structure across the street, $8, 000 to $10, 000 to reconstruct the basement and foundation, $8, 000 to $12, 000 to bring the building up to Code Enforcement Division standards (cost depends on whether it is renovated for commercial or residential use) , and $10, 000 in deferred maintenance costs and adaptive reuse. Total costs of moving the structure are $46, 000 to $52 , 000 plus the cost of the new site. The City of 4 KENT CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE February 7, 1989 4: 00 PM Committee Members Present Planning Staff Present Judy Woods, Chair Charlene Anderson Steve Dowell Kathy McClung Jon Johnson Fred Satterstrom Dan Stroh City Administration Other City Staff Dan Kelleher, Mayor Jim Harris, Acting City Administrator Norm Angelo Jim Hansen Sandra Driscoll Bob Hutchinson Others Present Carolyn Lake Larry Webb Eric Campbell Jim & Leona Orr Robert Stettner AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEMO PROJECT Fred Satterstrom iterated that affordable housing is a 1989 City Council Target Issue. He had worked on a study of affordable housing and visited the H.U.D demonstration projects in Lacey and Everett. Each community is responsible for establishing guidelines within which to develop affordable housing. The project involves a negotiation process whereby the City, the developer and H.U.D define the rules that are unique to each community. He views this meeting as a forum for raising the issues; a future session can address establishing guidelines for the demonstration project. Kathy McClung displayed the plans submitted to the City for the demonstration project. The proposal is for 36 lots on two parcels totalling 7 .8 acres. Lot sizes range from under 6000 sq. ft. to over 9000 sq. ft. Special consideration is required in the areas of undersized lots and decreased development standards relating to lot widths, curb and gutter, street widths, turning radii, etc. Because this area was recently annexed to the City Of Kent, staff is concerned that approving this demonstration project would open the door for other requests for similar consideration. Adjacent to the southern portion of the property are three plats which were platted in King County prior to the area's annexation to Kent. Those lot sizes range from 6200 sq. ft. to over 16, 000 sq. ft. (King County allows lot averaging. ) In addition, the City of Kent presently has almost 200 lots of single family residences in the review stage, so this type of housing is increasing. Related to the decreased development standards, staff is concerned about the combination of rolled curbs and narrow street widths. People will park up on rolled curbs on both the side with the sidewalk and the side without. In addition to thereby creating a circulation problem, including a safety issue related to emergency access, the rolled curb without the sidewalk is not CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 71 1989 equipped to handle the weight of vehicles, will deteriorate and cause maintenance problems. The Engineering Department stated that with rolled curbs, the street sweeper pushes dirt onto the sidewalk. Ms. McClung believes a project with similar density and including open space and other amenities for the public can be accommodated through the existing P.U. D. ordinance. Ms. McClung added that the projected $3, 000 cost savings may not be enough to make a difference on affordability. Upon checking with realtors, staff learned that new homes in the Cherokee Bay area average $85, 000 to $90, 000 and depending on the area of Kent, generally range from $85, 000 to $100 , 000 . The proposed "affordable housing" project projects prices of $85, 000 to $95, 000. Staff is willing to work with the developer regarding an affordable housing project and requests that the developer consider a project within the requirements of the existing P.U.D. ordinance. City Attorney Driscoll stated her office had not had an opportunity to review the project. She added that any time the City has to waive requirements, it needs to examine its authority to do so and the legal ramifications involved. Bob Stettner of H.U.D. stated that affordability is a relative term that relates to what is affordable for a given family. The project reviewed by staff is a proposal only. H.U.D. is seeking a resolution from the City Council which expresses a willingness to work with H.U.D. and look at the City's land development standards in order to develop an affordable housing project which meets the needs of the City of Kent and is marketable by the developer. Several meetings will occur between City representatives, H.U. D. and the developer to finalize a project that is worthy of consideration. H.U.D. does not intend to modify the Uniform Building Code and H.U.D. will guarantee that any dollar savings will be passed dollar for dollar to the consumer. H.U.D. documentation indicates that the average cost of housing in the City of Kent is $115, 000. This proposal is looking at the $85, 000 range to determine what flexibility is available to reduce the cost of housing in Kent. After evaluation of the project, H.U.D. and the City would be looking at adopting into the code the flexible standards allowed in the affordable housing project. King County will need approximately 12 , 500 housing units between 1980 and 1990. Eric Campbell, architect, passed around a map of what realtors call the "Kent area; that is Area 330. It includes a northern boundary of 192nd St, southern boundary of about 288th, eastern boundary at Highway 18 and western boundary at Highway 181 (e.g. , it includes the Covington area) . In this area, there are presently only 6 homes available which are below the $90, 000 price range. There are approximately 50 homes under construction which fall in the $90, 000 to $100, 000 price range; all else is above those ranges. With the present market and without the joint venture with H.U.D. the proposed project would place homes in the $99, 000 to $110, 000 price range. Keeping current zoning, the homes would fall within the $110, Ooo to $130, 000 price 2 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7 , 1989 range. Mr. Campbell believes the narrow lot widths will become standard. He presented to staff statistical data which indicated that in the past year 69 homes had sold in the $80, 00o to $90,000 price range and there are only 6 homes available now in that range. He also presented data which showed new homes available within the $90, 000 price range and those above that range. Mr. Stettner stated Kent could choose whatever savings they could go along with at the present time, would be able to review the project and would then decide if there was interest in pursuing a second phase with perhaps more flexibility. Councilman Johnson is not as concerned with the decreased lot size as he is with the narrow streets (safety problem?) and landscape islands that can have maintenance problems and that might become parking areas. In response to Councilman Dowell, Mr. Campbell stated that the price paid for the proposed development area allowed an opportunity to become involved in this venture with H.U.D. ; should the project not occur, he will develop the land in the normal manner. Acting City Administrator Harris stated that since this is a Council Target Issue, it behooves the City to explore this affordable housing concept. Councilman Dowell believes a resolution has some binding focus and he does not think a resolution is needed in order to review the concept. Mr. Stettner stated the resolution is a national approach to the affordable housing project and does not obligate the City to go forward with the project. Chairwoman Woods would like a resolution drawn up for the February 21 Planning Committee meeting at which time a decision can be made on whether to move this issue forward to the City Council . Fire Chief Angelo would like the resolution to reflect the fact that a new Uniform Building Code is being adopted by the state. He welcomes the opportunity to discuss consequences and risks related to delivery of service to the proposed project area. Mayor Kelleher welcomed any information H.U.D. could provide to the committees being established on housing and he hoped H.U.D. was aware of the work the Planning Department has done on affordable housing. MAYOR'S TASK FORGER COMMITTEES ON HOUSING - FOR INFORMATION ONLY Fred Satterstrom stated Mayor Kelleher had requested that the Planning Department develop a work program and budget for three committees on housing whose tasks would be as follows: 1) Conduct a needs assessment for public housing, particularly senior housing. 2) Examine zoning and other City regulations as applied to special populations, e.g. , developmentally disabled or T.R.Y. homes 3) Examine ways to encourage single family residential development a) Permit process and City regulations applied to single family development b) Review 1985 Affordable Housing Study 3 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 7, 1989 _ Staff will present a work program and proposed budget at the Planning Committee meeting of February 21. Fire Chief Angelo expressed a desire that discussion in the committees consider possible trade-offs for flexible regulations, e.g. , if a developer is allowed to change hydrant spacing perhaps the City could get a trade-off of a sprinkler system. COOPERATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN KING COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY AND CITY OF KENT Fred Satterstrom stated the Housing Authority has requested that the City of Kent enter into a Cooperation Agreement with them to allow one unit of low- rent housing in the City. The H.U.D. form of the agreement was included in the agenda packet. The Housing Authority has a specific site in mind to purchase for this low-rent housing. The Planning Department recommends that this issue be forwarded to the full Council at their meeting tonight. Mayor Kelleher showed a picture of the house the Housing Authority desires to purchase. It is located in the South Park area at 716 3rd Avenue S. He reviewed major items of concern which are outlined in the agreement: 1) Housing authorities under state law do not pay tax, yet they will be provided service. 2) Section 4B states that if the Housing Authority deems it necessary and reasonable, the City will agree to vacate whatever streets the Authority asks to be vacated; if sewer lines need to be relocated, the City will pay for the relocation. Section 4C agrees that the City will waive any building codes that may be necessary, within the law; the City will change the zoning of the parcel and surrounding parcels if the Housing Authority asks for it. Mayor Kelleher suggested that the Housing Authority, along with the agreement, may elect to certify to the City in writing that for this house they do not need any streets vacated, any utilities moved, any zoning changed or any codes waived. City Attorney Driscoll stated that even if the City can lawfully waive any requirements, there is concern about liability. The letter from the Housing Authority will certify that the Cooperation Agreement will apply only to this project and that the sections discussed above will not be applicable in this situation. This letter would alleviate some of the legal concerns regarding those sections and should minimize the City's liability. Mayor Kelleher stated that a motion could be worded so that the Mayor would be authorized to sign only after review and approval by the Law Department. Councilman Dowell MOVED that the Planning Committee recommend to the Council that the City refuse the offer. The motion died for lack of a SECOND. Councilman Johnson MOVED to recommend to the Council that the Mayor be 4 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF JANUARY 17 , 1989 areas abutting the single family residences in the study area. In addition, commercial and industrial uses make up less than 20% of the land area in this study and there are over 1100 acres of vacant or undeveloped industrial land elsewhere in the city. "Area 2" contains prime farmland. Discussion occurred on options to the City's approval of water and sewer availability. Councilman Johnson MOVED and Councilman Dowell SECONDED the motion to not recommend pursuing an amendment to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for the Horseshoe Bend area at this time. Motion carried unanimously. The issue of water and sewer availability will return to the Public Works Committee. AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEMO PROJECT (HUD) Fred Satterstrom stated that Kent has always had an active interest in affordable housing. He had worked on a study of affordable housing, subsequent to which the City Council approved ordinances related to Planned Unit Developments and zero lot line developments in support of affordable housing. Bob Stettner of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development stated that the proposed demonstration project relates to market rate housing, not low income or subsidized housing. After reviewing some alarming statistics in 1982 related to affordable housing, HUD devised 4 ways to address the problem. These include innovative design, financial enhancements, regulatory reform and streamlined processes. Considerable work has been done on financial enhancements and HUD has worked to streamline their own procedures. Now there is emphasis on regulatory reform. Specifically HUD is attempting to arrange a partnership between itself, the developer and the city to seek ways to reduce the cost of housing. Fifty percent of the cost of a house is in the construction of a house; the remainder is in everything else. There is no set formula in this project; it is tailored to individual communities. Whatever is permitted, HUD assures that the dollar savings are passed to the homeowner. For the Kent area, it is anticipated that in a particular development that is envisioned, with some flexibility there could be achieved at least a $3000 per unit savings. HUD is looking for a resolution from the City of Kent to invite the project into the community by acknowledging a need for affordable housing and by supporting a review of existing land development standards to allow flexibility in a one-time demonstration project. Flexibility might include narrower streets, sidewalks on one side only, etc. HUD will review all projects before they are submitted to the city to ensure the projects will not increase the city' s maintenance or lessen the quality of standards or architectural character. From 1982 to 1984 HUD did 39 demonstration projects across the country. 2 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF JANUARY 17, 1989 There were two projects in Washington State, one in Everett (81 single family, zero lot line units) which generated a $10, 000 per unit cost savings, and one in Lacey (104 units) . Both communities have allowed a second phase. Mr. Stettner described additional locations developed since 1984 and indicated Kent was targeted as a project site for 1989. He stated that with traffic conditions, it is important that people live in the area where they work and that cities take into account the ideas developers have for reducing the cost of housing. Eric Campbell displayed three sketches of proposed housing. The development anticipates rezoning to 7200 sq. ft. lots with 60 foot widths (saves approx. $2000 per lot) . Off-street parking with landscape islands is proposed (saves approx. $800 per lot) . Pricing ranges from $85, 000 to $95, 000 for 1300 to 1810 sq. ft houses. This issue will be discussed again on February 71 1989 . ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at approximately 5: 15 PM. 3 KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT FEBRUARY 1, 1989 TO: Judy Woods, Chair; Planning Committee FROM: Kathy McClung, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Affordable Housing Demonstration Program REQUEST: HUD, in conjunction with CamWest, the developer, have requested the City of Kent to establish an affordable housing demonstration project. The proposed project is a family housing project consisting of 36 lots. The property proposed for this project is located west of 104th Ave SE and north of SE 228th St. The property is approximately 7. 8 acres. The proposal would require special consideration by the City because some of the lots proposed are less then the minimum 7200 square foot lots that the City currently allows . Also there are some development standards that do not meet the minimum Subdivision Code requirements such as street widths, rolled curbs, lot widths, etc. AREA HISTORY: The property proposed for this project was annexed into the City in 1987 . This fact is important to consider in this case because it explains why some of the surrounding developments do not meet Kent standards and provides us with some recent information on zoning in the area. It is also important' to consider since the City Council has received recent pressure to open up recently zoned properties to higher densities. The decision on this property may be setting a precedent for other properties in newly annexed areas where zoning has recently been established. In the Fall of 1987 the City Council adopted the recommended zoning for this property of R1 9 . 61 9600 square foot minimum lot size. The Comprehensive Plan Map showed a potential of .4-6 units per acre. The City Staff and Hearing Examiner recommended the lower end of this density based on existing Comprehensive Plan policies and the size of the existing lots in the general area.The Staff also took into consideration the mood created by resolution 1123 which encouraged lower densities. Most of the public attending the hearings for the zoning were supportive of the R1 9 . 6 zoning. The County approved three recent subdivisions in this area prior to the annexation. Briere Lane has lots ranging from 6, 500 square feet to 12 , 000. High Meadow I has lot sizes from 8 , 500 to 14 , 608 and High Meadow II lots range from 6200 to 16, 074 . The County allows lots in single family subdivisions to be averaged. The proposal has a few lots at less then 6000 to a few lots of over 9000 square feet. Based on approximate net acreage, the density is about 5 . 4 units per acre. STAFF REVIEW: Single Family Development- The past two years the City has explored ways to encourage single family development and balance the housing stock. For several years the City was receiving a small number of single family building applications and residential plats. In the past year this seems to be turning around. The City has currently 183 pending single family lots. The reason for this sudden increase is gradually becoming clearer. The market is showing more of a demand for single family lots. Through annexations, more land was available for single family development although only about 1/3 of these pending lots are in annexation areas. Also the City has taken a strong stand that densities need to be decreased in some areas and multifamily zoning requests are closely scrutinized. Development Standards- In order to approve this subdivision, the City will have to rezone the property to allow a higher density and accommodate smaller lots. Required lot widths, lot size, street widths, curbs, solar regulations, and turning radius ' in cul de sacs will have to be waived for this project. The Fire Department has a problem with allowing parking within the cul de sacs. The Fire Department needs these areas to be clear of vehicles in case emergency access is needed. If landscape islands are permitted in the cul de sacs a maintenance agreement would be recommended in order to keep these areas looking attractive. Most of the lots proposed have a narrow north-south dimension which makes it very difficult to site a house and take advantage of solar access. ' Rolled curbs are a problem when they are abused by residents. When combined with narrow streets, people tend to park their cars over the curb and onto the sidewalks. Evidence of this can be seen in the Park Orchard area where on certain blocks a pedestrian has to go out into the street to get around the cars parked on the sidewalk. Coupled with narrow street widths, this also creates a dangerous situation for traffic. Cars will be restricted to serpentine driving where vehicles are parked on the side of the road. Restrictive signing could be posted to prevent parking on the street, but then an enforcement problem is created for the City. Besides the enforcement and safety issues , there are maintenance problems with rolled curbs according to the Public Works Department. Sidewalks will break up due to heavy loads and parking on the top edge of the curb (where a sidewalk is not adjacent) will cause the curb to tip and crack. This in turn allows water to get into the road bed. When this happens, the life span of the road can be severely reduced. Rolled curbs also prevent proper sweeping of the street. Street sweepers use the vertical portion of the standard curb and gutter section to sweep against. With rolled curbs the rotary brushes on the front brush the dirt, rocks and litter onto the sidewalks or front lawns. The typical street section does not show street lights. For public safety reasons, street lights would be required. Sometimes the City can justify smaller lots and higher densities when a development has saved a unique physical feature of the property or created open spaces that can be enjoyed by the residents and public, as in a planned unit development (PUD) . This proposal does not incorporate these amenities into the project. Affordability- The price range of these houses are to be in the $85, 000-$100, 000 range. By reducing some of the City standards $3000 a lot could be saved, according to HUD. According to Windermere Realty, the median house price in the Kent area for 1988 was $89 , 950 . One could conclude that the homes in this project would be no more or less affordable then other homes in the Kent area. Establishing this project as an "affordable housing" project raises some other questions. If the savings per lot after waiving several development standards and increasing density is $3000 per lot, how does the City insure that this savings will be passed on to the consumer? Also is a $3000 savings per lot is approximately a 3% savings per dwelling unit, and may not be perceived by lending institutions as a significant factor in affordability. CONCLUSION: There is no question that the City wants to encourage single family development in Kent. Indeed, it is a 1989 target issue of the Kent City Council. The Fire, Public Works, and Planning Departments have reviewed this project for feasibility from a development standpoint. With some minor adjustments for public safety reasons the project can work technically. What the staff asks the Council to weigh is what the City is sacrificing in the way of development standards and what the public is gaining with respect to affordable housing. The Staff feels that under current PUD or Zero Lot Line development it is possible to create housing priced under the median price range and still follow development standards currently in place. Based on the approximate net land available (6 . 63 acres) the developer could get 30 units under the current zoning. With a PUD the developer could get a 20% increase in density if the density bonus standards can be met. This would gain an additional 6 units. The development would have to provide amenities to the public to take advantage of the bonus by providing open space, recreation areas, creative design and a variety of housing types. w tirme5iil>M - es 4. --_ --_-_ r D. John S.Beard 1.11 A, RkAmd 1.Toneill m Well,Ar. - Barker a IM. LILAC. ,:,r L L114• Waller C7., a t E.Shall [[''�J'' 9 11 al.f . izz .....,. .I A Jetty W.Hegedorn 110 As. uo +r "eye F e Huold N.Marl LLII I' w �ItH.. se t.19A Oth nett 0 fih'r 1� �+ w1 a Nr, a.r/ a .v,'ban•T'!LktO A Her Dale It.Murray I We iltr Milford v.Sperry .1aNe9ganl Allaeaky, wade _ �;• ' / f r. 1l' I naA. IV . .1e114 f.9)M.• Dale R, Murray II a[ nii . •+ f I 1. AI /1 rr NFa i I'1r�V' 0.Gu ='zz rxNCT - 21011"1 b 1. y Ron." I, I r el E 'I� 1 s t „ ) p Twit.. ... Io9Ar. YYdd a� Il'1 I rn a s0 ,e IN y, Qom. N 'J't• •(sh�Il ='_--' 113 R.C.Larson al r D) ,IT s !yJy i J. N} I I f 1, .y, 11IPr 'hM.,1 R.0;Larson i °� ° 1 g Geor a G.Hunfar, ue4? Blaylock ■ lip Y ]1' s L' �. � t tiid�f jaAWIn3E1 l _ _ Nw•wP rte ..N't.. r �� - Donald P. Iraq I)II ____ I• r III .0,:. H !v •I q° Il °� L Uw P.6 erber r uerbsr f G f T (( •f -rt f )rt ® n a inure W. C SE•9 Q36 Mon Ili '. Rs-_ 1P 39 lO. enberge( r i�Js IA I tN: I a qqops+ J I n a , x�--E{== r-{•r® , IetAr. Wm.B.LaWla tr�I t_ s I e7' Lloyd C.Daman _s® unf- is I I le If___.-___ - 1114. er olA1. ,A �%" 6 ©.. E.W.J.Knoll n 1 O r ,z mil- -1 .I James Ifym to ;2 •' ��' +, a1 nlA'. ----- V,+ Q ,�� f I O E) E.J. Knoll Robert W.Bcoit A re +r ytl firZjZCIQGSITJ, IT Kno H -�a��Jord an0 li; I P.11 In c Neiman W.Christiansen C]' I;_ ,e II I` r ( Ia� � Jr 11 ru4. A c_ i Q IT r It •°( ai u. I 1 L+r ue AT. I. e:i-' j I 1 ' )V•s C ')sF-!1I �� '�1.`�i-_-" I ��,,A �ly.�O •,I L 3 s. se PPP I I f ' u », ul +"tee � � I .: � '•., Z% �aCII- i•4.n1 1'f�t1 O190S2- 191 , '.�\.. �, I well 1 _ t ��_�, ,r LaWrence LILAC 101A, ✓" nr'r S-�"` I�I�----GGII •--- --- • PHASE V I NJ�1=e�nl(•___••_..._.� I a 1 1 McFarland r® olawrmc 1 ,F�(,�f,, ff r u fJLlf,11I Y - . N M+Fariand �® 3so jXlls3 rz Pi EIll LLLJJJ l I a "•' --ft r{ aw4Q ®a1tk. t r�1 _-i. 6�yM I �� ( 1 so...lT ,p osl ar® U` i�yq-a FIR.r n. ° Q ral�i n A cmgo. I.IZ At. 11e AT. f a PHASE N IZUNI S. R (2) `t e u E. 1L I N EL0 II1 i Blakely i NASE`yl\ I Y �� SRC.]9-Z] O. •;) . Ick ; N, Wllilaril'Garmlf •Ila UNIT i t✓� MI E�IVyA�� 1 ' >•+ - _--- Ie,M t I+U ITS_ "1 FV',1�-lr'la 0 AG Ell I) ill ° Q' W.J. db[!q IPIIASE I 16 VIIItS _ Itsk kl 1 z a! a O B.A K. Homes " Q I (Lg+ wo, IS. l+a� 3fi '--J Mn 9 •L —'- _ M.Hebbcviwii.or I ua s B o o BI Imiors< 17 1 '"- P11r ,_ � ICI a i a.ae79008 ). sex ,rf 1 I( L le It.Devere °rJ° °� ul Aa. W »n .• ...... ue . 9 AC �I »r+f Iryy`-•1T ® 121 O �` r, f°1 -1l.IUt ______ ll_JJ 1—a�n III ___ IBI (0) O IAc. I Itals 1.Quam »n. a c2 rb .�' s -na eGT .11 I, q�r— Bj ^N�T^ f I Kent City Council Meeting �`. Y Date March Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: HOUSING WORK PROGRAM AND BUDGET 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorize $56, 000 from the General Fund balance to allow the Planning Department to complete three housing work tasks as outlined in the Planning Department's staff report dated 2/15/89. 3 . EXHIBITS: Staff memo to Planning Committee and Planning Committee minutes 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Planning Committee 2/21/89 and Operations Committee, 3/1/89 (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $56,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: General Fund 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3G KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT March 2 , 1989 To: Mayor Dan Kelleher and City Council Members From: Fre N. Satterstrom, Acting Planning Director Subject: Req est for Funding/Housing Work Tasks On February 21, 1989, the Council Planning Committee approved the staff recommended work program for accomplishing the three Housing work tasks requested by the Mayor. As described in the staff report to the Planning Committee (dated 2-15-89) , the recommended option included $20, 000 for consultant services and $36, 000 for the additon of one permanent staff position, for a total of $56, 000. On March 1, 1989, the Operations Committee reviewed and approved this request. Funding for this request is anticipated from the General Fund balance. The Planning Department seeks the concurrence of the City Council in order that we may begin to address three of the Council ' s TOP PRIORITY target issues for 1989 . KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT February 15, 1989 To: Judy Woods, Chair; Council Planning Committee From: Fre N. Satterstrom, Acting Planning Director Subject: Re st for Funding/Housing Work Tasks BACKGROUND At the February 7th meeting of the Council Planning Committee, the Planning Department staff presented the Mayor' s request to complete three housing work tasks. The Mayor' s request was presented as an information item and no action was taken. This item comes before you at this time for a recommendation. The Mayor's request involves the accomplishment of three housing work tasks: 1. Assisted housing needs assessment. This project consists of an assessment of assisted housing needs in Kent. it would include an examination of delivery approaches and funding options, with special emphasis on senior housing needs. 2 . Regulations and special populations. This project would entail an examination of zoning and other City regulations as they pertain to special populations, such as the developmentally handicapped. The group homes issue would be included under this study. 3 . Single-family incentives. This project would include an examination of the ways in which the City of Kent can encourage the development of single-family residential . This would include a study of the permit process, a review of the 1985 Affordable Housing Report, and other incentives for encouraging single-family development. According to the Mayor's direction, committees would be formed for each of the above tasks. Furthermore, it has been requested that all three of the abovementioned tasks be accomplished simultaneously and, that work begin on these objectives as soon as possible. OPTIONS FOR ACCOMPLISHING HOUSING WORK PROGRAMS Since February 71 the Planning Department has had an opportunity to develop more fully the work task outline for each housing planning project as well as make projections of their budgetary impact. A rough outline of the steps involved in each project is attached to this memorandum. Given the work load created by these planning projects, the staff has explored alternative ways of accomplishing them. The following are three alternatives which the staff has evaluated: Option Description Cost 1 In-house Study, Successive Elements $30, 000 This option would be accomplished in-house with the addition of a staff person. The primary advantage is control . The two major drawbacks are 1) lack of expertise on needs assessment methodology, and 2) it does not accomplish tasks simultaneously and would extend the time period for completion. 2 All Consultants/Simultaneous Elements $60-75, 000 This option would be totally accomplished by consultant(s) . Tasks would all be accomplished simultaneously. The primary advantage is that all elements could be accomplished simultaneously. Primary disadvanatges include 1) lack of control, 2) expense, and 3) amount of staff time for consultant coordination. 3 Partial Consultant/In-house/Simultaneous Elements $56, 000 This option would entail hiring consultants to complete task #1 ($15, 000-20, 000) and hiring an additional staff person to complete tasks #2 and #3 ($361000 w/benefits) . The primary advantages are 1) control of project, 2) consultant expertise on needs assessment, and 3) all projects would be accomplished simultaneously. DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department recommends Option #3 to the Planning Committee. Specifically, this would entail hiring a consultant (with a specialty in housing) to conduct the needs assessment and adding one (1) staff person at a cost of approximately $36, 000 to complete the other two tasks. We would propose that the position be funded as a permanent position. This would help us in the recruitment process as well as allow us to address other projects on the City Council target issues for 1989 . PROPOSED HOUSING COMMITTEES PRELIMINARY LIST OF WORK ITEMS TASK #1 - ASSISTED HOUSING ISSUE o Develop detailed work program o Prepare consultant Request for Proposals o Evaluate proposals and hire consultant o Form Citizen Committee o Study existing situation: assisted housing units and target population o Forecast growth in target population o Complete needs assessment for assisted housing units needed to serve Kent area o Identify and evaluate programmatic alternatives for providing assisted housing units o Conduct financial analysis of selected alternative o Develop Committee recommendation o Write staff report for Planning Commission and Council o Prepare SEPA review o Prepare proposal for public hearing o Develop preferred alternative, which may include preparation of bond referendum for November 7 TASK #2 - GROUP HOMES ISSUE o Develop detailed work program o Form Citizen Committee o Review experience under existing City Code ("welfare facilities" and the conditional use process) o Identify problems/issues o Research approaches used in other jurisdictions o Study legal implications of various group home siting strategies o Identify and evaluate alternative siting approaches o Coordinate with other City departments o Develop Committee recommendation o Write staff report for Planning Commission and Council o Prepare SEPA review o Prepare proposal for public hearing TASK #3 - SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSING ISSUE o Develop detailed work program o Form Citizen Committee o Assess existing situation and recent trends in the single-family market o Develop inventory of land available for new single-family development o Identify problems and opportunities for enhancing the market for new single-family development o Review the City' s 1985 Housing Affordability Study: actions taken and remaining opportunities TASK #3 - CONT' D PAGE 2 0 Study existing permit procedures and building regulations to identify new opportunities for encouraging single- family development o Identify and evaluate innovative development approaches, such as zero-lot line, clustered housing and design competitions o Coordinate review with other City departments involved in building regulation, particularly Code Enforcement and Engineering 0 Identify and evaluate alternative strategies; multiple complementary strategies may be selected 0 Develop Committee recommendation o Write staff report for Planning Commission and council 0 Prepare SEPA review o Prepare proposal for public hearing Planning Department February 15, 1989 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1989 communities. Chairwoman Woods asked that this item be placed on both the Planning Committee and City Council agendas for March 7, 1989. AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEMO PROJECT - RESOLUTION The draft resolution which was in the agenda packet states that the Planning, Public Works and Fire Departments will work with HUD and the developer to explore the potential for Kent's participation in the Affordable Housing Demonstration Project. In addition, it directs the City Attorney to work with the departments and HUD to explore the legal appropriateness of waiving or modifying local ordinances and codes. The resolution basically speaks to a commitment of a working relationship to explore the potential for this project. Bob Stettner of HUD confirmed the resolution was representative of HUD' s objective, which is to have the policy-making body enter into a working relationship with HUD to seek ways to establish affordable housing. Fire Marshal Webb confirmed that the resolution is acceptable to the Fire Department. In response to Councilman Dowell, Mr. Stettner stated that HUD will screen the project from an engineering, architectural and cost perspective to ensure _. the proposal is reasonable. Then HUD will set a time to meet with staff to present the proposal and develop an approach which is acceptable to the City of Kent. The long-range goal is to make permanent and open to all developers any regulatory reform which is acceptable for this project. The normal development time is seven months. Mr. Stettner stated the project will take probably three additional meetings with staff to explore whether it is an acceptable concept; then it will proceed as a normal development project. Councilman Dowell stated he cannot support the resolution for two reasons: 1) time involved for staff, and 2) the resolution gives a signal that the Council is in favor of the project. Chairwoman Woods wants this item placed on the Planning Committee meeting of March 7 for a vote and placed also on .the City Council agenda of that same date (under Other Business) . HOUSING COMMITTEES WORK PROGRAM Fred Satterstrom stated staff had considered three alternatives for completing the work program for the Mayor's committees on housing: 1) using consultants for the entire program, 2) hiring additional staff to complete the entire program in-house and successively, not concurrently, and 3) using a combination of consultant and in-house staff to complete the projects concurrently. Staff recommends alternative 3 and suggests using a consultant to conduct the needs analysis and hiring permanent staff to complete the other tasks related to special populations, group homes and incentives for single-family housing. Staff desires to hire a permanent staff person not 3 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1989 only because it is difficult to recruit for and keep a temporary person but also because of the work overload in other areas of the department, particularly long-range planning. Staff is requesting $56, 000, which reflects projected one-year costs for a staff person as well as consultant fees. Councilman Dowell recommended the Committee approve a fourth alternative, i.e. , have the Mayor re-establish priorities within the Planning Department' s work program in order to accommodate this additional work program without expending additional dollars. Mr. Satterstrom stated he had reviewed with the Mayor some of the priorities in the Planning Department work program and there were no projects the Mayor felt were suitable to put on hold. In addition, the department is looking at demands from SEPA and other areas. The Planning Department had requested some additional staff (1/2 time) for 1989 and it was not funded. After seeing the Council 's target issues, there appeared to be even more work to be done than was anticipated. Chairwoman Woods stated it becomes a problem when the budget is passed first, then the Council establishes target issues to be addressed that same year. Assistant City Administrator Hansen suggested that the City Council could establish target issues in April of each year which is before the budget process begins. Discussion occurred on the level of building activity in 1988 and 1989 and what that means for the Planning Department. Acting City Administrator Harris stated that if, at the Committee' s suggestion, the Mayor reviewed the Planning Department's work program, he doubted there would be any project the Mayor would wish to defer. Chairwoman Woods stated she is in favor of recommending the additional funds for completing the work program for the Mayor's committees on housing and Councilman Dowell is in disagreement; she asked Mr. Satterstrom to poll Councilman Johnson before tonight's City Council meeting to obtain a direction on this issue. PONNSON HOUSE This item was added to the agenda. Dan Stroh stated the Ponnson House is located at the corner of Alder and Central and is identified on both the county and city inventories as an historical structure. Mr. Stroh distributed a memo outlining alternatives for preserving this structure. Shaughnessy Movers in Auburn reviewed the feasibility of moving the structure and determined it could be moved but not without a great deal of difficulty. Cost estimates are $20, 000 to move the structure across the street, $8 , 000 to $10,000 to reconstruct the basement and foundation, $8 , 000 to $12 , 000 to bring the building up to Code Enforcement Division standards (cost depends on whether it is renovated for commercial or residential use) , and $10, 000 in deferred maintenance costs and adaptive reuse. Total costs of moving the structure are $46, 000 to $52 , 000 plus the cost of the new site. The City of 4 Kent City Council Meeting V Date March 7 . 1989 Category Consent Calendar DAYBRIDGE DAY CARE 2 Acceptance�or continuous operjation and maintenance, the bill of saie and warr"any'agreement c9,( ---- approximately 141. 5 feet oii sairtary sewer exterisiori consti1{i cted in the vicinity of 112th Ave. S.E. and S.E. 240th for the Daybridge Day Care development and release of the cash bond after expiration of the one year maintenance period. TO Lt-) a AA- C <� 6l G l 3 . EXHIBITS: Vicinity map 4 . RECOMMENDED R*Y (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURt REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF DS• 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilm6mber moves, Councilmember seconds 1 r DISCUSSION,'• ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 3H DAYBRIDGE DAY CARE Ile N KING COUNTY 167 Si rE U SE, 240 TN ST. ui KING CO LINTY 516 wclNirr MAP SCALE : 112"= f M/. SE. 256 Kent City Council Meeting (J Date March 7 . 1989 S Category Consent Calendar 1. A MEADOWLAND EAST .-c $ice AF�3&IsE'_ 2 : Acceptance for continuous -operatio-n-und. „.a-intenance,- the bill o-f_..sa3.-e-_..and. warranty---agreement.-.for - _.__....- approximately 1, 199 feet of water main extension, 806 of sanitary f' sewer extension constructed in the vicinity of 123rd Place S.E. and S.E. 282nd for the Meadowland East development and release of the cash bond after expiration of the one year maintenance period. i 1 r2.z. a- U 3 . EXHIBITS: vicinity map 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3I MEADOVILAND EAST 108835 VICINITY MAP s� 41 264 T H ST S E 244T?I ` ... . . .. : , sic e 2 8`s_E ` ' SE 765TH ST > iE 2WTH ' FS — SE I6iTli : STtx St 2 TH T < 261TH ST J > D N I a <. I.- ' a ` l _ -a�Q� •. = z SE > I72HD ST J t! 77A r tl .. s n•••.. CT TH I < T tz ISE 775TH ST ��M tE 7t7M •r iT R ;� # SE 27iTH 5 a at IMTH a s s Z 0 SE :NOTH ST t ls� ' i MST ST S 2IND : ST _ W AE W iE 1 SE 284TH ST SE 294TH ST �. T Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7, 1989 Category Consent Calendar 1. sue' CHARGE IN LIEU OF ASSESSMENT - 98TH AVE./S.E. 236TH . 2 . L s approved by-the Public __Works Committee >authorization to establish a charge in lieu of assessment for connections into the water main constructed in the vicinity of 98th Ave. and S.E. 236th. 3 . EXHIBITS: Vicinity map, memorandum to the Public Works Committee from the Director of Public Works and an excerpt from the Public Works Committee minutes of February 28 . 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Exa finer, Commission, etc. ) i 5. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: r 6. CITY COUNCIL ACiION: Councilmember // moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3J DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS February 23, 1989 TO: Public Works Co7ittee FROM: Don Wickstrom RE: Charge In Lieu of Assessment 98th Avenue /S.E. 236th Water Main The City constructed a water main in the vicinity of 98th Avenue South and S.E. 236th in conjunction with our commitment as part of the East Hill Community Well takeover. The East Hill Community Well customers have been transferred over to the new main. In addition there are several other parcels in the area which were receiving their water service from private wells but have requested Kent water service from this main because of failure of their wells. By establishing this charge in lieu of assessment for these new customers, the City would be reimbursed for a portion of its costs of the main construction. It is projected the charge in lieu of assessment would be $26. 06 per front foot. We are requesting authorization to establish this charge in lieu of assessment. AML T- 1tij LIEU EA12T (�,'-Tv09P- T2A,4,;,Fep "E SCAL -1-,3 0 R 4 I(C Sp 5 79 03 2-7908171001 LOT 2 LOT 4 It jo 4., LOT 3 P; j 11. r. (A) lie ov 13 , rz 01 KCSP!a2002 021.050626 it p lot (2), SOITU sp 107 O75C AW/ I P,1.I V 0 KCSP579005 1102OL0 .Nb9,,- 140OZ 5 Public Works Committee February 28, 1989 Page 2 form has been prepared. Mrs. Moschel requested assistance in disseminating the survey and processing the data. Mrs. Moschel clarified the area involved would be the new Downtown Planning area which is SR 167 to the park and Willis to James. Nizlek suggested we disseminate the survey through the mail. Collection of the data can be done by existing staff but may be slower than optimal due to the existing workload. Biteman expressed concerns about the response rate if the survey is mailed and suggested we include a self addressed, stamped envelope with the survey. Mrs. Justus' Concerns - 240th and 100th Avenue S.E• 240th and 102nd Avenue S.E. and 240th and Benson Wickstrom explained that all the data had not been developed as yet. However, a preliminary design for a caution sign proposed to be installed at 240th and Benson was available for the Committee' s review. As to the concerns about the other intersections, Nizlek commented he has also had two other requests from businesses in the area to look into it. Biteman requested the design for the caution sign be shown to about 10 motorists to determine how they will interpret the meaning of the sign. Woods asked that Mrs. Justus be informed of all the findings prior to the next Committee meeting. Charge In Lieu of Assessment - 98th Avenue/S.E. 236th Water Main Wickstrom explained that in conjunction with the takeover of the East Hill Community Well we were to replace the existing water mains to bring them up to Kent standards and transfer the existing East Hill Community Well customers to the new main. There are some properties which front on the main which weren't East Hill Community Well customers and were on private wells. These properties are having problems with the wells and have requested to connect to our main. The cost to the City for construction of the main was approximately $52 per foot. To receive partial reimbursement for this construction cost, Wickstrom recommended establishing a charge in lieu of assessment of approximately $26. 06 per front foot for those properties which were not previously East Hill Community Well Customers and who connect to the main. Additionally, Wickstrom continued, some of the property owners may be requesting a payment plan for the assessment. Woods moved to accept the recommendation. The Committee unanimously approved. Reith Road Improvements - 38th Avenue to Military Road Wickstrom clarified this item was referred to the Committee from 1 Kent City Council Meeting f\ Date March 7 , 1989 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: TACOMA GREEN RIVER PIPE LINE NO. 5 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As approved by___the_._Pub.lic_-Works Committee, authorization for the Public Works Director to sign a letter of L Q� support from the Regional Water Association for the Green River Pipe Line No. 5 project. 3 . EXHIBITS: memorandum to the/"Public Works Committee from the Director of Public Works and an excerpt from the Public Works Committee minutes of February 28 . 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staffi Examiner, Commission, etc. ) tr I /j 5. EXPENDITURE RE UIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUND r 6. CITY COUNCI ACTION: Councilme4er moves, Councilmember seconds r DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3K DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS February 23, 1989 TO: Public Works Comm ttee FROM: Don Wickstrc , RE: Tacoma Green River Pipeline #5 The construction permit for the Green River Pipeline #5 is nearing approval from King County. Tacoma does have, however, some concerns regarding the approval and has asked for a letter of support from the Regional Water Association (of which Kent is a member) for the project. Since we are a financial participant in the Pipeline project and its reflected as a key element in our Comprehensive Water Plan, we recommend that Council authorize the Public Works Director, who is the City's Regional Water Association representative, to sign a letter in support of the project. Public Works Committee February 28, 1989 Page 3 the Council to determine the costs of a sidewalk from 38th Avenue to Military Road. Wickstrom indicated staff has not been able to complete the estimate and this will be brought back to the next Committee meeting. Biteman inquired about the other improvements on Reith Road and 253rd. Wickstrom responded those improvements are being done. Weather has delayed some of the activity on this project. Tacoma Green River Pipeline #5 Wickstrom explained that King County has completed its review of the EIS for construction of the Tacoma Green River Pipeline #5 project. Tacoma apparently has settled the appeals to the project. Since this procedure has taken so long, Tacoma is requesting the Regional Water Association provide a letter of continuing support for the project. As a member of RWA, Kent is a contractee of Tacoma for the water supply and it is reflected as a key element in our Comprehensive Water Plan; therefore, he would recommend supporting this request. The Committee unanimously agreed. Biteman mentioned purification needed at the impoundment reservoir. Wickstrom replied that it is part of our comprehensive plan. Transfer of Funds - Green River Bridge Replacement - 72nd Avenue Acquisition Wickstrom stated this was referred from Council back to the Committee due to concern over reallocating funds from the Reith Road Improvement project. In retrospect, Wickstrom added, he would recommend deleting the suggested reallocation of funds from the Corridor Feasibility Study as well as these funds will be needed for Kents participation in the Valley Transportation Action Plan and its plan to hire a financial consultant advisor. Deleting these two sources would reduce the transfer to the Green River Bridge project. Biteman requested clarification of the item on the sidewalks. Wickstrom explained that was the fund allocated for evaluating the sidewalks near and around school which we deleted from possible reallocation. The Committee unanimously approved the amended analysis for reallocation of funds to the 72nd Avenue Acquisition and Green River Bridge Replacement projects. Canyon Drive Improvements Jon Johnson had requested this item be tabled until he could be present. Wickstrom suggested the two issues on the Canyon Drive project be separated. one issue is the installation of the jersey barriers. The other is the reinstallation of the pylons and J� OltKent City Council Meeting Date March 7 , 1989 Category Consent Calendar TRANSFER_ OF FUNDS - GREEN RIVER BRIDGE REPLACEMENT AND 72ND ACQUISITION + CAs approved_ _bv the Public Works Committee isTi , authorization to estabI --a-Eudget and transfer $30,000 to the 72nd Ave. acquisition project and $25, 211 to the Green River l� Bridge replacement project from the funding sources identified in the analysis prepared by the Director of Public Works. 3 . EXHIBITS: Funding analysis and an 'excerpt from the Public Works Committee minutes of February 28 . 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiy}er, Commission, etc. ) r 5. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: SOURCE OF FUNDS• 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:,' Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3L Public Works Committee February 28 , 1989 Page 3 the Council to determine the costs of a sidewalk from 38th Avenue to Military Road. Wickstrom indicated staff has not been able to complete the estimate and this will be brought back to the next Committee meeting. Biteman inquired about the other improvements on Reith Road and 253rd. Wickstrom responded those improvements are being done. Weather has delayed some of the activity on this project. Tacoma Green River Pipeline 45 Wickstrom explained that King County has completed its review of the EIS for construction of the Tacoma Green River Pipeline #5 project. Tacoma apparently has settled the appeals to the project. Since this procedure has taken so long, Tacoma is requesting the Regional Water Association provide a letter of continuing support for the project. As a member of RWA, Kent is a contractee of Tacoma for the water supply and it is reflected as a key element in our Comprehensive Water Plan; therefore, he would recommend supporting this request. The Committee unanimously agreed. Biteman mentioned purification needed at the impoundment reservoir. Wickstrom replied that it is part of our comprehensive plan. loom Transfer of Funds - Green River Bridge Replacement - 72nd Avenue Acquisition Wickstrom stated this was referred from Council back to the Committee due to concern over reallocating funds from the Reith Road Improvement project. In retrospect, Wickstrom added, he would recommend deleting the suggested reallocation of funds from the Corridor Feasibility Study as well as these funds will be needed for Kents participation in the Valley Transportation Action Plan and its plan to hire a financial consultant advisor. Deleting these two sources would reduce the transfer to the Green River Bridge project. Biteman requested clarification of the item on the sidewalks. Wickstrom explained that was the fund allocated for evaluating the sidewalks near and around school which we deleted from possible reallocation. The Committee unanimously approved the amended analysis for reallocation of funds to the 72nd Avenue Acquisition and Green River Bridge Replacement projects. Canyon Drive Improvements Jon Johnson had requested this item be tabled until he could be present. Wickstrom suggested the two issues on the Canyon Drive project be separated. One issue is the installation of the jersey barriers. The other is the reinstallation of the pylons and SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES FUND PROJECT DESCRIPTION AVAILABLE FUNDING 1. 3122 WVH & 180TH PHASE I $48,000 G 4 Q,,,,vn,edcC,C. 16 2 EWAt 3. 3135 SR 99 & 252ND $49871 Gt„..a,.,d�,.d "► 5. 3160 LID 297 $506 6. 3167 LID 318 - N. CENTRAL $17,106 7. 3170 LID 325 - 76TH AVE. ST. IMPR. $181,000 8. 3183 LID 313 / CBD $65,000 9. 3185 SMITH STREET IMPROVEMENTS $40r000 11. 3198 212TH & 42ND ( ORILLIA ROAD) $113 TOTAL AVAILABLE* $458;409— �' 35G, 54 b LESS: RESERVE $260,000 Gjb,591v BALANCE $B8-94 POSSIBLE ADDITIONAL REALLOCATION SOURCES RUBBER RAILWAY CROSSINGS $489000 260TH AND 104TH SIGNAL $659000 TOTAL POSSIBLE REALLOCATION SOURCES $113,000 a o q�syG GRAND TOTAL $ � FOOTNOTE: * SIDEWALK FUND (3133) $75,000 WOULD REQUIRE COUNCIL REALLOCATION OF THEIR COMMITMENT TO SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS # $9,000 AVAILABLE IN THIS FUND PRIOR TO CANYON DRIVE PYLON REALLOCATION 00 V 0) Ln N n �7 C D: O �--i ►r to fN m m 0D ;a iq D N .� tp ..i Op O M --i < n m o D z z O m r*7 � m to --! L> -G p V .+ = 3 r- to z - x m O cm'� N -00D pa N z C - I :0fp H < Z ;a to O < m to p < D .-. p A N 3 ;a to -i N m c� r C D p --1 -0 --1 CO UD A r to p 70 r D -Nt --G C o D ; ) ,� j2o . T 3 z o p T x r to Tmtn o o m o M o � m c -zID \ = ti o z o rd ��. z z z m SD 3 � r. m om -ni cn � �zto ►� r .� � o � O D -0CCO -NI m r-4 ') O in Co z x �z m n -D1 "'l C) o T • m Z '4 y N z Dm'1 O Z G7 to .-• --1 D z -I .. o c-) .. r z > p C. A r mr � 3Z 00 Ul m m <no mr H rri z c� Nv 3 D < m m z m z o -i D m -n3 Z � z m m m D (A I p C) C � Z Z p Z 4n m m �: 4A D to m W Z Z Cn m Lrl N !A fA 4b1 W 3 -i p Co O V ? to Ln O C W p p O O O W O O O O Z D co E S O O O 00 O O O Ln Z Z O O O Ln O O O O m D < D H r D co r m -n C Z p Z G� DM 00< m � .D-. 3 zvz -fJ c-) W ., r"mczi Vl .� ,� 9u CA M 6- 1 +� P oo Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7 , 1989 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: CANYON DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As approved by the Public Works Committee, authorization for staff to proceed with the replacement of the pylons on Canyon Drive and authorization to establish a budget for the transfer of $5, 000 to this project from the funding sources identified in the analysis prepared by the Director of Public Works. 3 . EXHIBITS: Funding analysis and an excerpt from the Public Works Committee minutes. 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3M Public Works Committee February 28, 1989 Page 3 the Council to determine the costs of a sidewalk from 38th Avenue to Military Road. Wickstrom indicated staff has not been able to complete the estimate and this will be brought back to the next Committee meeting. Biteman inquired about the other improvements on Reith Road and 253rd. Wickstrom responded those improvements are being done. Weather has delayed some of the activity on this project. Tacoma Green River Pipeline #5 Wickstrom explained that King County has completed its review of the EIS for construction of the Tacoma Green River Pipeline #5 project. Tacoma apparently has settled the appeals to the project. Since this procedure has taken so long, Tacoma is requesting the Regional Water Association provide a letter of continuing support for the project. As a member of RWA, Kent is a contractee of Tacoma for the water supply and it is reflected as a key element in our Comprehensive Water Plan; therefore, he would recommend supporting this request. The Committee unanimously agreed. Biteman mentioned purification needed at the impoundment reservoir. Wickstrom replied that it is part of our comprehensive plan. Transfer of Funds - Green River Bridge Replacement - 72nd Avenue Acquisition Wickstrom stated this was referred from Council back to the Committee due to concern over reallocating funds from the Reith Road Improvement project. In retrospect, Wickstrom added, he would recommend deleting the suggested reallocation of funds from the Corridor Feasibility Study as well as these funds will be needed for Kents participation in the Valley Transportation Action Plan and its plan to hire a financial consultant advisor. Deleting these two sources would reduce the transfer to the Green River Bridge project. Biteman requested clarification of the item on the sidewalks. Wickstrom explained that was the fund allocated for evaluating the sidewalks near and around school which we deleted from possible reallocation. The Committee unanimously approved the amended analysis for reallocation of funds to the 72nd Avenue Acquisition and Green River Bridge Replacement projects. Canyon Drive Improvements Jon Johnson had requested this item be tabled until he could be present. Wickstrom suggested the two issues on the Canyon Drive project be separated. One issue is the installation of the jersey barriers. The other is the reinstallation of the pylons and Public Works Committee February 28 , 1989 Page 4 reallocating funds for same. Wickstrom continued that the jersey barriers can not be installed until the required right of way is acquired and the roadway is widened. Right of way acquisition is only in the beginning stages. It could take up to four months assuming condemnation action is not required. Condemnation could add another three to twelve months thereto. With such a time lag, replacing the temporary pylons is, thus, important to do now. On a temporary basis, it was proposed to reinstall the pylons and reallocate the $5, 000 from those funding sources identified in the above discussed analysis. The Committee approved the reinstallation of the pylons and the reallocation of the $5, 000 for same. Biteman asked about using a different type of pylon. Nizlek responded that is being done; however, it might be that nothing will stand up well. Installation of the jersey barriers will increase the project costs by about $60, 000. Norm Angelo commented that no matter which solution is determined there will be problems surrounding it. He commented he is working closely with Martin Nizlek to be sure the Fire units can drive over the pylons. He referred to previous calls for response the fire units have had for the apartment units on Canyon in addition to assisting with auto accidents. Jersey barriers will create a longer response time as he will not direct his units to go up the wrong side of the road to respond. The East Hill station will not be staffed with an engine company so the main response will be from Station 71. In addition, it will put added pressure for an engine company at the East Hill station. Biteman expressed an opposition to jersey barriers but recognized what was being attempted. He asked if some time runs could be made to determine what the difference in response times would be. Angelo responded the only meaningful solution would be to staff apparatus on the East Hill. A good response time from the downtown station to the top of East Hill is 6-7 minutes. To go up James Street and come back down the response time increases to 14 minutes. Wickstrom added there may some misconception as to the actual planned location of the jersey barriers and which properties will be affected. This item will be brought back before the Committee at their next meeting. The Committee adjourned to an Executive Session on possible litigation. SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES FUND PROJECT DESCRIPTION AVAILABLE FUNDING 3122 WVH & 180TH PHASE I $48,000 2.-31��,�-IDEWAtI(S a'° nw 3. 3135 SR 99 & 252ND $4)871 5. 3160 LID 297 $506 6. 3167 LID 318 - N. CENTRAL $17, 106 7. 3170 LID 325 - 76TH AVE. ST. IMPR. $181,000 8. 3183 LID 313 / CBD $65,000 9. 3185 SMITH STREET IMPROVEMENTS $40p000 ioo. 3i9i REITu ROAD !MPRO EMENTS $9,006 11. 3198 212TH & 42ND ( ORILLIA ROAD) $113 TOTAL AVAILABLE* $458,409- 3 `I 35 G, 59 G LESS: RESERVE $260,000 BALANCE $1.98.409 POSSIBLE ADDITIONAL REALLOCATION SOURCES RUBBER RAILWAY CROSSINGS $48,000 260TH AND 104TH SIGNAL $65,000 TOTAL POSSIBLE REALLOCATION SOURCES $113,000 a 0 q,59 G GRAND TOTAL V311 2 403 t FOOTNOTE: * SIDEWALK FUND (3133) $75,000 WOULD REQUIRE COUNCIL REALLOCATION OF THEIR COMMITMENT TO SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS # $9,000 AVAILABLE IN THIS FUND PRIOR TO CANYON DRIVE PYLON REALLOCATION v �. O N n '.h C 7 d i �+ r+t7 r G] N N T f") V •G �. CD 'n .-+ lD tN m m ;;a .T N O tp O� t70 L� O tT -I G t7 m O Z Z t� Z x -I m m .-, m cn -'I m -< v r*) N � O m D H T a) m N v O N 3 .-. m X ;a D-�I N m n r C D 0 -vI -4 M U3 r-+ A r0 N O Drn D tin 'D-{ -i N Cn rT-� Z rri to m O C7 Z ---I .� m C) c� IeED > D x N o -c D Z N -I 3 --I -I v Z Z m 2 -V ►+ { ;a � oto --0 z to ,.._, i--i -t = G7 tN W N C •'O ram-. i-.O O > 'G CO --I m V O I N OC) Z x �A m �-+ O Olt m • O m Z O N �N-' Z D Z > o c� .. r z D z z m to o o r x C-1 00 G Z Z �. to m m m tno mr cv (Inv a) X 3 -< cn Z 0 D-i 3 � rGn O D 3 Z m T m m m v D N ... H C Z v v Z Z m m yto m W C C M Obi t~1'� N M M 61 W 3 -4 v 7C O O O V ? tS7 tl) CD C�""� N . Z Z CD00 0 E O O co CoO O O to z z o 0 o cn o Co 0 o my D C D r- r n r m T C Z t7 '-r Z G') to G m zv to m CA rrr7m dx P r. voo N CA o oo -P Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7 , 1989 U Category Consent Calendar 1:�eT: RIVERBEND GOLF COURSE/KENT SIGN BANNER PROJECT Approval of the selection of Koryn Rolstad of Banner Works as the artist commissioned to create banners and kiosk covers for the Riverbend Golf Course and a six banner plaza backdrop for the "Kent" sign, located at the corner of Meeker and Highway 516. The artworks will be completed in two color schemes. 3 . EXHIBITS: None . 4 . RECOMMENDED Y: Kent Arts Commission, February 28 , 1989 and Art Selectioh Jury, February 9 1989 (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURE RE UI D: $15,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Cl Art Fund (Ordinance 2552) 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: 4 e Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds a "a DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3N A Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7 , 1989 Category Consent Calendar 1<,-ZUBJZCT: ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE CONTRACT 2 : Requ eh 4er authorization for the Mayor to sign a letter to extend the elevator contract with ML Elevators for one year until December 31, 1989 at the current rate of $186 per month plus sales tax. 3 . EXHIBITS• None 4 . RECOMMENDED B Operations Committee 2/15/89 (Committee, aff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURE REQUIRE same as budgeted $2 .412.84 SOURCE OF FUNDS: as i the budget 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember r�pves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 30 li Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7, 1989 Category Consent Calendar l.r StECT: DANCE CLUB ORDINANCE , n� :- Adoption of Ordinance regulating dance clubs within the City. At the last meeting this item was referred to the Public Safety Committee. The Committee — rt 1 to consider this ordinance at 6 p.m. on March 7 , immediately prior to the Council meeting. 3 . EXHIBITS: ordinance YE 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Staff LLPublic Safety Committee (Committee, Staff, aminer, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURE REQU:ftD: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS:,` 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds i DISCUSSION:/ ACTION• .—7 Council Agenda Item No. 3P ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCF of the City of Kent, Washington, providing for the licensing and regulation of public dances and dance halls, adding a new section 5.35 to Chapter 5 business license and regulations, establishina licensing requirements, penalties, establishing qrounds for revocation of licenses and eFtatlishinq an effective date, and amending Kent City Code Section 5.04 .070, Ordinance 0.686, F10. WHEREAS, the Kent City Council finds that unregulated public dance halls contribute to the problems associated with runaway children, alcohol and drug abuse by children; and WHEREAS, the Kent City Council finds that the regulations set forth in this ordinance will help prevent the operation of public dance halls from contributing to such problems and that these regulations are necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES HFREEY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Kent City Code Chapter 5, entitled "Pusir.ess License and Regulations" is hereby amended by adding a new Section 5.35 entitled "Puhlic dances and Dance Halls" as follows: 5.35.010 DEFINITIONS. For the purpose of this Chapter and unless the context plainly requires otherwise, the foll.owira definitions are adopted: A. "Public dance" means any dance that is open to the public and which: (1) is conducted for a profit, direct or indirect; or (2 ) requires a monetary paymert or contribution from the persons admitted. The term "Public Dance" does not include a banquet, party or celebration conducted for invited guests which is not open to the public, and for which no fee or membership contribution is required. Additionally, the term "public dance" as used in this ordinance does not include any dance held by a licensed liquor establishment, or at any location wherein alcoholic beverages are legally served, sold, dispensed, or permitted on the premises; it being the intention that said dances be governed by the appropriate provisions of RCW Chapter 66. and all other pertinent laws and regulations including but not limited to Kent City Code Section 5.04 .070. B. "Dance hall" means any place or premise where a public dance is conducted, including but not limited to all hallways, bathrooms and all adjoining enclosed areas accessible to the public or any patron during the dance. C. "Person" includes one or more natural persons, corporations, partnerships or unincorporated associations or other forms of business organization. D. "Police Chief" means the Kent Police Chief or his designee. E. "Fire Chief" means the Kent Fire Chief or his or her designee. 5.35.020 LICENSE REQUIRED - FEE --RENEWALS A. It is unlawful for any person to conduct a public dance within the City of Kent without first having obtained and 'being the holder of a valid and sutsisting license for such activity, to be known as a "public dance license" . The annual fee for a public dance license is $250.00. A limited license for a single event is $25.00 per event day, but no more than 3 limited licenses shall be obtained in any calendar month or more than 6 limited licenses in any calendar year unless the full annual license has been paid. B. The entire annual license fee shall he paid for the applicable calendar year regardless of when the application for license is made, and shall not be prorated for any part of the year except that if the original application for license is made subsequent to June 30th, the license fee for the remainder of that - 2 - year shall be one-half of the annual license fee. Annual license renewals shall be obtained and paid in full by January 1st of each calendar year. C. There shall be assessed and collected by the Finance Director an additional charge of 501 of the original license fee, on renewal applications not made when due, including payment of the required fee, on or before January 31st of each calendar year. D. Failure to obtain license renewal and to pay all required fees pursuant thereto by January 31 shall result in suspension and/or revocation of said license pursuant to Kent City Code 5.35.120(i) . 5.35.030 LICENSE - EXEMPTION AND WAIVEP OF PAYMENT A. A license is not required under this chapter if the dance is conducted by the City of Kent or by a public and/or private school licensed by the State of Washington. B. The Police Chief or his or her designee shall have the right to waive the requirement of payment of the license fee in the case of any dance open to the public which is conducted for a charitable purpose by a nonprofit, tax exempt organization, corporation or association recognized as exempt from Federal income tax pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code. Application for a fee waiver shall be made no less than thirty days prior to the date of the dance for which a license is sought . 5.35.040 LICENSE - APPLICATION A. Applications for any license pursuant to this chapter shall be submitted in writing to the Finance Director upon such forms as the Police Chief may prescribe at least thirty (30) days prior to the first dance. In addition to other information requested, application forms shall contain the name and place of residence of the applicant and owner, if different than applicant, the address and description of the premises to be licensed and the time and date of the dance or dances to be held. The Finance - 3 - Director must be notified within 10 days of any changes in the information required in this Section. B. All applications shall be referred to the Police Chief who shall conduct an investigation as to the truth of the statements contained therein and investigate all other matters pertaining to the criteria for license approval set forth in this chapter. The Chief of Police shall confer with the Finance Director as to the results of such investigation, as well as his or her other findings as to whether the criteria for obtaining a public dance license have been met. 5.35.050 LICENSE - CRITERIA FOP. APPPOVA.L - RFAPPLICATION A. The Finance Director shall Grant a license unless he or she finds that one or more of the following conditions exist: 1. The building, structure, equipment or location of the business or dance for which license is sought does not comply with the requirements or fails to meet the standards of the applicable health, zoning, building, fire safety or other applicable laws and ordinances of the State of Washington, King County, and the City of Kent or the requirements of this chapter; 2. The applicant or any of the applicant 's employers, officers, directors, partners, operators, employees or any other person involved in the operation or business of the dance or dance hall has been convicted within the last five years of: a) A felony involving a crime of violence (as defined in RCw 9.41.010(2) as it now exists or as hereafter amended) or any felony under RC6' Chapters 9A.44, 9A.64, 9A.88 or 69.50; or b) A crime involving prostitution, promoting prostitution, prostitution loitering or lewd conduct, or assault on a juvenile. 4 - B. Any applicant denied a license may reapply and be granted a license if the applicant can show that the basis for such denial no longer exists, or may appeal such denial pursuant to Chapter 5.35.070, below. C. Applications for renewal of a license issued under this Chapter shall be processed and considered according to the criteria for initial issuance of the license. 5.35 .060 CONDITIONS UPON ISSUANCE OF LICENSE - RFVIFV OF OPERATIONS. A. At the time of granting a license or license renewal pursuant to this Chapter, the Finance Director, when authorized by City Code or State or Federal law, rule or regulation may impose such conditions as necessary to adequately protect the public health, safety and general welfare. B. The Police Chief shall review the operations of all public dance halls approximately six months after commencement of business to determine whether additional or revised conditions are needed to protect the public welfare. The licensee shall be given notice of all proposed additional conditions and an opportunity to be heard concerning the conditions pursuant to Kent City Code 5.35.070. 5.35.070 APPEAL FROM DENIAL OR CONDITIONS A. when the Finance Director refuses to grant or renew a license, or grants or renews a license with conditions, the City shall notify the applicant in writing of the same and shall inform the applicant of his or her right to a hearing before the Hearing Examiner by the applicant filing a written notice of appeal which contains a specific statement of the reasons for the appeal with the Hearing Examiner within 10 days of the date of the notice from the Finance Director. B. If the applicant timely files a notice of appeal , the applicant shall be afforded a hearing before the Hearing Examiner at which time the applicant shall be afforded an opportunity to - 5 - show that the conditions imposed are arbitrary and capricious or that the reasons for denial of the license do not justify the denial. After the hearing the Examiner shall determine whether the applicant has shown reason to revise the conditions or to issue the license and shall issue its final findings of fact, conclusions of law and decision within. 10 days of the date of the hearing. Any aggrieved party may appeal the Hearing Fxaminer's Decision by seeking, within 14 days of the date of the Examiner's decision, a writ of review from the King County Superior Court . 5.35.080 SECURITY PERSONNEL. REQUIRED. It shall be the obligation of every person licensed under this Chapter to insure that an adequate number of qualified security personnel are employed and in attendance before, during, and following each public dance as is necessary in order to maintain order and insure compliance with the laws of the State of Washington and ordinances of the City of Kent. Qualified security personnel shall include ai minimum of two persons trained as law enforcement personnel which may include off duty police officers approved by the Police Chief. At no time shall fewer than 25% of the security personnel have training as law enforcement personnel or similar training as approved by the Police Chief. Those security personnel not having law enforcement training must have received formal training in crowd control by an agency not associated with the licensee as approved by the Chief of Police. A minimum of two security officers shall be required for up to the first two hundred persons in attendance; thereafter one additional officer for each additional one hundred persons in attendance shall be required. The Police Chief of the City of Kent shall have the right to require an increase in security personnel if the Chief determines the extra security is necessary because of past incidents at the dance hall which threaten public safety, health or welfare, or threats or evidence of future incidents that threaten public safety health or welfare. Any decision of the Chief to require extra security personnel may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner in the manner described in Kent Code 5.35.070. ---• 6 - 5.35.090 LITTER CONTROL - SECURITY FOR CLEANUP A. Prior to issuance of any public dance license a cash security deposit in the amount of $200 shall be suhmitted to the Finance Director as security for the cleanup of all litter resulting from any public dance authorized by the license. In the event the licensee fails to clean up all litter on any public or private property which results from any public dance conducted by the licensee within twenty-four hours of the end of the dance, the City may cause such litter to be cleaned up and pay the costs of the clean up out of the security funds. Litter resulting from the public dance shall be limited to that occurring within a one hlock radius of the location of the dance unless clearly identified with the dance. In the event the cost of the clean up exceeds the , amount of funds on deposit, the licensee shall pay such excess costs. B. In the event funds are expended out of a security deposit required by this Section, the licensee shall, within five days of receipt of written notice of such expenditure, submit the amount necessary to replenish the security fund to the amount of the full security deposit. No renewal license shall be issued unless the full amount of the security deposit for litter clean up is on deposit with the City at the time of the application for renewal. If funds sufficient to replenish the fund are not received within 5 days of receipt of written notice then the dance hall license shall be suspended until sufficient funds are received. Within the 5 days of receipt of notice of deficiency, the dance hall licensee may inform the Finance Director in writinq of circumstances justifying nonpayment of additional funds which information shall be considered by the Finance Director and the licensee shall not be suspended if the nonpayment is justified. C. If the funds for security for cleanup are fully expended within any one week, or if the funds for cleanup fall below $100.00 twice in any quarter or five times in any year, then the Finance Director shall require an additional cash deposit of not less than $200.00 and not more than the greatest one week expenditure for cleanup during the prior year. 7 - D. Upon termination of all activities authorized by a public dance license and clean up of all litter resulting from such activity, the remainder of all funds deposited as security for litter clean up shall be refunded to the licensee, without interest. 5.35.100 LOITERING ON PREMISES PROHIPITED. It shall he the obligation of each person issued a license under this Chapter to use best efforts to prevent loiterina of all persons on the premises of the dance hall, including all parking lot and driveway areas used by patrons of the dance hall. "Loiterinq" shall not include walking between the entrance to the public dance and parked vehicles, nor shall it include the act of waiting in line to gain admission to the dance including both inside and outside the dance hall premises. The licensee shall use every best effort to cooperate with the Kent Police Department for removal of loiterers by enforcement of criminal trespass charges against said loiterers. Failure to cooperate by the licensee shall be grounds for possible revocation and/or suspension of license. 5.35.110 AREA FOR WAITING FOR ADMISSION ENTRANCE AND SECURITY A. Any dance hall shall provide an area, which area is not part of the public right-of-way or sidewalks, where patrons may wait for admission to the dance hall. This area shall be clearly marked. The number of persons permitted in this area shall be limited to a number of persons reasonably likely to obtain admission to the dance hall within 30 minutes considering the normal rate of turnover of patrons within the dance hall. At no time shall the number of patrons waiting exceed the permitted occupancy load of the dance hall as established by the Fire Code and Fire Marshal. The dance hall operator shall provide security personnel to control the waiting area one hour before opening and throughout the hours of operation. The security personnel shall use their best efforts to prevent persons seeking admission but not permitted in the waiting area from congregating on the public right-of-way and sidewalks, and the security personnel shall require such persons to leave the property under control of the dance hall. - 8 - B. All persons admitted to the dance hall shall he admitted through a single entrance so that the occupancy load can be monitored. C. The licensee and management of any dance hall shall prohibit any person under the influence of intoxicants or drugs from entering the dance hall and shall expel any person under such condition if found within the premises. 5.35. 120 REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION OF LICENSE A. After giving notice to the licensee of the right to a hearing pursuant to the procedures set forth in this ordinance, and conducting a hearing if a timely reouest is filed, the Finance Director may suspend or revoke any license issued pursuant to this chapter where one or more of the following conditions exist: 1. The license was procured by fraud or false representation of material fact in the application or in any report or record required to be filed; 2 . The building, structure, equipment or location of the business or dance for which the license was issued does not comply with the requirements or fails to meet the standards of the applicable health, zoning, building, fire and safety laws and ordinances of the State of Washington, King County, and the City of Kent, or the requirements of this chapter; 3. The applicant or any of the applicant 's officers, directors, partners, operators, or with the applicant 's actual or imputed knowledge employees or any other person involved in the operation of the dance or dance hall has been convicted within the last five years of: a) A felony involving a crime of violence (as defined in RCW 9.41.010(2) as it now exists or as hereafter amended) or any felony under RCW Chapters 9A.44, 9A.64, 9A.88 or 69.50; or - 9 - b) A crime involving prostitution, promoting prostitution, prostitution loitering or lewd conduct, or assault on a juvenile. 4. The licensee or his or her employee, agent, partner, employer, director, officer or manager has knowingly allowed or permitted: a) A felony involving a crime of violence (as defined in RCW 9.41.010(2) as it now exists or as hereafter amended) or any felony under RCW Chapters 9A.44, 9A.64, 9A.88 or 69.50 to occur in or upon the dance hall premises; b) A crime involving prostitution, promoting prostitution, prostitution loitering or lewd conduct, or assault on a juvenile to occur in or upon the dance hall premises; c) Any unlawful act of sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copulation, or masturbation to be committed in or upon the dance hall premises; or d) The dance hall premises to be used as a place in which unlawful solicitations for sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copulation or masturbation occur; or e) The possession or consumption of liquor by persons under the age of twenty-one years, in or upon dance hall premises; or f) The giving or supplying of liquor to any person under the age of twenty-one years; or g) The use by any person in or upon the dance hall premises of marijuana, cocaine or any other controlled substance (as defined in RCW 69.50.101(d) as now exists or as hereafter amended) not prescribed by a licensed physician for use by the person possessing or using the substance. 10 - h) Violation of any condition placed upon a license issued pursuant to this chapter, of this ordinance, or of any other applicable law or ordinance, which the Finance Director finds constitutes an unreasonable interference with surrounding land uses or is otherwise unreasonably detrimental to the puhlic welfare; i ) Failure to timely file and pay any admissions tax or other fee owing to the City of Kent. j) Allowing any person under the influence of intoxicants or drugs onto or to remain within the premises. B. If the Finance Director finds that any of the conditions set forth in this Chapter exists and that the existence of such condition constitutes a threat of immediate and serious injury or damage to person or property, and in the case of conditions which may be eliminated by the licensee, that notice of the conditions has been given to the licensee and at least 24 hours have expired without the elimination of such conditions, the Finance Director may immediately suspend any license issued under this Chapter without prior opportunity to be heard. In this event the licensee shall be entitled to appeal the decision to the Hearing Examiner in accordance with FCC 5.35.070 of this chapter. The notice of immediate suspension of license given pursuant to this suhsection shall include a statement of the conditions found to exist that constitutes a threat of immediate and serious injury or damage to persons or property, and shall also inform the applicant of his or her right to appeal within ten (10) days of the date of the notice by filing a written notice of appeal, which contains a statement of the specific reasons for the appeal, with the City Clerk. C. Revocation of any license issued under this Chapter shall be accomplished pursuant to KCC 5.35.070. D. Any decision of the Finance Director to revoke or suspend a dance hall license may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner within 10 days of the Finance Director's decision. The ~~ appellant shall pay a $75.00 fee as a condition of filino such appeal . - 11 - E. Any aggrieved party may appeal the Hearing Examiner's decision rendered under parts B and D of this section, by seeking, within 10 days of the Examiner 's decision, a writ of review from the King County Superior Court . 5.35.130 AGE RESTRICTIONS. A. No person conducting a public dance or maintaining a public dance hall shall knowingly allow persons under the age of sixteen years to enter or remain in the dance hall without a parent or legal guardian present. B. It is the responsibility of the licensee and any other person conducting and/or operating a public dance to require identification showing the age of each person admitted. A valid Washington State Drivers License or photo identification card issued by the Washington State Department of Licensing shall he the only acceptable forms of proof of age. C. Every person who knowingly or recklessly allows a person to ester or remain in violation of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. D. Any person who affirmatively misrepresents his or her age to obtain admission to or permission to remain in any public dance in violation of this chapter shall he guilty of a misdemeanor. 5.35.140 HOURS OF OPERATION. No public dance hall to \�+ which any person under the age of 18 years may be admitted s O be operated past the hour of 12:Oa midnight on any school night . No public dance shall be operated past the hour of 2:00 a.m, on c any other day. for the purpose of this Section, the term "school night" means any night preceding a day upon which public schools within the City of Kent are scheduled to operate. 5.35.150 PUBLIC DANCE - READMISSION FEE. No person conducting or operating a public dance or public dance hall shall permit any person, other than an employee, to leave the dance or 12 - dance hall and return unless that person pays a readmission fee equal to the original price of admission. 5.35.160 ACCFSS - BY POLICE AND FIRE OFFICERS. All police and fire officers of the City of Kent shall have free access to public dances and dance halls when a dance is being conducted, for the purpose of inspection and to enforce compliance with the provisions of this chapter and other applicable City, County and State health, zoning, building, fire and safety ordinances and laws. 5.35.170 LICENSE LIMITED TO LICENSEE AND LOCATION. Any license issued under the provisions of this chapter shall apply to a sinale licensee and to a single location only and shall not be transferable to other locations or to other persons. 5.35.180 APPLICABILITY. All dance halls required to be licensed by this ordinance within the City of Kent shall be regulated by the provisions of this chapter, regardless of whether a public dance license or business license was obtained from the City prior to or after the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter. 5.35.190 VIOLATION. It shall be a misdemeanor to operate or manage a public dance in violation of the provisions of this chapter, without having first ohtained a valid license, or renewal; or to operate or manage a public dance when one's license to do so has been suspended or revoked. Section 2. Kent City Code Chapter 5.04.070 is amended as follows: 5.04.070. PRFMISES WHERF DANCING IS PERMITTFD. The license fee for taverns, cocktail lounges, and any other place of business wherein dancing is permitted and where alcoholic beverages are legally served dispensed, sold, or permitted on the premises, shall be fifty dollars per year, payable quarterly in advance. (0.686, 51.0) 13 - Section 3. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to to invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance. Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force five (5) days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided ty law. DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR ATTEST: MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: SANDRA DRISCOLL, CITY ATTORNEY PASSED the day of 1989. APPROVED the day of , 1989. PUBLISHED the day of , 1989. I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No. , passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereo indicated. (SE.AI.) MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK 06320-240 - 14 - Kent C;t C un it ing Date Urc4i �l, 1 � Category Consent Calendar 1 LgaL T, POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS . - Tire f�l i c� Dartmerrt re�uesi s approval to increase police word processing staff by .50 full time employees. In addition, it has been recommended and authorized to transfer 1 .50 full time employees from Information Services to the Police Department. This would allow for 2 full time employees for data entry and typing of master case reports. Authorization to establish the pay range for the positions at the 1989 Police Records Specialist' s salary range between $1444 - $1844 per mo, Benefits shall be provided in accordance with those provided non-exempt, non- represented employees. 3. EXHIBITS• Staff recommendations and Committee minutes 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety and Operations Committees on 3-1 -89 (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc.) 5. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ 12,000 (approximately) SOURCE OF FUNDS: City Contingenty Fund 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 30. VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT REGARDING WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS WITHIN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT - OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING ON 3-1-89: HOUSER: Okay, we' ll move onto the half-time word processing position so some of these people can clear out of here a little. Did you have anything that you wanted to talk to us about on this? FREDERIKSEN: I 'm assuming that you know that I will. First of all, I would like to apologize for missing the last two Operations Board meetings. I was out of town on one and I think the other issue, Lt. Sweeney represented me at both of those. I do have, I think the point in contention here, perhaps, is how do we resolve dispute between the Union position and the Administrative position and to help you and the Council, I have run off some copies and I will pass them around to the Council. . . . (pause while information was passed out) . I think it 's quite normal that there will be at times disagreements between Administration and Union as to whether the new position will be included or excluded from the bargaining unit. I think as we sit across the table from one another when we negotiated this contract that that very issue was addressed and agreed to contractually by both City and by the Police Union. I would draw your attention to section 2 . 3 of the contract, which is the first page, section E and it indicates, excuse me, it would be the paragraph below section E and it states any dispute arising in the future as to the inclusion or exclusion of a position from the bargaining unit will be presented to the Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) for determination. It is my understanding that that is the process that is agreed upon contractually that should be followed to resolve this particular conflict. I think there' s some maybe misunderstanding as to why I chose to classify this, or I should say, Mr. Webby and I chose not to have this as a Union position and as we looked at the job tasks that we wished to be performed to address the work that was described by Lt. Sweeney at the last meeting of Operations, also to Public Safety, we felt that it was outside of the tasks that were performed by Records Specialists and different. I think on the second page is a job description that was drafted that represents, in my opinion, the duties that will be performed by the word processing position within, the Department. As this appears to me, or appeared to me to be a non-represented position, that's why we chose to advertise it as such. It does not, in my opinion, fit into the duties or compare to the duties of Records Specialists. I think there 's also perhaps a dispute over the wages and why we chose the wages and when looking at that, as I made the determination or felt that it was a non-represented position, I looked throughout the City at like positions where there's comparable work being performed within the City. We found in looking throughout the City, Mr. Webby' s staff did that, that there was a position in Information Services/Word Processing that was extremely similar. The City was paying that position at the rate of 16 in the pay classification. So we chose, as this was equal work, to advertise at that particular rate. Now I realize that 1 Of 15 OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS that's a little bit more than what the Records Specialists are getting, however, they are going to be negotiating a contract and I 'm sure that information will be taken into consideration as we look at the new contract for wages by the City. It' s certainly not an indication that the tasks performed by Records Specialists is less than Word Processing. It' s simply an indication that this is a represented unit by the Union and this is, in my opinion, a non- represented unit and I think that disparity, if there is one, will be rectified when we look at that in the contract negotiations that will be coming up in 1990. DOWELL: If I may ask Chief Frederiksen a couple questions. Is it your wish that you have additional people taking this material and using it in the Department, in the Police Department rather than in Information Services? FREDERIKSEN: That particular problem I hope was addressed very well by Mike Sweeney at the last meeting. DOWELL: I want to get your opinion. FREDERIKSEN: Quite honestly, the reason that we're taking that work out of Word Processing, we' re taking approximately 50% of the workload out of Word Processing and moving it into the Department is because we want to enter the narrative data directly into the computer system. Currently, it' s not being done. That task is not being accomplished. It' s being done in Word Processing and we get a hard copy that comes to the Station or to the Police Department. We're trying to rectify that situation so that we can have that information on-line and get it to our supervisory personnel, get it to the detectives for follow-up purposes much sooner than what's being accomplished right now. DOWELL: That would be efficient in your eyes. . . . FREDERIKSEN: Yes. DOWELL: . . . in your thinking to have that done in the Department rather than Word Processing. FREDERIKSEN: Oh yes, yes it would. And, I might just add if I could, that in my opinion the delay of this hiring process or the beginning of it, is really a detrimental situation for the Department. It' s delaying our improving and correcting a problem that exists within the Department. Now if this is presented to PERC for their determination one way or the other, I don't, my understanding is, is that it is not before them at this time, is that right? PAINTER: They've got a complaint waiting for them down there, but 2of15 OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS they're not going to take action on it. . . . (inaudible) . . . DOWELL: But, this is a question that will be answered by them as to whether it' s a Union or non-union situation? FREDERIKSEN: Yes. HOUSER: Eventually. FREDERIKSEN: Well, if the determination were made later that this is in fact a Union position, then they would be included in the Records Specialists Union. DOWELL: Alright. The RFP that went out here, is that the proper, the request, the advertisement, has that been withdrawn? WEBBY: Yes. DOWELL: Alright. So is that no longer an issue here. WEBBY: You directed us at the last meeting to not recruit. HOUSER: It' s an issue still. DOWELL: It has been withdrawn at this time? WEBBY: It did not go out. HOUSER: Yes. DOWELL: Would it be then for us to act and redone on the same basis. WEBBY: That is the correct job description. DOWELL: Okay. And, PERC would enter into determination as to whether these classifications would be proper? FREDERIKSEN: I would assume that they would compare this job description with the job description of Records Specialist, which is a represented group, and make a determination if they are similar enough that that would be included in the same group. DOWELL: I don't see any reason why the Committee is getting involved with what seems to be an Administrative function and I would therefore move to approve the Chief's request here and the Department' s request from the, $12 , 000 from the contingency fund to do what they want to do. MANN: I had a couple of questions that haven't been answered. 3 of 15 OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS HOUSER: Go ahead, Paul. DOWELL: Well, that can come up in discussion. If we have a second, we can discuss it. MANN: Second. DOWELL: Okay. HOUSER: Go ahead. MANN: I 'm concerned about the morale of the other workers there and it would seem to me that if this position were a Union position there would be something for other workers to aim for, to shoot for, a goal to achieve. And the questions that I had were one, what is the problem, why is it difficult to make these positions Union positions, what would the ramifications be as far as your position. . . . . DOWELL: I 'm out of order. I question, you' re a member of a Union, is that correct? MANN: I 'm a member of A Union. DOWELL: Of a Union, and I really wonder if, if the question is - proper or if we have a conflict of interest or the appearance of fairness involved in that particular issue. In trying to determine that before it even goes to the PERC. HOUSER: Well, then maybe I can make a suggestion. Why don't we start this job at the same salary the other people are making and when PERC decides what they want to do, then we can go from there. I think that that would solve the problem, we can hire right away, we can pay them just exactly what we' re paying the Records Specialists and they' ll have to be told then that it, that we' re in the middle of deciding whether it Union or non-union and we can go from there. That way we can .get the people on board, that way then we don't have a morale problem and everybody that' s there can shoot for this if it' s going to be a higher paying job. They can all try out for it and that way we can get busy on what we're doing. DOWELL: I think I agree with you. I think we should get on with it and provide the facilities for the sake of the Department and the citizens. The Union, non-union issue, the grade issue is an Administrative or PERC decision, not ours. MANN: . . . (inaudible) . . . .disagree with this, this level . FREDERIKSEN: Can I address that, Christi, because I don't mind discussing that fully and we were looking at other like positions 4of15 OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS throughout the City and that was the reason for the determination and I think when you're looking at non-union positions and comparing them throughout the City, the intent was to pay comparably for comparable work and I would think that the, if you look at the job description for Records Specialist you may draw the assumption that there are greater tasks performed by them than by Word Processing and I would think that the City would recognize that and in the contract negotiation, would increase their salary next year. That would be a method of rectifying the situation. The problem we have in administrating contracts and looking at non- union is that one is a negotiated situation over the table, the other is under a pay classification and so what we attempted to do was to be fair and to pay them a comparable wage. And the problem I see within the Department is that if we hire word processing positions paying them at rate 14 and we're asking them to work weekends and we' re asking them to work nights on, without rotating them as Records Specialists, that once we have these people trained that it would be a natural for them to be, if there would be an opening in Word Processing and Information Services to certainly go to Information Services immediately because they have dayshift and a rate 16. That' s the reasoning that I had, now if it' s the Council ' s decision we can certainly follow any direction that you would have. HOUSER: The Records people don't work weekends or nights, right? FREDERIKSEN: They do, yes. HOUSER: Oh, okay, I guess I missed something there then. I thought they, I thought they, you said. . . . DOWEll: We keep getting into the Administrative. . . . . . HOUSER: Yah, okay, this is. . . .okay, this is want I want to do. If I have a second we ' ll do and we' ll just. . . . . WEBBY: Can I, may I make it a little more difficult for you, but another fact that might be important. If you look at the, what we're talking of, what I hear you talking about is that you would direct the City to recruit this non-represented position. If you look at non-represented employees as I believe in many cases you must as represented to the respect that there is a pay plan that is very similar to the pay plan in the Union contract. It' s adopted by ordinance and you've directed certain salary ranges in that pay plan. As Chief explained, our obligation to you is to recommend salaries that provide, at least in staffs opinion, equal pay for equal work. If we were to adjust the pay below or above that pay range for word processor, which essentially the Department is using now, then we would need to come to you and create a new step in the pay plan before we would have, at least in my opinion, 5of15 OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS your authorization to pay period. We also have a consideration of benefits. How do we address the benefits of this position, on the non-represented benefit plan or on the Union benefits, which differ. For instance, Police specialists receive additional pay for working night shifts which we're not talking about at the minute when we're comparing salary levels, we've been talking about base salary. So these Specialists working a night shift makes additional money per hour and we haven't factored that in. So the Chief' s recommendation to you in this recruitment is if we're to consider this non-represented position, that we believe we're required to abide by your non-represented salary plan and benefit structure. HOUSER: I don't consider this non-represented. I consider this non-determined and maybe then we better either, then hire them the Informations Department or wait until we find out where they' re going to go because I think that the morale of the people that we have here working for us now and have been working for us is more important than two new people that we don't even have on board yet. And I know it' s important that we get this stuff in the computer, so put them through Information Services then and then when we decide where there supposed to be going, then we can make a decision. DOWELL: What is the Administration' s position? HARRIS: Well, Brent approved. . . . . DOWELL: Brent Is gone, what is the Administration' s position today? HARRIS: That' s Brent' s approval, that's what I 'm supporting. DOWELL: Which would be the. . . . HARRIS: What you have before you. DOWELL: . .the RFP, Data Entry Specialist. HARRIS: Um-huh. DOWELL: In the. . . . HARRIS: For in the Police Department. You've already, it' s already been through the Public Safety Committee and approved, I think as I recall, one of the earlier meetings I went to. It' s been approved there. I think it was unanimous at Public Safety, wasn't it. BITEMAN: One of the problems with that approval was the fact that we were under the assumption that the pay differential was because 6 of 15 OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS of the night work and the weekends and so forth. In order to bring people in, it required that. I wasn't aware that we presently have, I believe, nine personnel doing that kind of work now. That's myself personally, I don't know how members of the committee. . . FREDERIKSEN: Could I comment to that. The difference there is that they're going to be working almost straight nights and straight weekends. (TURNED TAPE OVER - BRIEFLY LOST DISCUSSION) BITEMAN: . .I think the two motions that we' re working with here, I 'm • of the opinion that we shouldn't be making the determination that PERC should be making, but at the same time we would like to satisfy the needs of the Department to get people on board and I would be in favor of either doing it as the Chairman has suggested here or to have Word Processing do the hiring and await the determination of PERC whether it comes under Police wages or Word Processing. FREDERIKSEN: Could I make, or maybe I could ask the attorney that if PERC were to decide that these were Union positions then as I understand it from my past dealings with contracts, is that we would have to open again the wages portion of the contract to negotiate what we would pay those particular individuals after PERC's determination, is that correct? DRISCOLL: That' s correct. The other complication, I hate to do this to you, if they are included in the Word Processing and Information Services Department we currently have the petition before PERC in the election before PERC on whether or not that whole Department should become a Union. We may or may not have a hearing on that because of the number of contested positions and so then we would have two different Unions vying for this new position. HOUSER: Well, we' ll just wait then. We' ll just wait until PERC makes a decision and then we won't have any problem. We' ll know what their salary is going to be and where they belong. DOWELL: But in the meantime, we won't have any of this data entry. HOUSER: Well. . . DOWELL: And I think that' s the important thing, is what are we doing for the citizens. 7 of 15 OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS HARRIS: Didn't somebody bring up the fact that PERC' s now sitting on this and not moving forward with this. DRISCOLL: There has been, the City has received no official notification from petition, from PERC that there is a petition to PERC to have this position included within the bargaining unit. So there is no official notification to the City yet, so there is no official action that has started until we receive that notification. SWEENEY: Madam Chair, I appreciate your interest in compromise in trying to find middle ground in order to make it happen. My concern would be that if we were to begin to hire people under those grounds that the type of people that would submit for a position like that when there is so much uncertainty about the benefit levels, the ultimate wage levels, and the conditions of work in which Department they would be in and I think perhaps the people that we would hire into those conditions wouldn't want the job once other circumstances change. DOWELL: I believe you're talking about. . . . . SWEENEY: I understand why. . . . . . DOWELL: . . .the morale issue then. SWEENEY: Pardon. DOWELL: You're talking about the morale issue. SWEENEY: I 'm talking the morale issue. . . . . . HOUSER: Of the new hires. DOWELL: And some of the people in the Department are going to be jealous because they don't make as much as this person, is , that we're talking about. SWEENEY: No, I 'm talking about the people that we would hire if they temporarily work for him and be told that there is alot of uncertainty about where they would eventually end up working depending on what PERC decided, that their benefits would be contingent upon whatever the PERC decision was, basically we'd be asking people to come to work for the Police Department without any knowledge of what the benefits were. DOWELL: But at these wages, at $1948 a month, I would think that they would be pretty happy with what they would get under any circumstances. 8 of 15 OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS FREDERIKSEN: Well, I guess this draws into question other positions within the City that may have comparable work, my secretary, the other Administrative staff, shouldn't we be paying them the same rate then that we're paying the Union. I mean, you can argue it from the other way too. I mean, if they're being paid less than the Union, perhaps we should raise their salary to rate the Union Is making right now. They have the same argument it would seem. HOUSER: They probably should. FREDERIKSEN: And I would think that their morale would be very damaged by the action that the Committee may be taking here. DOWELL: I think fairness is important, but the Administrative position, as I understand it, is to request personnel at this rate, from $1597 to $1948, and that those people be hired for the Department and placed in the Department to do the data entry work that' s necessary for you to continue your police work. That' s what I understand the Administration' s program is, is that correct? HARRIS: Yes, and the Public Safety Committee has approved that, unanimously. HOUSER: Well, the Public Safety Committee is here and. . . . . . DOWELL: Now wait a minute, this is the Operations Committee and there' s three of us here. HOUSER: Yes, it's also the Public Safety Committee. BITEMAN: There' s four of us. DOWELL: No, there' s three of us. BITEMAN: No, no, this is a combined meeting. HOUSER: Yes, this is a combined meeting. BITEMAN: Yes, that' s right. HOUSER: Because we three. . . . . DOWELL: It' s a Council meeting, correct? You've got four members here. . . . . . BITEMAN: No, it' s not a Council meeting, it's a combined meeting. DOWELL: But in effect, it is if four people agree. HARRIS: You have to be your two separate Committees. 9of15 OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS MANN: Call for a vote on this motion. HOUSER: Okay, for the Operations Committee, all those in favor say I . In favor: Steve Dowell. Opposed: Christi Houser, Paul Mann. HOUSER: Okay, now do we need a vote from the Public Safety Committee? DOWELL: They've voted unanimously to approve. HOUSER: Public Safety Committee approved the position, okay. BITEMAN: That' s right. HOUSER: Now, I suppose you're right. I suppose we shouldn't be involved in Administrative problems. This is probably none of our business, but I still feel that because there are so many employees being affected by this and that it' s, it' s a part of our job as they're our employees, people that live in the City, a lot of them, and I think that we should change the salary range, start it at $1444 like the Records Specialists and hire and then let the Union and the Administrative staff fight it out from there. That way we can get two people hired, we can start at the same salary and then we can, when we decide where they go from there, we can make a change. We're talking about what, three or four months. It takes a while to hire people. DOWELL: What happened on the motion? HOUSER: It failed. DOWELL: You voted against the motion and you voted against the motion. Okay, it fails. Now does the Public Safety Commission come into play or. . . . BITEMAN: We' ll use the same motion as the. . . . .let's see, he can't make the same motion for Public -Safety. . . . DOWELL: I 'm not on the Public Safety, that' s right, so I can't be involved. HOUSER: Yah, so, so we don't have to vote on it, so. . . . BITEMAN: So, we' ll have to use the. . . . . DOWELL: So it' s automatically three to one. 10 of 15 OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS DRISCOLL: Technically, you do have to keep yourselves separate so we don't have public meetings. . . . . . BITEMAN: Right, understand that. DOWELL: Okay. MANN: Well, I can't support Steve's motion here because the question that I had hasn't really, to my satisfaction, been answered. I don't see any reason why these positions cannot be represented positions under the bargaining unit. I think and I just, I resent your bringing up Steve, that I 'm a member of the Union. I mean. . . . . DOWELL: Well, I bring that up as a fairness proposal . I just question, and not out of disrespect believe me, but I just. . .I suppose you could say the same thing about me because I don't belong to the Union is that maybe I shouldn't be voting either. So what I 'm going, pardon that, but perhaps you' re taking personally what I don't mean to do that way. But, I see what we, that we have here is Administration problem that the Council is trying to settle. The Council should be involved in policy and not in Administration and the Administration' s request to us, the information that we have from them is that we approve what they feel is the right way to go and I hear the Chief saying that, that' s what he feels is necessary for his Department. PERC can work out the problems of Union, non-union. That, I think should be fairly taken care of by them and not by us as a Council and so, that's why I made that motion. I can see that we're, if we' re going to get into this, that we' re not going to get a decision, we're not going to have anybody taking the criminal records and consequently, the only one that gets hurt is the public. And we're talking about a couple hundred bucks a month here and I think we have other issues involving thousands of dollars that we should be considering and I think we should take the Administration, at this time, and the Administration' s recommendation and that' s the reason for my motion and we have a motion on the floor, unless there' s any more to discuss. I don't know which Committee is voting here, if it' s the Public Safety Commission or the Operations Committee or both. I guess. . . . . HOUSER: Well , if you're confused, if you're confused I ' ll straighten it out for you. DOWELL: Well you have, you have two chairman here, right? HOUSER: Yes. DOWELL: You guys can fight it out. 11 of 15 OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS MANN: Two to one. BITEMAN: Do you want to use the same motion during Public Safety that you gave? MANN: She made a, she made another motion. BITEMAN: I 'm talking about her. HOUSER: I made a motion, yes, I want. Yes, I move that they hire data entry specialist at $1444 and we' ll go from there. MANN: Second. BITEMAN: All in favor. In favor: Berne Biteman, Christi Houser, Paul Mann. BITEMAN: Opposed likewise. Opposed: None. HOUSER: Okay. BITEMAN: That takes care of the two Committees. HOUSER: Public Safety. WEBBY: I 'm sorry, might I ask a question. As I recall and if somebody can help me out, the request before you today was one of funding the necessary monies to accomplish two full time positions, before we got into the discussion, before you got into the discussion. DOWELL: We voted it down. WEBBY: Before we could recruit for two full time positions, where ever they are, it would be my understanding that we would need authorization of the allocation of contingency monies to full fill our obligations to pay those two. So at some point do we need a motion I guess that we would later take to the Council for approval to fund the additional money so that we would have two positions we could hire. HOUSER: We can do that. BITEMAN: Let me ask, I thought we did this in Public Safety when it was brought to us. WEBBY: I believe, Mr. Biteman, that the reason we. . . . . 12 of 15 OPERTIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS DOWELL: We just voted down the funds. WEBBY: . . .the item came to the Operations Committee was because it had the budget implication, they needed to also approve the allocation of monies from the contingency funds. BITEMAN: Okay. HOUSER: We can do that. DOWELL: The Operations Committee just voted down the funds. BITEMAN: Then what you need is another motion to take care of the funds. DOWELL: (Inaudible) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (INAUDIBLE) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . HOUSER: Well, we voted down. . . . WEBBY: I think I 'm saying that. . . . . . . . . . HOUSER: Well, that doesn't mean we can't do something else. WEBBY: . . . . .but I 'm asking you to, it would seem appropriate. HOUSER: Then we need to. . . . . . . . . . . . DOWELL: My motion was expenditure of the $12, 000 and was voted down. HOUSER: Okay, we' ll make it $10; 000. . . (inaudible) . . . . I mean, it' s just enough, it's not that much difference, but we'll just vote the amount of funds needed to fund two data entry specialists or half of time, half of a person and the one and a half from .Information Services. We' ll fund enough money to cover those positions for the rest of this year, whatever that amount may be, starting at a salary of $1444 . All those in favor say I. MANN: I. DOWELL: Which Committee is voting? MANN: Operations. DOWELL: Operations Committee this time. HOUSER: Okay, the Operations Committee will vote on. . . . . DOWELL: Okay, I know what you' re voting on. 13 of 15 OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS HOUSER: And, Paul, you second the motion? MANN: Second. HOUSER: All those in favor say I. In favor: Christi Houser, Paul Mann. Opposed: Steve Dowell. HOUSER: Okay. BITEMAN: It's Public Safety, the same motion. All those in favor say I. In favor: Paul Mann, Christi Houser, Berne Biteman. BITEMAN: Opposed likewise. Opposed: None. HOUSER: Okay. BITEMAN: Now is the. . . . . . . HOUSER: Is everybody happy. I look around and everybody. . . . . . DOWELL: I think no one' s happy. WEBBY: It' s covered all the bases. HOUSER: I think. . . . . . . BITEMAN: Now, the result of this action. . . . . . DOWELL: . . . . . . (inaudible) . . .happens when the Council starts to get into. . . . . . . . (inaudible) . . . . . GUSTAFSON: I 'm just curious about this. Are they still in Informational Services these positions. . . . . . . . . (inaudible) . . . . . . . . HOUSER: No, they' ll be in the Police Department. . . . . . . . WEBBY: We don't have a pay range for. . . . . . . . . HOUSER: And, as soon as PERC decides where to put them, then we can, you know, if there' s any more decisions to be made, then we' ll go from there. Okay, Sandra, did we do anything illegal. DOWELL: I didn't. 14 of 15 OPERATIONS/PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MEETING 3-1-89 RE: POLICE WORD PROCESSING POSITIONS HOUSER: You never do. If you vote no on everything Steve, you don't have to worry about it. . DRISCOLL: What Mike and I were discussing was that we' ll have to examine our pay and class schedule and determine whether or not there's a place, a slot for this position since this is a unique situation. If there is not, we will have to go back to the Council as a whole to have the Council take action on that. HOUSER: That' s fine. BITEMAN: On the position classification. DRISCOLL: That' s right, the position classification because I believe we don't have one for it, but we can take a look and see. Now, I guess if you wanted that to go to consent, you could now authorized us to create that position on the schedule, though you wouldn't have the specific information. I don't know if you need it that quickly or not. BITEMAN: Is it possible this is a temporary adjustment though. If it' s a three month determination. . . . . . . . WEBBY: We were just talking about that. . . . . DRISCOLL: Yes. WEBBY: Unfortunately, we hadn't been prepared to be thinking this way prior to coming, but in many cases you' ll authorize us to create temporary full time positions for a specific period to deal with a certain task and in those cases, you're authorizing funds necessary to cover the expenditures is all we need. The down side of that, I believe, is as Mr. Sweeney was discussing. As we go out to recruit positions for the City, we want to feel very comfortable that when in that recruitment we can explain to those applicants very precisely their working hours, working hours, wages and what the potential for their future employment is. In a temporary recruitment as we might be talking now, we would be drawing a picture different from what you' re suggesting. BITEMAN: The vote has been taken and I think that with your talents in selling, it shouldn't be a problem. WEBBY: That' s all I needed to hear. BITEMAN: Thank you. HOUSER: Okay, alrighty, then we' ll go on to the Mayor' s committee on Housing. Thank you. 15 of 15 MEMORANDUM ��QIGYffh�� DATE: December 29, 1988 V �' TO: Brent McFall , City Administrator Q �� FROM: Ron Spang, Information Services Director/� cl o � ! 1. �°Z/C, SUBJECT: POLICE WORD PROCESSING oF�� r�Ftit This memo confirms and documents the resolution of Police word processing services, as determined at a meeting today between yourself, Chief Frederiksen and myself, as follows: Resolved That: The Police Department will assume responsibility as soon as reasonably possible for word processing services in support of Police master case reports with a staffing complement of 2.0 FTE. Funding for the 2.0 FTE is 1 .5 FTE transferred from Information Services and .5 FTE additional ; Information Services will assist PD in an orderly transition, will retain responsibility for Police supplementals, statements, and filing packets . Information Services staffing for 1989 will be reduced from its currently authorized level by 1 .5 FTE, leaving a net 3.5 FTE for central WP support. Information Services has vacancies for the 1 .5 FTE's. Coupled with the additional .5 FTE which is hereby authorized, PD can initiate recruitment for the new positions . Information Services staff may apply at their individual discretion. Approved as outlined above: gi McFaty Administrator Approved as outlined above with these changes: J. Brent McFall , City Administrator Date copies: Rod Frederiksen, Chief of Police Mike Webby, Assistant City Administrator Tony McCarthy, Finance Director Mike Sweeney, Police Department Rose Grabert, Information Services Department KENT POLICE DEPARTMENT NOVEMBER 23 , 1988 TO : Brent McFall, City Administrator FROM: Rod Frederiksen, Chief of Police[ (V SUBJECT: Police Word Processing Needs I have had the opportunity to review Information Service Director Spang's report regarding Police word processing needs. I accept his staff's analysis of the current work load generated by the Kent Police Department staff for master reports. Recommendation: Although Word Processing recommends an initial staffing level of 1. 5 versus the 2 positions requested by me, I am asking that you grant my original request for the following reasons: 1. As we are a 24-hour per day and seven-day a week operation, it is necessary to provide word processing functions on a continuous basis. Two staff members would provide word processing functions through vacation, sick time, and other necessary staff absence. 2 . We are anticipating the addition of seven additional police officers next year. Each of these new officers will generate additional case reports. 3 . We continue to see increases in calls for service which are caused by increases in population both in Kent and unincorporated King County. In addition, annexations by the City have, and will, greatly increase service requests and necessary reporting by police. Siimmar : I feel that two positions would efficiently deal with word Processing needs of the Police Department now, and as increased word processing needs grow following the addition of new personnel at the beginning of the year. The additional staff members would also allow us to effectively deal with additional requests for service caused by anticipated City and County growth during FY 89 . . cc: Mike Sweeney Ron Spang Hal Rees /klr MEMORANDUM DATE: November 18, 1988 TO: Brent McFall , City Administrator FROM: Ron Spang, Information Services Director SUBJECT: POLICE WORD PROCESSING NEEDS This report describes the current and recommended methods of addressing Police word processing needs, as outlined below and in the attached documents. Information Services concurs with the general recommendation of moving unique, confidential , time-critical Police word processing work back to that department in a phased approach. Our specific findings and recommendations follow. Current System A summary/analysis of the current ISO efforts has been developed by Seattle University student/intern Paula Kingsley. Paula met with appropriate staff from both departments and prepared the attached summary/analysis of selected months in 1988. Proposed System/Recommendations A summary/analysis of the proposed system has been developed by Rose Grabert and myself. We propose an initial Police Department staffing level of 1 .5, versus the requested 2.0, possibly augmented byIfunds for temporary part-time help as needed. If it is decided to grant the Police Department the requested 2.0 positions, we suggest that the Police Department commit to a time-specific transition of additional police word processing work, so 'that the proposed .79 FTE gain by the Police Department is not at the expense of City-wide Word Processing services. We would also encourage the Police Department, in any scenario where existing City staff is affected, to consider reasonable accommodation in the institution of off-shift hours to benefit the Police Department and existing staff during the transitional period. Rose, Paula and I would be pleased to answer any questions and/or meet together with the Police Department, as appropriate. Please advise. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this matter. copies: Rod Frederiksen, Police Chief Mike Sweeney, Police Department Rose Grabert, Information Services Department Paula Kingsley, Information Services Department Attachments 670I-17I Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7 , 1989 Category Other Business 1. SUBJECT: FUNDING BASE - HUMAN SERVICES 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: On January 26, 1989, the Human Services Commission voted unanimously to recommend that one percent of the General Fund budget be authorized as a funding base for human services. The Council Planning Committee considered the request on February 21, 1989 and will consider it again at their meeting of March 7 , 1989 . 3 . EXHIBITS: Staff memo, Human Services Commission minutes, Planning Committee minutes 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Human Services Commission. 1/26/89 and Planning Committee (anticipated March 7 . 1989) (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: 1% of General Fund Budget SOURCE OF FUNDS: General Fund 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 4A KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT March 2, 1989 MEMO TO: MAYOR DAN KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: LIN BALL, SENIOR PLANNER SUBJECT: FUNDING BASE FOR HUMAN SERVICES The Human Services Commission and a special subcommittee have been working on establishing a funding base for City of Kent general fund human services which will more adequately address the needs in the community. The Commission has been consistently receiving requests for funding which exceed the money available for human services. The $90, 568 allocated for human services in the general fund in 1988 , was only 47% of the requested $191, 734 . The $117, 750 allocated in the general fund in 1989 was only 57% of the requested $207 , 758 . The Human Services Commission at its January 26, 1989 meeting voted unanimously to recommend to the City Council the approval of a funding base for human services which is one (1) percent of the General Fund budget. This would be calculated using the current year' s General Fund budget to determine the following year' s funding base for human services. The Commission feels that this figure of 1% of the general fund will bring the City's funding for human services more in line with the actual requests received each year. This is based on using the same 12% estimated yearly General Fund budget increase to project the dollar amount of requests for human services funding. The City Council Planning Committee reviewed this item at its February 21st meeting. The Planning Committee is expected to take action on this item at its March 7th meeting, and will forward its recommendation to the full City Council on March 7th. The attached table gives a picture of recent trends and projections for human services funding requests. a:HSfund3 . 7 KENT HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION January 26 , 1989 3 : 00 PM Commission Members Present Staff Present Dee Moschel, Acting Chair Charlene Anderson Jean Archer Lin Ball Sharon Atkin Mary Duty Dick Foslin Peter Mourer John Pardo Judy Woods, Councilwoman Commission Members Absent Bill Carleton, absent Mary Eckfeldt, excused APPROVAL OF DECEMBER 15 , 1988 MINUTES It was noted that the retreat is scheduled for February 17 , 1989 from 10 AM to 4 PM (See further change below) . Commissioner Archer MOVED and Commissioner Atkin SECONDED the motion to approve the minutes of the December 15, 1988 meeting as corrected. Motion carried. WELCOME NEW MEMBER Introductions were made to Commissioner Mourer, and Acting Chairwoman Moschel presented him with a Certificate of Appointment. STATUS OF FUNDING BASE - REPORT BY COMMITTEE Commissioner Archer stated that of $207 ,758 requested for budget year 1989 , the Council approved $119 , 350 for human services. This is 57 . 4% of the dollars requested and represents . 5% of the General Fund budget. of the $191, 734 requested for budget year 1988, the Council approved $90, 568 for human services. This is 47% of the dollars requested and represented . 5% of the General Fund budget. The Human Services Commission subcommittee proposes a funding base for human services of 1% of the General Fund budget, calculated using the current year' s General Fund budget to determine the following year's funding base for human services. Using the same 12% estimated yearly General Fund budget increase to project the dollar amount of requests for human services funding, it is estimated that 1% of the General Fund budget will bring funding for human services within approximately $10, 000 of the amount requested by human services agencies. Mary Duty stated that City Attorney Driscoll suggested that the recommendation of the Human Services Commission for a funding base for human services should be forwarded to the City Administrator and to the Operation: Committee. Councilwoman Woods stated that the issue would likely go before " both the Planning Committee and the operations Committee. She would like it placed on the Planning Committee agenda for February 21, the Operations KENT HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING OF JANUARY 26, 1989 Committee agenda of February 27 , 1989 and the City Council agenda of March 71 1989 . Commissioner Atkin MOVED and Commissioner Foslin SECONDED the motion to proceed to obtain funding in the amount of 1% of the General Fund to fund human services. Motion passed unanimously. PLANNING SESSION FOR COMMISSION RETREAT The Commission retreat is scheduled for February 17, 1989 from 9 AM to 3 PM at the Battelle Conference Center in Seattle. Mary Duty reported the Center will provide a continental breakfast, buffet lunch and supplies. Cost is approximately $555 for 15 people. Discussion occurred on the proposed agenda for the retreat: 9 : 00 - 9 : 30 Networking 9:30 - 10: 30 A) Create vision B) Review mission statement C) Set priority issues for 1989 10: 30 - 10:45 Break 10 :45 - 11: 30 Speaker 11: 30 - 12 : 00 Form groups for afternoon session 12 : 00 - 1: 00 Lunch 1: 00 - 2 : 30 Discussion groups: existing unmet needs and funding issues 2 : 30 - 3 : 00 Reaffirm mission and priorities Commissioner Archer and Acting Chairwoman Moschel would like to discuss public education and having the Human Services Commission as an information source with its own library and speaker's bureau. Commissioner Atkin suggested that Judy Clegg be invited to a Human Services Commission meeting in March or April, at which time the Human Services Roundtable will have solidified its position. It was decided that staff will contact Doug Stevenson of King County to invite him to speak at the retreat. The topic will be regional issues and how they tie to South King County, i.e, what they mean to Kent. REVIEW AND DISCUSS CONTRACT CHANGES/REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR 1989 Lin Ball reported there were only minor changes made to the contracts; the changes related to insurance requirements. Staff has contacted the agencies being funded in 1989 to clarify what information the Commission needs and how the statistics should be reported. STATUS OF 1989 CONTRACTS Mary Duty stated the contracts have been drafted and approved and will be sent to the agencies on Monday. 2 KENT HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING OF JANUARY 26, 1989 APPOINT NEW REPRESENTATIVE TO SOUTH KING COUNCIL OF HUMAN SERVICES The Council meets on the fourth Tuesday of the month from 12 - 1: 30 PM. It was suggested that Chairman Eckfeldt represent the Commission at the meetings he normally attends and Commissioner Mourer can report to the Commission on the meetings which Chairman Eckfeldt cannot attend. This item will be placed on the agenda next month to confirm the arrangement. EVALUATE FUNDING APPLICATION FORMS FOR 1989 AND DISCUSS ANY CHANGES FOR 1990 Lin Ball distributed copies of last year' s application form and instructions. Commissioner Atkin suggested this issue be addressed by a subcommittee. Commissioner Atkin will chair the committee. Commissioners Pardo, Mourer and Carleton will be members and Mary Duty will represent staff. Mary Duty will provide the committee members with notes from last year on the application form. Lin Ball mentioned several items the committee might discuss, including 1) working with common information suggested by the Human Services Roundtable, 2) staff will obtain from the King County Health Department their age group breakdown, 3) including a signature line on the front page of the application, and 4) clarifying the sliding fee scale and poverty guidelines. Commissioner Archer suggested having a statement indicating that incomplete applications are a basis for denial. The committee will discuss that idea. Timing for the applications was discussed. The Roundtable will have their final changes made relating to common application information by March 7 or " March 8 . The committee will discuss also creating a data base of information from the applications. HUMAN SERVICES ROUNDTABLE Lin Ball distributed information on the Human Services Roundtable legislative package. The Roundtable will be requesting additional funding from the cities this year. Commissioner Atkin reported the regional groups are finishing their work and will forward their findings to staff and the Roundtable as a whole. There will be a retreat within the next couple of weeks. Acting Chairwoman Moschel requested that staff collect the materials from the retreat to distribute to the Commissioners. HOMELESS ISSUES DISPLAY Acting Chairwoman Moschel added this to the agenda. Commissioner Atkin reported that there is a black and white photo display presently at the Rotunda in Olympia which depicts the plight of the homeless in Washington. She asked if the Human Services Commission would like to co-sponsor the display in Kent along with the South King County Multi-service Center. She needs a place for the display and someone to help set it up and share in a reception around it. This item will be placed on the agenda next month, at 3 KENT HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION MINUTES OF MEETING OF JANUARY 26, 1989 which time Commissioner Atkin will have obtained additional information on the display. Suggestions for location included the library and Kent Commons. CITIZEN OF THE MONTH Acting Chairwoman Moschel added this item to the agenda. She received the consent of the Human Services Commissioners to nominate Chairman Eckfeldt for the award given by Soroptomist International to an individual making an outstanding contribution to the quality of living in Kent. ADDED ITEMS Councilwoman Woods routed a letter from Food Lifeline which reported that the Gift of Food program contributed $54 , 000 in six months to the food bank program. Commissioner Atkin reported that a food bank will be started at Springwood. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at approximately 5: 00 PM. Respectfully submitted, N F ed N. Satterstrom, Secretary 4 KENT CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE February 21, 1989 4 : 00 PM Committee Members Present Planning Staff Present Judy Woods, Chair Charlene Anderson Steve Dowell Lin Ball Kathy McClung City Administration Fred Satterstrom Dan Stroh Jim Harris, Acting City Administrator Jim Hansen Other City Staff Others Present Norm Angelo Carolyn Lake Charles Aweeka John Marchione Dick Foslin Larry Webb Dee Moschel John Pardo Robert Stettner Linda VanNest FUNDING BASE - HUMAN SERVICES Chairwoman Woods stated that presentations would be heard on this item but the Committee would not take action at this meeting. Lin Ball reminded the Committee that at a City Council workshop last spring, the Human Services Commission had talked about looking at ways to establish a predictable base of funding of human services in order to more adequately address the needs of the community. In the agenda packet was a table showing recent trends and projections of human service funding requests and dollars available. The Human Services Commission is recommending a funding base of 1 percent of the General Fund budget. Dee Moschel, Vice Chairwoman of the Human Services Commission, stated that at their retreat last Friday, the Commissioners were made more aware of the local and regional arena of human services. There have been profound changes in the economy and social structure nationwide which make it difficult for people to have quality medical care, decent homes and a decent standard of living. At a Chamber of Commerce meeting last week, Dr. George Daniel, Superintendent of the Kent School District, stated that one-third of the kindergarten entrants are living at poverty level. Two years ago, that figure was 25%. The new administration in Washington, D.C. is continuing to look to the state and local government to take responsibility for funding human services. Kent is a leader in the area of human services. Because of the City of Kent's funding of a particular agency last year, that agency was able to generate additional dollars from the State of Washington. It is expected that by establishing a 1 percent funding base, applications for funding will increase. However, this stable funding base will allow support CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1989 of human services to be realistic and forward-looking. Human Services Commissioner Dick Foslin stated that during the last two years the Commission has gained a strong feeling for how human services should be funded. The Commission and the City of Kent are innovative, proactive and are leaders in King County and perhaps even the state for support of human services. By continuing to move forward in this arena, the City of Kent can make an impact that citizens will appreciate. Commissioner Foslin believes the Human Services Commission has been a good steward of the City of Kent funds for human services and he would like the Council to consider the recommended 1 percent funding base. John Pardo is one of the newest members of the Human Services Commission. The Commissioners have excellent backgrounds in human services and are constantly aware of what image they are projecting for the City of Kent in the human services arena. Commission Vice Chairwoman Moschel added that the Commissioners take a great deal of responsibility and pride in their work; Commissioner Foslin stated further that their work is done with a lot of seriousness. In response to Chairwoman Woods, the Commissioners confirmed that their rigorous examination of the applications for funding would not be compromised by establishing a 1 percent funding base. Applications would be reviewed keeping in mind the criteria for funding. In addition, having the funds available does not necessitate spending all of the funds should some applications be deemed unacceptable for funding. Councilman Dowell questioned using 1 percent of the previous year' s General Fund budget to determine the following year' s funding level. What if there was a greater need than 1 percent? What if emergencies arose? What if the following year's budget was lean and human services ended up being 2 percent of the budget? Should the Council be considering a similar method of funding for all other departments, i.e. , basing the following year's budget on a percentage of the previous year' s budget? What happened to per capita funding? Commission Vice Chairwoman Moschel stated that per capita funding had been considered. However, as the City growth leveled out, a lid would be placed on human services funding. In addition, per capita funding does not take into consideration the level of revenue being brought in by the City of Kent. Acting City Administrator Harris stated that the Human Services Commission is not dealing with staff and the need for maintenance of equipment, etc. ; therefore, their funding needs are different from other departments. Providing a funding base of 1 percent of the General Fund budget would provide stability and predictability in addressing a host of human services problems in the community. Discussion occurred on the level of funding from Kent and from other 2 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1989 communities. Chairwoman Woods asked that this item be placed on both the Planning Committee and City Council agendas for March 7, 1989. AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEMO PROJECT - RESOLUTION The draft resolution which was in the agenda packet states that the Planning, Public Works and Fire Departments will work with HUD and the developer to explore the potential for Kent's participation in the Affordable Housing Demonstration Project. In addition, it directs the City Attorney to work with the departments and HUD to explore the legal appropriateness of waiving or modifying local ordinances and codes. The resolution basically speaks to a commitment of a working relationship to explore the potential for this project. Bob Stettner of HUD confirmed the resolution was representative of HUD's objective, which is to have the policy-making body enter into a working relationship with HUD to seek ways to establish affordable housing. Fire Marshal Webb confirmed that the resolution is acceptable to the Fire Department. In response to Councilman Dowell, Mr. Stettner stated that HUD will screen the project from an engineering, architectural and cost perspective to ensure the proposal is reasonable. Then HUD will set a time to meet with staff to present the proposal and develop an approach which is acceptable to the City of Kent. The long-range goal is to make permanent and open to all developers any regulatory reform which is acceptable for this project. The normal development time is seven months. Mr. Stettner stated the project will take probably three additional meetings with staff to explore whether it is an acceptable concept; then it will proceed as a normal development project. Councilman Dowell stated he cannot support the resolution for two reasons: 1) time involved for staff, and 2) the resolution gives a signal that the Council is in favor of the project. Chairwoman Woods wants this item placed on the Planning Committee meeting of March 7 for a vote and placed also on the City Council agenda of that same date (under Other Business) . HOUSING COMMITTEES WORK PROGRAM Fred Satterstrom stated staff had considered three alternatives for completing the work program for the Mayor's committees on housing: 1) using consultants for the entire program, 2) hiring additional staff to complete the entire program in-house and successively, not concurrently, and 3) using a combination of consultant and in-house staff to complete the projects concurrently. Staff recommends alternative 3 and suggests using a consultant to conduct the needs analysis and hiring permanent staff to complete the other tasks related to special populations, group homes and incentives for single-family housing. Staff desires to hire a permanent staff person not 3 ............... CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1989 only because it is difficult to recruit for and keep a temporary person but also because of the work overload in other areas of the department, particularly long-range planning. Staff is requesting $56, 000, which reflects projected one-year costs for a staff person as well as consultant fees. Councilman Dowell recommended the Committee approve a fourth alternative, i.e. , have the Mayor re-establish priorities within the Planning Department' s work program in order to accommodate this additional work program without expending additional dollars. Mr. Satterstrom stated he had reviewed with the Mayor some of the priorities in the Planning Department work program and there were no projects the Mayor felt were suitable to put on hold. In addition, the department is looking at demands from SEPA and other areas. The Planning Department had requested some additional staff (1/2 time) for 1989 and it was not funded. After seeing the Council's target issues, there appeared to be even more work to be done than was anticipated. Chairwoman Woods stated it becomes a problem when the budget is passed first, then the Council establishes target issues to be addressed that same year. Assistant City Administrator Hansen suggested that the City Council could establish target issues in April of each year which is before the budget process begins. Discussion occurred on the level of building activity in 1988 and 1989 and what that means for the Planning Department. Acting City Administrator Harris stated that if, at the Committee's suggestion, the Mayor reviewed the Planning Department's work program, he doubted there would be any project the Mayor would wish to defer. Chairwoman Woods stated she is in favor of recommending the additional funds for completing the work program for the Mayor' s committees on housing and Councilman Dowell is in disagreement; she asked Mr. Satterstrom to poll Councilman Johnson before tonight's City Council meeting to obtain a direction on this issue. PONNSON HOUSE This item was added to the agenda. Dan Stroh stated the Ponnson House is located at the corner of Alder and Central and is identified on both the county and city inventories as an historical structure. Mr. Stroh distributed a memo outlining alternatives for preserving this structure. Shaughnessy Movers in Auburn reviewed the feasibility of moving the structure and determined it could be moved but not without a great deal of difficulty. Cost estimates are $20, 000 to move the structure across the street, $8 , 000 to $10,000 to reconstruct the basement and foundation, $8, 000 to $12 , 000 to bring the building up to Code Enforcement Division standards (cost depends on whether it is renovated for commercial or residential use) , and $10, 000 in deferred maintenance costs and adaptive reuse. Total costs of moving the structure are $46, 000 to $52 , 000 plus the cost of the new site. The City of 4 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1989 Kent does own property next door. Relocating the structure is one option. From an historical preservation standpoint, having the structure remain on its original site is preferable. Two options are available in that regard: 1) purchase the property by cash, or 2) acquire the property via a transfer of land of similar value. Discussion occurred on the options. Chairwoman Woods asked Linda VanNest and Planning Department staff to look into proposing an option to the owner to allow more time to consider the options. She further requested that staff determine the owner's interest in a transfer of land, the market value of the property and house, and the status of the City property next door. Acting City Administrator Harris stated the City needs to obtain additional historical information on the Ponnson House, e.g. , who built it, what it was used for, etc. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 5: 15 PM. 5 KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT MARCH 1, 1989 MEMO TO: JUDY WOODS, CHAIR; AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL'S PLANNING COMMITTEE FROM: LIN BALL, SENIOR PLANNER SUBJECT: FUNDING BASE FOR HUMAN SERVICES This item was discussed at the February 21, 1989 Planning Committee meeting and was continued for further discussion at the March 7th meeting. See attached memo for information pertaining to this item. RECOMMENDATION• This item is before the Planning Committee on March 7th for the Committee to take action and to make a recommendation to the full City Council . It is scheduled to be heard by the City Council on March 7 , 1989 . LB:ca Attachment KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT February 15, 1989 MEMO TO: Judy Woods, Chair; and Members of the Council 's Planning Committee FROM: Lin Ball, Senior Planner SUBJECT: FUNDING BASE FOR HUMAN SERVICES The Human Services Commission and a special subcommittee have been working on establishing a funding base for City of Kent general fund human services which will more adequately address the needs in the community. The Commission has been consistently receiving requests for funding which exceed the money available for human services. The $90, 568 allocated for human services in the general fund in 1988, was only 47% of the requested $191, 734 . The $117 ,750 allocated in the General Fund in 1989, was only 57% of the requested $207 ,758 . The Human Services Commission at its January 26, 1989 meeting voted unanimously to recommend to the City Council the approval of a funding base for human services which is one (1) percent of the General Fund budget. This would be calculated using the current year' s General Fund budget to determine the following year' s funding base for human services. The Commission feels that this figure of 1% of the General Fund will bring the City' s funding for human services more in line with the actual requests received each year. This is based on using the same 12% estimated yearly General Fund budget increase to project the dollar amount of requests for human services funding. The attached table gives a picture of recent trends and projections for human services funding requests. LB:ca Attachment CITY OF KENT HUMAN SERVICES FUNDING Funds Requested Approved Funding % of Request Funded 1988 : $191, 734 $90 , 568 47% 1989 : $207 ,758 $117 ,750 57% Projected Requests - Future years: (Based on 12% increase) 1990: $ 232 , 688 1991: $ 260, 611 Projected funds available/future funding years: 1% of General Fund 1990 : $ 246, 786 1991: $ 276, 400 ,, Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7 , 1989 Category Other Business 1. SUBJECT: VETO OF ORDINANCE 2333 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: On February 21, 1989 the Council adopted Ordinance 2833 , providing for the conditional rezone of the Kent Hill Apartments from single family residential to garden density residential . Mayor Kelleher vetoed the Ordinance on March 2 , 1989 . A copy of his veto message is included in the packet . 3 . EXHIBITS : Veto Message 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds to accept the veto message for the record. Discussion Action FURTHER COUNCIL ACTION: MOTION DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 4B CITY OF � / OFFICE OF THE MAYOR March 3, 1989 �INVICTA To: Jim White, Council President and City Council Members From: Dan Kelleher, Mayor Subject: Veto of Ordinance #2833 Yesterday I vetoed Ordinance #2833 known as the Kent Hill Apartments rezone. If passed, Ordinance #2833 would rezone approximately 3 . 25 acres of single- family zoned land to MR-G (Multifamily residential- Garden density) . Together with adjacent land already zoned multifamily to the west, a total of 80 multifamily units would be authorized by Ordinance #2833 . I do not agree with the elimination of single-family zoning for the purpose of developing multifamily housing. Ordinance #2833 would do just this. I believe, as the City Council stated in Resolution #1123 , that single-family residential use should be promoted. Therefore, reclassifying such lands to multifamily zoning is inconsistent with established City policy. Proponents of Ordinance #2833 argue that the rezone will merely maintain the existing permitted density. I do not support this strategy on the East Hill. Instead, I support density reductions on East Hill. The goals and policies of the proposed Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan recommend limits on multifamily development on East Hill. The following policy statements relate to new residential development on the East Hill: Goal 2, Objective 2 Policy 3 . Protect existing single-family neighborhoods from adverse impacts of new development. Policy 5. Limit opportunities for multifamily development. The Housing Advisory Committee and Planning Commission have both endorsed this growth policy. The Housing Element has also received preliminary approval by the City Council at its February 21, 1989 meeting. I believe the rezone is contrary to the emerging policy direction of the Housing Element. For the above-stated reasons, I vetoed Ordinance #2833 . cc: City Council Members Jim Harris Fred N. Satterstrom Sandra Driscoll InINNINklm MID Li KA202ZKZn 220 401 AVE. SO.,/ KENT,WASHINGTON 98032 5895 1 TELEPHONE (206)859-3300 Kent City Council Meeting Date March 7 , 1989 Category Bid Opening 1. SUBJECT: REFUSE COMPACTOR BODY 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Bid opening was held February 13, with three bids received. These bids have been reviewed and it is recommended to waive the minor discrepancy relating to the location of the inspection door in the bid submitted by Refuse Equipment and to accept their bid in the amount of $24, 161.43 . 3 . EXHIBITS: Memorandum from Fleet Manager and Director of Public Works and a bid summary 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 6. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds to accept the recommendation to waive the discrepancy relating to the location of the inspection door and accept the bid from Refuse Equipment in the amount of $24 , 161.43 . DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 5A DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS March 2, 1989 TO: MAYOR KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON WICKSTROMO RE: GARBAGE COMPACTOR BODY Bid opening was held February 13 with three bids received. As detailed in the March 1 memorandum from Jack Spencer, Fleet Manger, the two low bids contained several deviations from the bid specifications. All bids have been reviewed and the actual equipment inspected by the Operations Manager and Fleet Manager. It has been determined the bid and equipment specified by Refuse Equipment for the bid amount of $24 , 161.43 is the lowest responsible bid. While Refuse Equipment bid contained one minor deviation from the bid specification relating to the location of the inspection door, it is recommended this one discrepancy be waived and the Refuse Equipment bid accepted. MEMORANDUM DATE: March 1, 1989 TO: Don Wickstrom Director of Public Works FROM: Jack Spencer Fleet Manage t-4-e� SUBJECT: Garbage Compactor Body We have received bids from three companies for the purchase and installation of a 16 yard compactor on our truck. The bids are as follows: INDUSTRIAL REFUSE SALES: New Way Body Compactor $21, 010. 32 Auburn, Washington FRUEHAUF CORPORATION: Wayne Body Compactor $22 , 996. 11 Seattle, Washington REFUSE EQUIPMENT: Heil Body Compactor $24, 161. 43 Seattle, Washington After comparing specifications and inspecting each body offered, I recommend purchasing the Heil body from Refuse Equipment. Even though this is the higher priced body, this unit meets more of the specifications we asked for than either of the other bodies. If we consider ease of loading, (lower hopper height) , protective measures built in to protect the mechanisms, and easy access to inside operating body, I feel this is a better body for our use. These features will insure longer life for the unit, lower maintenance costs, and the lower hopper height will make loading easier and safer for the workers. Parts are stocked in Seattle and are readily available due to the large number of units in service. The budgeted funds for purchase are available from Parks Department capital outlay, Equipment Rental reserve, and salvage value from the sale of the eductor body on the used truck. On the following page you will find the comparisons and the reasons to reject the particular bids. SUBJECT: Garbage Compactor Body Page 2 of 2 New Way Body/Industrial Refuse Bid call for: Body Dimensions: Length: 197" Height: 83" Length: 223" Height: 76" Body Floor: 10 gauge hi-tensile steel 1/4" center 10-gauge sides Literature says 12 gauge Body cross-members 26" centers U-shaped floor w/outriggers & bars Body shall have smooth floor Has a trough down center Loading width shall be 80" Cording width 74" Packing blade/ejector panel Adjust forward, manually (adjusts automatically) The body we inspected shows warping and need of reinforcement. The material used is not heavy enough to withstand the pressure from the compactor. We do not recommend this unit. Wayne Body/Fruehauf Corporation Bid calls for: Bid: Dimensions overall: 16 yard 197" Center 83" height 218 Length 93" Height above frame Body frame materials 10 gauge hi-tensile 11 gauge hi-tensile Loading height Frame height 3 " above Packing cycle 22-26 seconds 29 seconds Packer w/compactor - internal cushion designed Not offered Door at front for access to inside of Access through front box of unit. Heil Body/Refuse Equipment Company Bid asked for: Bid: Inspection door right side Inspection door left side (This change is a safety feature) JA/map C208A03 OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES J February 15, 1989 COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Christi Houser Steve Dowell Paul Mann STAFF PRESENT: Jim Harris Mike Webby C Jim Hansen Tony McCarthy k Norm Angelo Ron Spang Barney Wilson Charlie Lindsey May Miller Patricia Shea Tom Vetsch Teri Mertes Alana McIalwain Sue Viseth Mike Sweeney Ken LaBelle Sheryl Jardine Kathy Britten Cheryl Fraser OTHERS PRESENT: Dick King, Shearson, Lehman & Hutton Don Winters, Police Union Representative APPROVAL OF VOUCHERS All claims for the period ending February 15, 1989 in the amount of $ 1, 261, 813 . 83 were approved for payment. TIME OF FUTURE MEETINGS Councilmember Houser requested all future Operations Committee Meetings be held at 2 : 00 PM instead of at 8: 30 AM on the 1st and 15th of each month to better accommodate Paul Mann' s work schedule. This time change to 2 : 00 PM was unanimously agreed upon by the Committee members. RENEWAL OF ELEVATOR CONTRACT Customer Service Manager Lindsey presented to the Committee a request for authorization to have the Mayor sign a contract extension with A&M Elevators, Inc. This extension is for one year at the current rate of $186. 00 per month plus sales tax. This contract extension was recommended by a vote of 3-0 . 1989 DEBT ISSUANCE PLANS Finance Director McCarthy presented to the Committee the current and projected bond issuance needs of the City. Highlighted were the many projects the City wants to fund in 1989 and 1990 creating potential bond issuances over $10 million each year. This creates an disadvantage to Financial Institutions in purchasing our bonds and therefore we will pay a slightly higher interest rate. The City' s outstanding debt is currently $57 million. The negative of this situation is that we have a high debt per capita rate. Councilmember Dowell voiced a concern of this large per capita debt which could create tough decisions in the future. The positive items are that the City of Kent ratings from Moody' s and Standard and Poor' s were confirmed at Al and A+ respectively. For the LID issues the City is ahead of schedule in the redemption of LID bonds and the LID guarantee fund would be able to pay LID debt for 2 years, if the property owners could not. Very large future LID issues would jeopardize this position so alternative guarantee fund funding options are being explored. PUBLIC TRAINING CENTER/272ND CORRIDOR GO BOND ISSUANCE PURCHASE Finance Director McCarthy pointed out that prior Council resolutions have authorized the issuance of Councilmanic Bonds in 1989 for the completion of the Public Safety Training Center and provide a portion of City funding for the 272/277 Corridor. The amount of the GO Bond Issue Purchase Contract is $980 , 000 for the Public Safety Training Center and $2 , 000 , 000 for the 272/277 Corridor with the remaining $3 , 057 , 000 to be issued in 1990 . This is because our remaining bonding capacity isn't large enough at this time and our financial advisors are advising us to do only one bond issue in 1989 . Since the 272/277 Corridor is the City' s number one priority project deferring the whole bond issue until a later date leaves open the possibility of using the funds for other purposes. In addition interest rates are very favorable at this time. The bonds would be issued at 7 . 14% net interest cost. Finance Director McCarthy requested the Committee recommend the approval of the purchase contract to sell the Councilmanic Bonds to Shearson Lehman & Hutton. This recommendation passed by a vote of 3-0. LID 322 323 & 325 BOND ISSUE PURCHASE CONTRACT Finance Director McCarthy told the Committee that he had negotiated a purchase contract with Shearson Lehman & Hutton to purchase these LID bonds. The LID projects had been for residential sewer improvements and an industrial area street improvement. The projects had been completed and the appropriate prepayment period held. The bond issue amount totals $1, 010, 605.79 . The bonds would be issued at 7 . 76% net interest cost. It is harder to sell the LID bonds because there market consists mainly of the local community so they have a slightly higher interest rate. Finance Director McCarthy requested the Committee recommend the approval of the purchase contract to sell the LID Bonds to Shearson Lehman & Hutton. This recommendation passed by a vote of. 3-0 . POLICE & FIRE DEPARTMENT RECLASSIFICATIONS Assistant City Administrator Webby presented to the Committee the Police and Fire department reclassifications. The Police department reclassification was submitted by the Police department to former City Administrator McFall. McFall recommended the Police Captain and Lieutenant position salary levels be adjusted upwards by one salary range (2 1/2 percent) . In addition McFall recommended that a clothing allowance, not to exceed $400 per year, be provided to both positions (similar to union contract personnel) . To maintain parity between the positions of Police Captain and Assistant Fire Chief it has been recommended that a 2 1/2 percent salary adjustment increase be awarded in the Fire department for the position of Assistant Fire Chief. The primary reason for this request is due to salary compression of police management staff with union positions. Acting City Administrator Harris feels this is a problem and suggested going with McFalls proposal as a starting point and review in 1989 the difference between Union and Non-Union salaries and benefits. Councilmember Mann asked Acting City Administrator Harris to review the policy related to the management staff and bring it to the Committee at a future meeting. Councilmember Houser moved to recommend McFalls original proposal effective January 1, 1989 . It was unanimously recommended by a vote of 3-0 . PARKS DEPARTMENT RECLASSIFICATION Assistant City Administrator Webby outlined that the reorganization of the Parks and Recreation Department impacted three positions creating the following reclassification recommendations . Administrative Secretary I/Range 20C to Administrative Assistant II/Range 27A, Administrative Assistant II/Range 27C to Project Accountant/Range 34A and Office System Tech I/Range 21E to Office System Tech II/Range 24E. There was also a recta sification request in the Cultural Arts Division. Due to ere elocation from Parks Administration to the second floor of C� all the position of Administrative Secretary I/Range 20E was more clearly defined and reports directly to the Superintendent of Cultural Arts creating a request for Administrative Assistant I/Range 22E title. The last two reclassifications were from the Special Populations Resource Center due to changes in responsibility and duties. The requests are Custodian I/Range 15C to Custodian II/Range 20B and Office Tech II/Range 16C to Office Tech III/Range 20B. The funding for the above reclassifications are contained within the 1989 Parks and Recreation budget. The reclassification recommendations were recommended by the Committee at a 3-0 vote and to be implemented effective January 1, 1989 . . 5 TIME WORD PROCESSING POSITION FOR POLICE Mike Sweeney representative for Police Chief Rod Fredericksen introduced increasing the police word processing staff by recruiting 2 full time employees for data entry and typing master case reports. This would be funded by transferring 1. 5 full time positions from Information Services (the positions are vacant) to the Police Department and adding . 5 full time employee to the Police Department. This is requested due to the increase in Kent ' s population, more calls for service, the Police Department anticipating the addition of 7 police officers and the Department being open 24 hours per day, seven days a week. The initial recruitment process was to hire the positions as Non- Union and this was recommended by the Public Safety Committee. Then at the Operations Committee Meeting there was controversy as to whether the word processing positions should be Union or Non- Union by Union representative Don Winters. He gave the Unions position as leaving the word processing positions in Information Services until PERC can rule on the issue or reclassify the positions as records specialist instead of records technicians and hire them as Union employees. Councilmember Houser requested the postponement of this issue until the next Operations Committee Meeting on March 1, 1989 . At that meeting Councilmember Bernie Biteman, whom is on the Public Safety Committee (the two Committees will vote separately at this meeting) and Police Chief Fredericksen will be able to attend. Assistant City Administrator Webby will stop recruitment for these 2 positions until that time. WARD SYSTEM FOR COUNCIL DISTRICTING The Ward System discussion was postponed until the March 1, 1989 Operations Committee Meeting because concerned citizen Jim Flick was not able to attend. MARIE JENSEN CITY CLERK KENT CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE February 21, 1989 4 : 00 PM Committee Members Present Planning Staff Present Judy Woods, Chair Charlene Anderson Steve Dowell Lin Ball Kathy McClung city Administration Fred Satterstrom Dan Stroh Jim Harris, Acting City Administrator Jim Hansen Other City Staff Others Present Norm Angelo Carolyn Lake Charles Aweeka John Marchione Dick Foslin Larry Webb Dee Moschel John Pardo Robert Stettner Linda VanNest FUNDING BASE - HUMAN SERVICES Chairwoman Woods stated that presentations would be heard on this item but the Committee would not take action at this meeting. Lin Ball reminded the Committee that at a City Council workshop last spring, the Human Services Commission had talked about looking at ways to establish a predictable base of funding of human services in order to more adequately address the needs of the community. In the agenda packet was a table showing recent trends and projections of human service funding requests and dollars available. The Human Services Commission is recommending a funding base of 1 percent of the General Fund budget. Dee Moschel, Vice Chairwoman of the Human Services Commission, stated that at their retreat last Friday, the Commissioners were made more aware of the local and regional arena of human services. There have been profound changes in the economy and social structure nationwide which make it difficult for people to have quality medical care, decent homes and a decent standard of living. At a Chamber of Commerce meeting last week, Dr. George Daniel, Superintendent of the Kent School District, stated that one-third of the kindergarten entrants are living at poverty level. Two years ago, that figure was 25%. The new administration in Washington, D.C. is continuing to look to the state and local government to take responsibility for funding human services. Kent is a leader in the area of human services. Because of the City of Kent's funding of a particular agency last year, that agency was able to generate additional dollars from the State of Washington. It is expected that by establishing a 1 percent funding base, applications for "" funding will increase. However, this stable funding base will allow support CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1989 of human services to be realistic and forward-looking. Human Services Commissioner Dick Foslin stated that during the last two years the Commission has gained a strong feeling for how human services should be funded. The Commission and the City of Kent are innovative, proactive and are leaders in King County and perhaps even the state for support of human services. By continuing to move forward in this arena, the City of Kent can make an impact that citizens will appreciate. Commissioner Foslin believes the Human Services Commission has been a good steward of the City of Kent funds for human services and he would like the Council to consider the recommended 1 percent funding base. John Pardo is one of the newest members of the Human Services Commission. The Commissioners have excellent backgrounds in human services and are constantly aware of what image they are projecting for the City of Kent in the human services arena. Commission Vice Chairwoman Moschel added that the Commissioners take a great deal of responsibility and pride in their work; Commissioner Foslin stated further that their work is done with a lot of seriousness. In response to Chairwoman Woods, the Commissioners confirmed that their rigorous examination of the applications for funding would not be compromised by establishing a 1 percent funding base. Applications would be reviewed keeping in mind the criteria for funding. In addition, having the funds available does not necessitate spending all of the funds should some applications be deemed unacceptable for funding. Councilman Dowell questioned using 1 percent of the previous year's General Fund budget to determine the following year' s funding level. What if there was a greater need than 1 percent? What if emergencies arose? What if the following year's budget was lean and human services ended up being 2 percent of the budget? Should the Council be considering a similar method of funding for all other departments, i.e. , basing the following year' s budget on a percentage of the previous year' s budget? What happened to per capita funding? Commission Vice Chairwoman Moschel stated that per capita funding had been considered. However, as the City growth leveled out, a lid would be placed on human services funding. In addition, per capita funding does not take into consideration the level of revenue being brought in by the City of Kent. Acting City Administrator Harris stated that the Human services Commission is not dealing with staff and the need for maintenance of equipment, etc. ; therefore, their funding needs are different from other departments. Providing a funding base of 1 percent of the General Fund budget would provide stability and predictability in addressing a host of human services problems in the community. Discussion occurred on the level of funding from Kent and from other 2 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1989 communities. Chairwoman Woods asked that this item be placed on both the Planning Committee and City Council agendas for March 7, 1989. AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEMO PROJECT - RESOLUTION The draft resolution which was in the agenda packet states that the Planning, Public Works and Fire Departments will work with HUD and the developer to explore the potential for Kent' s participation in the Affordable Housing Demonstration Project. In addition, it directs the City Attorney to work with the departments and HUD to explore the legal appropriateness of waiving or modifying local ordinances and codes. The resolution basically speaks to a commitment of a working relationship to explore the potential for this project. Bob Stettner of HUD confirmed the resolution was representative of HUD's objective, which is to have the policy-making body enter into a working relationship with HUD to seek ways to establish affordable housing. Fire Marshal Webb confirmed that the resolution is acceptable to the Fire Department. In response to Councilman Dowell, Mr. Stettner stated that HUD will screen the project from an engineering, architectural and cost perspective to ensure the proposal is reasonable. Then HUD will set a time to meet with staff to present the proposal and develop an approach which is acceptable to the City of Kent. The long-range goal is to make permanent and open to all developers any regulatory reform which is acceptable for this project. The normal development time is seven months. Mr. Stettner stated the project will take probably three additional meetings with staff to explore whether it is an acceptable concept; then it will proceed as a normal development project. Councilman Dowell stated he cannot support the resolution for two reasons: 1) time involved for staff, and 2) the resolution gives a signal that the Council is in favor of the project. Chairwoman Woods wants this item placed on the Planning Committee meeting of March 7 for a vote and placed also on the City Council agenda of that same date (under Other Business) . HOUSING COMMITTEES WORK PROGRAM Fred Satterstrom stated staff had considered three alternatives for completing the work program for the Mayor's committees on housing: 1) using consultants for the entire program, 2) hiring additional staff to complete the entire program in-house and successively, not concurrently, and 3) using a combination of consultant and in-house staff to complete the projects concurrently. Staff recommends alternative 3 and suggests using a consultant to conduct the needs analysis and hiring permanent staff to complete the other tasks related to special populations, group homes and incentives for single-family housing. Staff desires to hire a permanent staff person not 3 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1989 only because it is difficult to recruit for and keep a temporary person but also because of the work overload in other areas of the department, particularly long-range planning. Staff is requesting $56, 000, which reflects projected one-year costs for a staff person as well as consultant fees. Councilman Dowell recommended the Committee approve a fourth alternative, i.e. , have the Mayor re-establish priorities within the Planning Department' s work program in order to accommodate this additional work program without expending additional dollars. Mr. Satterstrom stated he had reviewed with the Mayor some of the priorities in the Planning Department work program and there were no projects the Mayor felt were suitable to put on hold. In addition, the department is looking at demands from SEPA and other areas. The Planning Department had requested some additional staff (1/2 time) for 1989 and it was not funded. After seeing the Council 's target issues, there appeared to be even more work to be done than was anticipated. Chairwoman Woods stated it becomes a problem when the budget is passed first, then the Council establishes target issues to be addressed that same year. Assistant City Administrator Hansen suggested that the City Council could establish target issues in April of each year which is before the budget process begins. Discussion occurred on the level of building activity in 1988 and 1989 and what that means for the Planning Department. Acting City Administrator Harris stated that if, at the Committee's suggestion, the Mayor reviewed the Planning Department's work program, he doubted there would be any project the Mayor would wish to defer. Chairwoman Woods stated she is in favor of recommending the additional funds for completing the work program for the Mayor' s committees on housing and Councilman Dowell is in disagreement; she asked Mr. Satterstrom to poll Councilman Johnson before tonight' s City. Council meeting to obtain a direction on this issue. PONNSON HOUSE This item was added to the agenda. Dan Stroh stated the Ponnson House is located at the corner of Alder and Central and is identified on both the county and city inventories as an historical structure. Mr. Stroh distributed a memo outlining alternatives for preserving this structure. Shaughnessy Movers in Auburn reviewed the feasibility of moving the structure and determined it could be moved but not without a great deal of difficulty. Cost estimates are $20,000 to move the structure across the street, $8, 000 to $10, 000 to reconstruct the basement and foundation, $8, 000 to $12, 000 to bring the building up to Code Enforcement Division standards (cost depends on whether it is renovated for commercial or residential use) , and $10, 000 in deferred maintenance costs and adaptive reuse. Total costs of moving the structure are $46, 000 to $52, 000 plus the cost of the new site. The City of 4 CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING OF FEBRUARY 21, 1989 Kent does own property next door. Relocating the structure is one option. From an historical preservation standpoint, having the structure remain on its original site is preferable. Two options are available in that regard: 1) purchase the property by cash, or 2) acquire the property via a transfer of land of similar value. Discussion occurred on the options. Chairwoman Woods asked Linda VanNest and Planning Department staff to look into proposing an option to the owner to allow more time to consider the options. She further requested that staff determine the owner's interest in a transfer of land, the market value of the property and house, and the status of the City property next door. Acting City Administrator Harris stated the City needs to obtain additional historical information on the Ponnson House, e.g. , who built it, what it was used for, etc. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 5: 15 PM. 5 PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 28, 1989 PRESENT: Berne Biteman Martin Nizlek Judy Woods Norm Angelo Don Wickstrom Christine Lucas Sandra Driscoll Gary Ewing Bill Williamson Steve Caputo Jim Hansen Dee Moschel Recycling Mrs. Lucas stated she was present to request an interim solution for some way to handle the excess recyclables until Council makes a determination on increasing the number of pickups. She commented she felt that she and others will eventually start putting the recyclable material in with the other garbage, thereby defeating the purpose of the program, if something can't be done. She commented she is willing to pay extra if necessary for an extra pickup. Wickstrom stated he has asked Kent Disposal to provide cost estimates to provide an additional pickup. Those figures have not been made available as yet. Steve Caputo volunteered to provide a second toter for Mrs. Lucas as an interim measure. Woods asked how soon the City could move toward a second pickup. Wickstrom replied as soon as he receives the cost estimates he would be able to make some recommendations to the Committee. Biteman inquired if there were anything that could be done at this stage. Driscoll stated that until the contract is renegotiated, legally there is no authority to start anything. It was determined that it is the Committee's wish to proceed as quickly as possible on this matter and that some recommendations should be brought back before them at their next meeting. Mrs. Moschel asked when the remaining toters would be distributed. Caputo indicated that all the toters should be distributed by the end of March. Downtown Parking Mrs. Moschel reviewed the status of the downtown parking study by KDA. She indicated that emphasis has been placed on the long term problems. Three meetings have been held to date and it has been determined that a block by block inventory of the current available parking and parking needs, both public and private, should be done. In addition, it is requested the business license application be modified to request this type of information so that it can be updated annually. Marty Nizlek indicated a draft of the survey Public Works Committee February 28 , 1989 Page 2 form has been prepared. Mrs. Moschel requested assistance in disseminating the survey and processing the data. Mrs. Moschel clarified the area involved would be the new Downtown Planning area which is SR 167 to the park and Willis to James. Nizlek suggested we disseminate the survey through the mail . Collection of the data can be done by existing staff but may be slower than optimal due to the existing workload. Biteman expressed concerns about the response rate if the survey is mailed and suggested we include a self addressed, stamped envelope with the survey. Mrs Justus' Concerns - 240th and 100th Avenue S.E; 240th and 102nd Avenue S.E. and 240th and Benson Wickstrom explained that all the data had not been developed as yet. However, a preliminary design for a caution sign proposed to be installed at 240th and Benson was available for the Committee 's review. As to the concerns about the other intersections, Nizlek commented he has also had two other requests from businesses in the area to look into it. Biteman requested the design for the caution sign be shown to about 10 motorists to determine how they will interpret the meaning of the sign. Woods asked that Mrs. Justus be informed of all the findings prior to the next Committee meeting. Charge In Lieu of Assessment - 98th Avenue/S.E. 236th Water Main Wickstrom explained that in conjunction with the takeover of the East Hill Community Well we were to replace the existing water mains to bring them up to Kent standards and transfer the existing East Hill Community Well customers to the new main. There are some properties which front on the main which weren't East Hill Community Well customers and were on private wells. These properties are having problems with the wells and have requested to connect to our main. The cost to the City for construction of the main was approximately $52 per foot. To receive partial reimbursement for this construction cost, Wickstrom recommended establishing a charge in lieu of assessment of approximately $26. 06 per front foot for those properties which were not previously East Hill Community Well Customers and who connect to the main. Additionally, Wickstrom continued, some of the property owners may be requesting a payment plan for the assessment. Woods moved to accept the recommendation. The Committee unanimously approved. Reith Road Improvements - 38th Avenue to Military Road Wickstrom clarified this item was referred to the Committee from Public Works Committee February 28, 1989 Page 3 the Council to determine the costs of a sidewalk from 38th Avenue to Military Road. Wickstrom indicated staff has not been able to complete the estimate and this will be brought back to the next Committee meeting. Biteman inquired about the other improvements on Reith Road and 253rd. Wickstrom responded those improvements are being done. Weather has delayed some of the activity on this project. Tacoma Green River Pipeline #5 Wickstrom explained that King County has completed its review of the EIS for construction of the Tacoma Green River Pipeline #5 project. Tacoma apparently has settled the appeals to the project. Since this procedure has taken so long, Tacoma is requesting the Regional Water Association provide a letter of continuing support for the project. As a member of RWA, Kent is a contractee of Tacoma for the water supply and it is reflected as a key element in our Comprehensive Water Plan; therefore, he would recommend supporting this request. The Committee unanimously agreed. Biteman mentioned purification needed at the impoundment reservoir. Wickstrom replied that it is part of our comprehensive plan. Transfer of Funds - Green River Bridge Replacement 72nd Avenue Acquisition Wickstrom stated this was referred from Council back to the Committee due to concern over reallocating funds from the Reith Road Improvement project. In retrospect, Wickstrom added, he would recommend deleting the suggested reallocation of funds from the Corridor Feasibility Study as well as these funds will be needed for Kents participation in the Valley Transportation Action Plan and its plan to hire a financial consultant advisor. Deleting these two sources would reduce the transfer to the Green River Bridge project. Biteman requested clarification of the item on the sidewalks. Wickstrom explained that was the fund allocated for evaluating the sidewalks near and around school which we deleted from possible reallocation. The Committee unanimously approved the amended analysis for reallocation of funds to the 72nd Avenue Acquisition and Green River Bridge Replacement projects. Canyon Drive Improvements Jon Johnson had requested this item be tabled until he could be present. Wickstrom suggested the two issues on the Canyon Drive project be separated. One issue is the installation of the jersey barriers. The other is the reinstallation of the pylons and Public Works Committee February 28, 1989 Page 4 reallocating funds for same. Wickstrom continued that the jersey barriers can not be installed until the required right of way is acquired and the roadway is widened. Right of way acquisition is only in the beginning stages. It could take up to four months assuming condemnation action is not required. Condemnation could add another three to twelve months thereto. With such a time lag, replacing the temporary pylons is, thus, important to do now. On a temporary basis, it was proposed to reinstall the pylons and reallocate the $5, 000 from those funding sources identified in the above discussed analysis. The Committee approved the reinstallation of the pylons and the reallocation of the $5, 000 for same. Biteman asked about using a different type of pylon. Nizlek responded that is being done; however, it might be that nothing will stand up well. Installation of the jersey barriers will increase the project costs by about $60, 000. Norm Angelo commented that no matter which solution is determined there will be problems surrounding it. He commented he is working closely with Martin Nizlek to be sure the Fire units can drive over the pylons. He referred to previous calls for response the fire units have had for the apartment units on Canyon in addition to assisting with auto accidents. Jersey barriers will create a longer response time as he will not direct his units to go up the wrong side of the road to respond. The East Hill station will not be staffed with an engine company so the main response will be from Station 71. In addition, it will put added pressure for an engine company at the East Hill station. Biteman expressed an opposition to jersey barriers but recognized what was being attempted. He asked if some time runs could be made to determine what the difference in response times would be. Angelo responded the only meaningful solution would be to staff apparatus on the East Hill. A good response time from the downtown station to the top of East Hill is 6-7 minutes. To go up James Street and come back down the response time increases to 14 minutes. Wickstrom added there may some misconception as to the actual planned location of the jersey barriers and which properties will be affected. This item will be brought back before the Committee at their next meeting. The Committee adjourned to an Executive Session on possible litigation. SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES FUND PROJECT DESCRIPTION AVAILABLE FUNDING 1. 3122 WVH & 180TH PHASE I $48,000 OA .O.nwL ---3133—�H?EWAL- 3. 3135 SR 99 & 252ND $4,871 5. 3160 LID 297 $506 6. 3167 LID 318 - N. CENTRAL $17,106 7. 3170 LID 325 - 76TH AVE. ST. IMPR. $181,000 8. 3183 LID 313 / CBD $65,000 9. 3185 SMITH STREET IMPROVEMENTS $40,000 REIT1 l ROAD 11. 3198 212TH & 42NO ( ORILLIA ROAD) $113 TOTAL AVAILABLE* $458;409- LESS: RESERVE $260,000 BALANCE $198 49 gG,S9 POSSIBLE ADDITIONAL REALLOCATION SOURCES RUBBER RAILWAY CROSSINGS $48;000 260TH AND 104TH SIGNAL $65,000 TOTAL POSSIBLE REALLOCATION SOURCES $1132000 a 0 j596 GRAND TOTAL 09 tJ FOOTNOTE: * SIDEWALK FUND (3133) $75,000 WOULD REQUIRE COUNCIL REALLOCATION OF THEIR COMMITMENT TO SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS # $9,000 AVAILABLE IN THIS FUND PRIOR TO CANYON DRIVE PYLON REALLOCATION v �+ t0 0 V O) tT ? N n •-ti c n: cl S •-• •-•C7 r m to N 'n r') V •V o Nmm z ;a 4P D N to -� co � m orn -iGV-) m o z z o m m � m trl -I c> v c, ,-•S 3r- N Z S m O m V) o r rn z D c') -I-I PO -I D O m - to O G m D vo OZ 33rn m -A-I N m C-) w to A rO to O m . � ---I -�G .C-. ram-, m C3 C-) m \ D x N Z N -I � 3 -I � z Z m SD —I O Z ;a m m to .-• o � O D "NO0O0 -y-I m IV -O mc C) T . � z m > -Di -i z 0-4 yN zn m-I ` O Z c� L') � --I Z Z co (A 3 CD r verr H O ""I 2 0 t0 � Ul m m z c to o m r m z -I to to o ►-• r D C m m z C-) z o -I c-) m -n 3 C) > z m m C) H m -ZI v -i o c z z N v z z rn m w C C ad► to f�-+ {A an pp cn m W Z Z tT m ul N H H M/ W ,—• 7C O O Cl V P Ul V7 Co C W O O O O O W O O O O Z n 0 E E O O O 0 O O O O -I --i to z z o 0 Cl to o 0 0 o my D G A r D w r m -n ca Z v z c� Az D m r �-+ z >z co .� m r z m C) CA SO I poo N wyL bn t S ap ...1 00