HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 12/04/1990 .x
b: X:
Xw:
:X
City of Kent �}� �-
City Council Meeting .:X
�e�
Agenda
��s
ffia
e�s
�a
-
Mayor Dan Kelleher
Council Members
Judy Woods, President
Leona Orr Steve Dowell
Christi Houser Jon Johnson
Paul Mann Jim White
xx-
::'X.:. December 4, 1990
X. ...
Office of the City Clerk
:IX.::
-:2
_ ...........
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
December 4, 1990
Summary Agenda
City of Kent Council Chambers
Office of the City Clerk 7: 00 p.m.
NOTE: An explanation of the agenda format is given on the
back of this page.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
1. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Employee of the Month
Crime Prevention Award
2 . PUBLIC HEARINGS
Street Vacation - Pacific Ventures
3 . CONSENT CALENDAR
,-,. Minutes
---B:' Bills
,,e-.-" Joint Reservoir Equity Purchase
Valley Transportation Benefit District
E. Noise Control Ordinance .--�J-b q
-F 1991 Property Tax Ordinancer.�L-/4
Set Hearing Date for Zoning Group Homes
_Ii Library Services
4 . OTHER BUSINESS
--•-A Cedar Meadows Preliminary Plat
Parkside Vacation of Walkway Request
--e: Severe Weather Shelter for Homeless - Resolution
--B 1990 Budget Adjustment Ordinance
-E: Management Study Consultant Selection'
5. BIDS
6. CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
REPORTS
8. EXECUTIVE SESSION, IF NECESSARY
9. 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
CO
B. Crime Prevention Award
JKent City Council Meeting
Date December 4 . 1990
( Category Public Hearings
f v:
NJ S STREET VACATION STV-90-5
1. SUBJECT. PACIFIC VENTURE
2. S RY STATEMENT: A public hearing has been set for this
date on the application of Pacific Ventures Inc. to vacate a
portion of S. 212th Street (STV-90-5) as mentioned in Resolution
1264 as shown on accompanying map. This is located at the
8700 block of S. 212th Street.
3 . EXHIBITS: Application, staff report with map
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Staff
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO—X— YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $._
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
OPEN HEARING:
PUBLIC INPUT•
CLOSE HEARING:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
to approve/disapprove/modify the Planning Department's
recommendation of approval with three conditions on an
application to vacate a portion of S. 212th Street No. STV-90-5
and direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance
upon receipt of compensation.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 2A
MAIL TO: APPLICANT:
Gerald B, McCaughan Name: PACIFIC VENTURES, INC.
CITY OF KENT ,
220 So. 4th Ave. Address: P. 0. Box 3407
Kent, WA 98032
Bellevue , Washington 98009
Phone: (206) 455-5506
STREET AND/Oft ALLEY VACATION'APPLICATION AND PETITION
Dear Mayor and Kent City Council :
We, the undersigned abutting property owners hereby respectfully request that
-certain part of So. 212th hereby be vacated. .,General Location)
Legal Description
Exhibit "A" attached
BR1EF•STATEMENT WHY VACATION IS BEING SOUGHT
The portion of South 212th Street described is not needed for th'e
public roadway system.
Vacation would enhance the ingress and egress of Pacific Ventures ,
Iic. 's adjacent property.
Sufficient proof; copy of deed contract etc. supported by King County
Tax Rolls shall be submitted for verification of signatures. Without
these a "CURRENT" title report shall be required. When Corporations,.
Partnerships etc. are being signed for, then proof of individual's
authority to sign for same shall also be submitted.
Attach a color coded map of a scale of not less than 1" n 200' of the area
sought for vacation. (NOTE) I-lap must correspond with legal description.
ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS TAX LOT f
SIGNATURES AND ADDRESSES LOT, BLOCK 6 PLAT/SEC. TWN. RG
NOV - 7 W
PLANNING DEMIMC:•
CITY OF XFNJ t
PACIF NT RESj Lot 7 , Block 9102
By A Section 7 T22N R5E W.M.
is ar Boyer King County,
Secretary Washington
$150.00 Fee Paid Treasurer's Receip .9
Appraisal Fee Paid Treasurer's "{�sK. °
UAL-
1*udl WVQ PaidtW
Treasurer's n p�,l���s
Dowd Aeeepeed bateTrade Accepted Accepted Date TREASURY
i
1 ,
I ..
omm
Z c r'an
N _ Z1-4
L n O Z N m m C-O � r G N �Z 1
p� o n cT D Z Dm own :.
o� I G))-U mr-n M ?:ate
,., .. pap m;7 m -u -I O (1) ro m
DI � > Z my a m _Z ?a I.
O zm3 X u>m azo
m C- pA-A C mmz � .
O -C m p W 0 m r
a m
i I < D.m m m c: I
mTX Z �m I
m � � � o� 767.62:
mD -n�
i ��1 (D 3m mz N mz-Ai V; .
z <ms- o� m In in
O~ p
> O �
= n y m (A i
Z o O
y SI TH AYE.S. �W�
p { WEST LINE \
NWI/� SECTION 7 I
r
< < C
mo
n < <
{p^0n O f 50' 'pip
o Z 5�10u
O Z z e) T !L STEJfo'Y� •1'
' - r%r
IV
y
D �I
iiZ m
0
"gymN
n•� >[1N <cN m -
D z §y 2yN reR"i l0 2
•c
S T
m
{ D ss.00 - s0.00 I m
O I-
_ o w—? -'
1'I3 •Eu'r' -' M i•Y
00 m ro N ..,4
_ c a•oo K I .I M f
f
3 zay. 5 S
�i Z 3 -Ipm nA p_y f
:^p . Xf 30. " z-<-1 m
pc mZr. ay. S Z n
I O 16 ii= �3 F n;Kz ,
H 1;
c'Ds zzo
mA mMm -T tn'V ?20 olto jllr�
AAA O' O. I NQN
A-1
-gym mN_ Z +'.gym A<A
.. y—I-n p m a 1^z
n -1 m
< CA -1 -4 m
m o I
r > t7� z 1
- - n i
> Z I
= o 4) O a
m C7 N
i m 2 N
."".. i H a - O I
e = _ �. N m I
p In
T^ -1 f C ram-
Z
arr of Tind
CITY OF KENT
cTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
MEMORANDUM
November 28, 1990
MEMO TO: Mayor Dan Kelleher and City Council Members
FROM: James P. Harris, Planning Director
SUBJECT: Report and Recommendation on an application to
vacate a portion of S. 212th Street #STV-90-5
Recommendation: APPROVAL WITH
CONDITIONS
I. Name of Applicant
Pacific Ventures, Inc.
P. O. Box 3407
Bellevue, WA. 98009
II. Reason for Requesting Vacation
The applicant states, "The portion of South 212th Street
described is not needed for the public roadway system.
Vacation would enhance .the ingress and egress of Pacific
Ventures, Inc. 's adjacent property. "
III. History
An identical application to vacate the very same portion of
S. 212th Street was filed in 1987 (Resolution 1143) and was
denied by the City Council on October 6, 1987 . Prior to that
action, the Council had approved a vacation application for
the westerly one half of this area of S. 212th Street
(Ordinance 2694) This application was made by
LeRoy A. Bowen. Subsequent to that vacation the Bowen
Business Center placed required offstreet parking and
landscaping in the vacated area. Ingress and egress to both
the Bowen Center and the Pacific Ventures, Inc. property now
goes over the area Pacific Ventures, Inc. wants to vacate. In
order to prevent blockage of access to the Bowen Center at
this point an easement over the proposed vacation area would
be necessary.
Council Members
Mayor Dan Kelleher and City application to
MEMO CT Report and Recommendation on a PP
SUBJECT: vacate a portion of S. 212th Street #STV-90-5 F
Page 2
IV, Staff Recommendation departments and
After reviewing comments from the following
agencies:
Public Works
Fire
Police
U S West Communications Department
and conducting our own review, the Planning
request to vacate a portion of South 212th
on the
recommends that the conditions:
Street as mentioned
APPRoVED in l with the following own
accompanying
City of Kent for the full appraised value
1. Compensate the
thereof.
Construct the curb along S. 212th Street so that it
2. section.
conforms to a. City of Kent standard driveway
rights over, upon and under the area
and
3 , Retain easemsed ent
rlg vacation for utility
vehicular/pedestrian ingress and egress
otherspurposes,
including the right to grant said rig
147
Legal Description for Portion of So. 212th Street Vacation
That portion of Government Lot 2, Section 7, Township 22 North,
Range 5 East,W.M. in King County, Washington lying within that
portion of land deeded to the City .of Kent recorded in instrument under
King County Recording No. ` 7111230435'described as follows:
Commencing at the northwest corner of said Government Lot 2; thence
N 89056' 10" E along the north line of said Government Lot 2, a distance
of 536.82 feet; thence S 00051' 16" W, a distance of 50.00 feet to a
point on the north line of vacated South 212th Street as described in
City of Kent Street Vacation Ordinance No. 2694; thence N 89056'10" E
along said north line, a distance of 3.47 feet to the northeast
corner of said street vacation and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence
N 89056'10" E parallel -to the north line of said Government Lot 2,
a distance of 136.26 feet to an angle point which is 50 feet southerly
from the north line of said Government Lot 2; said point is also
on the south line of,said land deeded to the City of Kent recorded in
instrument under King County Recording No. 7111230435 thence along
said south line the following courses: S 83013'45" W, a distance of
85.59 feet to an angle point which is 60 feet southerly from the north
line of said Government Lot 2; thence S 300241,23" W, a distance of
52.20 feet to an angle point'which is .105 feet southerly from the
north line of said Government Lot 2; thence S 89056'10" W parallel
to said north line, a distance of 26.05 feet to a point on the east
- line of said vacated street per City of Kent Ordiance No. 2694;
thence N 01°15' 10" E along said east line, a distance of 55.00 feet
to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING and containing 2,683 square-feet more
or less.
The undersigned, Jeffrey R. Harstad, hereby certifies that the petition
to vacate a portion of South 212th Street herein described has been
signed by the owners of more than two-thirds (213) of the property
abutting upon the part of such street sought to be vacated.
/? A,'" 667U
ffrey Harstad Date
n. Hke
z
}y j
Ito,
,r� if far
iP ' tlis
N
a
w
Yf
w
f3• 6�a
R•
C
~ N _
OZ.
W a Q
Z 200
Wow
La
P
f y
CONSENT CALENDAR
3. City Council Actionr ff,,
Councilmember � '��1.°� moves,,.--,Councilmember
seconds that Consent Calendar Ite* A through
�jHbe ap roved.
Discussion '\
-----------
Action �1 ----
vJ c)C) Q 5 M 0 0 E D -f—Kca1 C �Lo ca d 9
NPr
W(�,�
c� a^�
n�r 3A.
Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of
November 20, 1990.
3B. Approval of Bills.
Approval of payment of the bills received through December 4,
1990 after auditing by the Operations Committee at its meeting
at 4:30 p.m. on December 11, 1990.
Approval of checks issued for vouchers:
i1.11j ,la(490 S77 99 a77,9 �•sl
0l 5 f 1 q 7
I a6'-, O i S
Approval of checks issued for payroll:
Date Check Numbers Amount
11/20/90 144600-145349 $833, 010.26
Council Agenda
Item No. 3 A-B
Kent, Washington
November 20, 1990
Regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at
7:00 p.m. by Mayor Kelleher. Present: Councilmembers Dowell,
Houser, Johnson, Mann, Orr, White and Woods, City Administrator
Chow, City Attorney Lubovich, Planning Director Harris, Public Works
Director Wickstrom, Fire Chief Angelo, Finance Director McCarthy,
Parks Director Wilson, Assistant City Administrator Hansen,
Personnel Director Olson and City Clerk Jensen. Police Chief
Frederiksen was not in attendance. Information Services Director
Spang was on vacation. Approximately 80 people were at the meeting.
PUBLIC National Bible Week, Mayor Kelleher read a
COMMUNICATIONS proclamation declaring the week of November 18 - 25
as the Fiftieth Anniversary of National Bible Week
and urging interested citizens to join in its
observance by reading the Bible.
Recycling Emblem. Mayor Kelleher noted that a
contest was held among City employees to design an
emblem to be used on all informational material
developed by the Solid Waste/Recycling Program. He
announced that the winners of the contest are Dan
Conroy of the Fire Department and Glen Bearson of
Operations, whose designs were merged to produce the
emblem unveiled tonight. Conroy and Bearson were
each awarded a gift certificate from The Keg
Restaurant by Karen Siegel of Public Works
Administration.
Centennial Birthday Card. Sally Storey,
representing the Kent Centennial Committee and Kent
"Leo" Midnight Lions, displayed a portion of a
Centennial Birthday Card which has been signed by
people from all over the world, commemorating Kent's
100th Birthday. She noted that the total card is
10, 353 feet (1.96 miles) in length and will be
listed in the Guiness Book of World Records.
"Kent - Valley of Opportunity". Mark McKay of the
Chamber of Commerce introduced Florence K. Lentz,
who has written a book in honor of the Centennial
entitled "Kent - Valley of Opportunity" . Ms. Lentz
displayed the book and presented a copy to Mayor
Kelleher.
CONSENT MANN MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A through J
CALENDAR be approved. Woods seconded and the motion carried.
November 20, 1990
MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3A)
Approval of Minutes. APPROVAL of the minutes of
the regular Council meeting of November 6, 1990.
HEALTH AND (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3F)
SANITATION Hawkridge. Acceptance of the bill of sale and
warranty agreement submitted by Thomas and Hartrice
Drangsholt for continuous operation and maintenance
of approximately 755 feet of water main extension;
1,633 feet of sanitary sewer extension; 1,040 feet
of street improvements and 1, 184.5 feet of storm
sewer improvement constructed in the vicinity of
Woodland Way and So. 262nd Street for the Hawkridge
Development and release of cash bond after
expiration of the one year maintenance period.
STREETS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3H)
LID 331 - James Street Improvements. Adoption of
Ordinance 2952 confirming the final assessment roll
for LID 331, for which a public hearing was
concluded on November 6, 1990.
TRAFFIC (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4D)
CONTROL Frager Road Guardrail - Transfer of Funds As
recommended by the Public Works Committee and by
IBC, authorization to transfer $35, 000 from the
Asphalt Overlay Fund to the Frager Road Guardrail
Project.
Wickstrom explained that this item has not been
discussed by the Operations Committee, and that time
is of the essence since the bid expires before the
next Council meeting. WHITE MOVED that $35,000 be
transferred from the Asphalt Overlay Fund to the
Frager Road Guardrail Project. Orr seconded and the
motion carried.
(BIDS - ITEM 5A)
Frager Road Guardrail. Bid opening was Nov. 1st
with two bids received. The low bid was submitted
by Peterson Brothers Inc. in the amount of
$68,001.50. Staff recommends that this bid be
accepted. WHITE SO MOVED. Woods seconded and the
motion carried.
SEWERS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3D)
metro Sewer Rate Increase Adoption of Ordinance
2951 increasing the City sewer rates to incorporate
the 1991 Metro Sewer rate increase, as recommended
by the Public Works Committee.
2 -
November 20, 1990
UTILITIES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3E)
Kensington Avenue Storm Project. Accept as
complete the contract with Scoccolo Construction for
the Kensington Avenue storm improvement and release
of retainage after receipt of the necessary state
releases.
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3J)
Laser Direct Contract. Authorization for the
Mayor to sign a contract renewal with Laser Direct
for the service of printing and mailing utility
bills, as recommended by the Operations Committee.
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4C)
Utility Extension Ordinance This meeting will
consider amending Ordinance 2767 and Ordinance 2696
relating to utility extensions, as recommended by
the City Council's Planning Committee. Upon the
Mayor's question, Satterstrom stated that this
ordinance would put a tighter control on density in
unincorporated areas, and that it would require the
Planning Department to ascertain whether the
development is consistent with Kent's land use
planning. White asked whether it is possible for
the Council to consider a policy of not extending
utilities beyond the city limits, and City Attorney
- Lubovich agreed to research the question and report
back to the Council. Wickstrom pointed out that the
city extends only out to approximately 132nd, and
that other water and sewer districts serve beyond
that area. He noted for Dowell that people who live
outside the city boundaries and choose to hook up to
the City's system must sign a no protest to annexa-
tion agreement.
There were no further comments and JOHNSON MOVED to
approve the Planning Committee's recommendation to
revise Ordinance 2767 and 2696 and to adopt
Ordinance 2953 providing for such changes. Houser
seconded and the motion carried.
SURPLUS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3C)
EQUIPMENT Surplus Equipment. Authorization to declare as
surplus, 18 vehicles and offer same for sale at the
state auction on December 1, as recommended by the
Public Works Committee.
HUMAN SERVICES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3I)
CDBG Human Services Funding. Approval of the
Planning Committee's recommendation to allocate an
additional $3, 145 of public (human) services dollars
to the Kent Community Clinic Health Services Project
to support their OB/GYN program.
- 3 -
November 20, 1990
PRELIMINARY (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3G)
PLAT Cedar Meadows NO, SU-90-4. Authorization to set
December 4, 1990 for a public meeting to consider
the Hearing Examiner's recommendation for
conditional approval of an application by J&G
Industry for a 15 lot single-family residential
preliminary subdivision. The property is located on
the west side of 116th Avenue S.E. , approximately
100 feet north of S. 229th Street.
FINAL PLAT (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4A)
Dover Place Final Plat SU-89-2. This meeting will
consider the final plat map for Dover Place Final
Plat SU-89-2. The property is 7.8 acres in size and
is located east of 104th Avenue S.E. and south S.E.
224th.
There were no questions or comments and JOHNSON
MOVED to approve the Staffs approval for Dover
Place Final Plat SU-89-2 with conditions (which was
approved January 2, 1990 by the Council) Woods
seconded and the motion carried.
BUDGET (PUBLIC HEARING - ITEM 2A)
1991 Budget - Ordinance. The 1991 Preliminary
Budget has been distributed to the Council and has
been available to the public since October 16. The -
first public hearing on the 1991 Budget was held on
November 6. Tonight's meeting will be the second
public hearing prior to Council adoption scheduled
for tonight. The items discussed at the Council
Workshop of November 6 are included in the proposed
budget ordinance.
Finance Director McCarthy noted that the total
budget is $64, 262,893, which is up over $9, 000,000
from last year, and that it includes $694, 000 in
adjustments as discussed at the November 6 work-
shop. He noted that the increase of $9, 000,000
covers contractual and inflationary increases such
as labor agreements, insurance, utilities and
personnel. He also stated that funding for
immunizations for Police and funding the Salmon
Enhancement Program for schools are both included in
the proposed ordinance. McCarthy clarified that
purchase of the IOOF building would be a 1990 budget
adjustment and that it is not in the proposed
ordinance for the 1991 budget. McCarthy noted that
the proposed ordinance contains a transfer of
$300,000 from the CIP fund reserve to the general
fund reserve. He noted that another change in the
proposed ordinance is to increase the golf course
revenue estimate by $624, 000 to cover budgeted
- 4 -
November 20, 1990
BUDGET expenditures including $20, 000 for irrigation under
Meeker Street.
The Mayor declared the public hearing open. Raul
Ramos, 25222 38th Avenue South, spoke against the
purchase of the IOOF building, stating that it has
historical value and should not be destroyed. Mark
McKay, President of the Chamber of Commerce,
recommended that the city delay acquisition of the
property until the Council has adopted a specific
plan for the property, and that purchase funds
should be included in the 1991 budget.
There were no further comments and WOODS MOVED to
close the public hearing. White seconded and the
motion carried.
McCarthy reiterated for the Mayor that the 1991
budget does not contain anything on the IOOF hall at
this time. WOODS MOVED for the adoption of
Ordinance 2950 approving the Mayor's 1991 budget
with changes as discussed at the November 6 Council
workshop and confirmed at tonight's meeting. White
seconded. JOHNSON MOVED to amend the budget by
deleting the request to spend an additional $50, 000
from the CIP for the Downtown Mural Program.
White seconded. Johnson explained that the budget
already contains funds for murals, and that other
items have higher priorities. Upon Mann's question,
Johnson noted that the higher priority items are
listed in the CIP requests, and that his first
choice would be to put the money in a reserve fund
in the CIP. McCarthy clarified for White that this
$50,000 for murals has always been in the CIP fund,
and that Johnson is referring to funds previously
appropriated. Woods pointed out that the Council
has discussed the budget many times and that the
Mayor has requested only $98,000 from this
$64,000,000 budget for items which help fulfill the
#2 top priority. She urged the Council to support
the Mayor's request. Orr pointed out that there may
not be $50, 000 in future budgets for mural projects,
and therefore she supports the request. Dowell
noted that this is recommended by the Arts
Commission and that the Council should support it.
The motion to amend the budget to delete the $50, 000
for murals failed, with only Johnson in favor.
Woods' motion to adopt Ordinance 2950 approving the
Mayor's 1991 budget with the changes as noted
carried unanimously.
- 5 -
November 20, 1990
BUDGET (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3B) -
A=roval of Bills. Approval of payment of the
bills received through November 16, 1990 after
auditing by the Operations Committee at its meeting
at 2: 00 p.m. on November 27, 1990.
APPROVAL OF CHECKS ISSUED FOR VOUCHERS:
Date Check Numbers Amount
11/2/90-11/14/90 98317-98349 $ 237, 063. 62
11/15/90 98350-98773 $1,834, 378.95
$2,071,442. 57
,APPROVAL OF CHECKS ISSUED FOR PAYROLL:
Date Check Numbers Amount
11/15/90 143857-144599 $ 845,572 .11
FINANCE (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4B)
1991 Property Tax Levy. Finance Director McCarthy
noted that figures required to compute the 1991
Property Tax Levy have not yet been provided by the
King County Assessor's Office. He also explained
that the deadline for submitting the levy to the
King County Council has been extended to
December 11, 1990. This item will therefore be
heard at the Council meeting of December 4 .
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4F)
ADDED BY COUNCILMEMBER DOWELL.
Budget Transfer. Dowell noted that the Council
has been asked to transfer $2,200 from the
unexpended 1990 City of Kent Arts Commission Budget
to the Cultural Center Study Fund, as unanimously
approved at the October 23, 1990 Commission meeting.
The Cultural Center Study Fund was created to
collect public donations solicited by the City of
Kent Performing Arts Center Task Force for the
purpose of completing a Comprehensive Cultural Plan
and Cultural Center Feasibility Study. DOWELL MOVED
to approve the transfer. White seconded and the
motion carried.
PERSONNEL (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4E)
Department Head Salary Survey. The City retained
the Kenny Consulting Group to conduct a department
head salary survey. Their findings and final report
dated October 1990 was submitted to IPC and
forwarded to Operations Committee for consideration
where it was approved and recommended for adoption. _.
- 6 -
November 20, 1990
PERSONNEL Acceptance and implementation of the report will
establish new and increased salary ranges (not
actual salary levels) for all department heads at
competitive levels according to a market survey.
Barney Wilson, Parks Director, showed charts and
graphs showing the growth of the Parks and
Recreation Department over the years, and objected
to the salary ranges recommended by the consultant.
The current ranges and those proposed are as follows:
pIFpgly RECOMMENDED
Actual 0.825 1.00 1.110
Benchmark Title Level Minimum Midpoint Maximum Sala Level Minimum Control Point Maximum
City Adminlslralor' 1 $4,968 $6,020 $7,072 $5.190 1 $5.462 $6,620 $7,779
City Attorney 2 $3.994 $4.842 $5,889 $5,239 2 $4,430 $5,370 �;6.310_
Public Works Dlr 2 $3,994 $4,842 $5,689 $5.681 2 $4,430 $5.370 $6,310
Police Chief 2 $3,994 $4,042 $6,689 $5,342 2 $4,430 $5,370 $6,310
Fire Chief 2 ,$3.994 $4,842 $5,689 $5,689 2 $4,430 $5,370 $6,310 -
Asst City Administra 3 $3,595 $4,357 $5.118 $4,860 2 $4.430 $5,370 $5,310
Parks$Rec.Director 2 $3,994 $4,842 $5.689 $5,188 3\) $4,220 $5,115 $6.010
Finance Director 3 $3,595 ;4,357 $5,178 $5.118 / $4.220 $5,115 $6,010
Info Services Dir 3 $3,595 $4,357 $5.118 $5,118 14 $3.936 $4.660 $5.464
Planning Director 3 $3,595 $4,357 $5,118 $5,118 14 $3,836 $4,650 S5,464
Personnel Director 3 $3.595 $4.357 $5,118 $3,918 4 C$$3,836 $4.650 55,464
Wilson stated that his service was long, the
department had won awards, and the status of the
department should not be changed from a major
department to a minor one. He noted further that
merit raises for all the other department heads were
4 .3% and his was 2%.
JOHNSON MOVED that the consultants' findings be
accepted with the following modifications: that the
City Administrator be at Level I and all the
department heads be at Level II, with a minimum of
$3836 and a maximum of $6310. White seconded.
Personnel Director Olson clarified that Johnson's
figures cover the minimum of Level IV through the
maximum of Level II. Johnson suggested that the
exact amount of department head's salaries should be
determined by the Mayor and Administrator. Orr
concurred. It was determined that Hansen, Chow and
Wilson met with the consultant and the findings are
shown on the table shown above. Dowell suggested
the order of the levels remain as current, and noted
that the morale of the Parks Department was
suffering. White stated that the department heads
were neither underpaid nor overpaid and that there
must be a limit and it was not the function of the
Council to set actual salaries. Dowell suggested
-7-
November 20, 1990
PERSONNEL that the salary levels be left as is. Upon Mann's
question, Chow determined that three department
heads are currently at the top of their range now
and therefore not at normal market level.
Bill Doolittle spoke from the audience, noting that
Wilson headed an award winning department and his
salary should not be downgraded. Houser noted that
it is impractical to leave the situation as is.
Mann offered a substitute motion: to move the Parks
Director and the Finance Director from Level III to
Level II and those at Level IV to be changed to
Level III. White seconded. Mann clarified that he
was referring to the list as recommended by the
consultant and his motion would provide for Level IV
to be eliminated, and the three Level IV classifica-
tions become Level III, making seven at Level II,
including Parks and Finance.
Johnson noted that department heads could not be
replaced at the lower level salary range and Orr
suggested that new department heads could be
promoted from within. Woods noted that the Council
was uncomfortable in setting salaries and agreed
with White that Kent's salaries were good. She
noted that personnel were efficient and deserving.
Johnson noted that in departments where unions -
exist, department heads are sometimes making less
salary than subordinates.
The vote was taken on whether to substitute Mann's
motion for Johnson's. The motion to substitute
carried with Houser, Johnson and Orr voting against
it.
Mann's motion then passed with Houser, Johnson and
Orr voting against it.
REPORTS Council President. Woods announced that the
Onnual retreat with Lyle Sumek will be held either
on January 11 and 12, 1991, or on February 22 and
23, 1991. She asked the Councilmembers to report
back as to which date is preferred.
Public Works Committee. White announced that at a
Public Works Committee meeting recently, a petition
was submitted containing 430 names regarding the
safety of school children traveling to schools on
James Hill. The citizens ask that the Council
consider a pedestrian overpass. White stated that
staff will look into this and report to Council
within 30 days with a number of alternatives to
consider. WHITE THEN MOVED that the petition and
-8-
November 20, 1990
REPORTS two letters be made a part of the record. Woods
seconded and the motion carried.
Administrative Reports. At the Mayor's request,
Assistant City Administrator Hansen noted that the
article in the newspaper regarding payment of rent
on the Centennial Building was not entirely
correct. He noted that rent was paid on the offices
while utilities for communications and computers
were being installed before the offices were
actually occupied. The date for the start of rent
payments was determined some 18 months ago by
agreement with Sound ventures, as recommended by the
City Attorney.
EXECUTIVE At 9: 15 p.m. , City Administrator Chow announced that
SESSION there would be an executive session of approximately
fifteen minutes to discuss litigation matters.
ADJOURNMENT The meeting reconvened and adjourned at 9:25 p.m.
Marie Je , CMC
City Clerk
Kent City Council Meeting
Date December 4. 1990
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: JOINT RESERVOIR EQUITY PURCHASE
2. S As recommended by the Public Works__-'
ommittee thorizaton for £fie' public Works Diredtor to
transmit the Council concurrence of the letter of understanding
for purchase of Water District 111 Equity in the joint use
reservoir.
3 . EXHIBITS: Public orks Committee material, IBC Fiscal Note
and Operations Committee minutes
4. RECOMMENDED BY:
(Committee, Staff, Ex miner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBIIDGETED FIS PERSONNE IMPACT: NO YES _
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Rec ende Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, ouncilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3C
s�
City of Kent, Washington
Kent Public Works Committee
Date lIZ6190
Category - Consent
1. SUBJECT:
Joint Reservoir Equity Purchase
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT:
Water District ill needs additional storage capacity to meet
its peak summer water needs. Since they are unable to use
their share of the joint use reservoir, they have requested
the City purchase their share thus financially enabling them
to build a new storage reservoir.
The Joint Use Reservoir was constructed in 1978 and financed
jointly by Kent and Water District 111. The City owns 53% of
the tank and shares the maintenance costs with Water District
111.
The District' s share of the tank is 1. 5 million gallons or 43%
of the original total project cost. We have identified the
value of this to be $608,780. 38 in 1990 dollars. Funding for
this purchase has been included in our 1991 Capital
w Improvement budget request. At this time, we are seeking
formal Council concurrence on the letter of understanding
pertaining to this purchase.
3 . EXHIBITS•
Letter from Economic and Engineering Services
Memorandum from Director of Public Works
4 . RECOMMENDED BY:
Don Wickstrom
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT• NO x YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE• Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED• $608, 780. 38 cash or $100, 000 per year
SOURCE OF FUNDS: 1991 Capital Improvement
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
MCCARTHY,TONY / KENT70/FN - HPDesk print.
-----------------------------------------
Subject: JOINT RESERVOIR EQUITY PURCHASE - FISCAL NOTE
Creator: .Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/FN Dated: 11/05/90 at 1557 .
THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS PROPOSING THE PURCHASE OF WATER DISTRICT
111'S SHARE OF THE JOINTLY OWNED WATER RESERVOIR. THE DISTRICT' S SHARE IS
APPRAISED AT APPROXIMATELY $609, 000. THE CITY CURRENTLY HAS $100, 000
BUDGETED IN 1990 AS A DOWN PAYMENT ON THE PURCHASE. THE CITY HAS TWO
OPTIONS: CASHING OUT THE PURCHASE OR PAYING $100, 000 DOWN AND $100, 000
ANNUALLY UNTIL THE CONTRACT IS PAID OFF. THE BORROWING RATE ON THE CONTRACT
WILL BE THE BORROWING RATE OF WATER DISTRICT ill.
THE ATTACHED ANALYSIS SHOWS THE BREAKEVEN INTEREST RATE TO BE 8 . 060. IF
THE CITY PAYS A GREATER INTEREST RATE TO WD ill WE SHOULD DEFINITELY CASH
OUT THE DEAL. IF WE PAY A LOWER INTEREST RATE THEN WE SHOULD LOOK AT OTHER
ISSUES. THESE OTHER ISSUES INCLUDE: THE BORROWING AND ANNUAL BOOKKEEPING COST
ASSOCIATED WITH ESTABLISHING THE CONTRACT AND THE PERCEPTION OF THE IMPACT OF
ADDING CITY DEBT ON TOP OF THE 9/30/90 AMOUNT OF $64, 131,417 WHEN THE CITY HAS
A CASH PORTFOLIO AT 9/30/90 OF $54 , 9171334 OF WHICH $17, 778 , 602 IS IN THE
WATER FUND.
BASED ON THE CITY'S CURRENT DEBT AND CASH POSITION, THE IBC RECOMMENDS A
CASH PAY OUT UNLESS THE INTEREST RATE TO THE DISTRICT FALLS BELOW 7 . 5%, AN
AMOUNT DETERMINED TO OFFSET THE COST OF BOOKKEEPING AND NEGATIVE PERCEPTION.
BASED ON •THIS THE IBC RECOMMENDS INCREASING THE WATER FUND BUDGET TO COVER THE
CASH PAYOUT IN 1991.
. , j
JOINT RESERVOIR EQUITY PURCHASE
.BREAK EVEN ANALYSIS
PERIODS PRINCIPAL PERIOD INTEREST COST TO INTEREST
7 BALANCE PAYMENT •8.06% PRINCIPAL TOTAL YIELD * DEFEASE EARNED
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 508,781 100,000 41,008 58,992 100,000 7.50% 93,023 6,977
2 449,789 100,000 36,253 63,747 100,000 7.65% 86,292 13,708
3 386,042 100,000 31,115 68,885 100,000 7.83% 79,759 20,241
4 317,157 100,000 25,563 74,437 .100,000 8.00% 73,503 26,497
5 242,720 100,000 19,563 80,437 100,000 8.15% 67,588 32,412
6 162,283 100,000 13,080 86,920 100,000 8.25% 62,149 37,851
7 75,363 81,437 6,074 75,363 81,437 8.35% 46,454 34,983
----------------------------------- ------------------------------------
681,437 172,656 508,781 681,437 508,768 172,669
3% COST OF BORROWING ON $508,781 15,263
* BASED ON US TREASURY SECURITIES AS OF 11/6/90, WALL STREET JOURNAL
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES
October 23, 1990 CITY OFKENT
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Jon Johnson OCT 3 11990
Paul Mann ENGINEERING DEPT.
STAFF PRESENT: Dennis Byerly
Ed Chow
Dea Drake
Charlie Lindsey
Roger Lubovich
Tony McCarthy
Kelli O'Donnell
Don Wickstrom
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC: Richard King
The meeting was called to order at 4:35 pm by Acting Chairperson Paul Mann.
APPROVAL OF VOUCHERS
All claims for the period ending September 30, 1990 in the amount of$816,531.84 were approved
for payment. All claims for the period ending October 15, 1990 in the amount of $2,416,144.44
were approved for payment.
JOINT RESERVOIR EQUITY PURCHASE
Public Works Director Wickstrom outlined the history of the joint reservoir owned by the City of
Kent and Water District 111. Water District 111 is in need of storage for secondary water reserves
which cannot be combined with the Citys water supply. Consequently, the Water District is
requesting that the City purchase their share of the reservoir which would enable them to build a
new storage reservoir.
The Joint Use Reservoir was constructed and financed jointly by Kent and Water District 111. The
City owns 53% currently and shares the maintenance cost. The purchase of the Water District's
share would be$608,780.38 in 1990 dollars. Funding for this purchase has been included in Public
Works 1991 Capital Improvement budget request.
Public Works Director Wickstrom requested authorization to execute a letter of agreement with the
Water District in 1991. The letter of understanding would allow them two years to convert off of
the joint reservoir to their own.
Committeemember Johnson asked if they currently had property for such a reservoir. Public Works
Director Wickstrom replied they did not currently have property, but they would have the funds if
we purchased their share. It would also be cost effective to allow them to use some of the City's
property because of the simplification of a one owner system.
Finance Director McCarthy asked if the full amount of purchase was in the 1991 budget. Public
Works Director Wickstrom noted that$100,000 was budgeted for 1991. Finance Director McCarthy
suggested that it may be in the City's best interest to pay for the full amount out of the Water Fund
instead of paying interest.
Committeemember Johnson moved that the letter of agreement should be executed requesting that
Finance Director McCarthy analyze whether the full purchase price should be paid in full or
financed. The motion was seconded by Committeemember Mann.
The motion carried with a vote of 2-0.
AWARD OF LAUNDRY SERVICES CONTRACT
Customer Services Manager Lindsey requested the Operations Committee approve his
recommendation to award the laundry services contract to American Linen. Quotations were
solicited from five companies. The lowest bid was from Aratex who is the City's current supplier.
There have been a number of issues with Aratex during the past contract regarding the quality of
service which were not addressed by the vendor to the City's satisfaction.
American Linen's references all rated them high for customer satisfaction which included the State
of Washington. Customer Services Manager recommended they be awarded the contract since a
higher level of service and more responsiveness would offset the higher costs since it would require
less City staff time.
Committeemember Johnson moved that approval of the contract should be recommended to the
City Council. Committeemember Mann seconded the motion.
The motion passed with a vote of 2-0.
SR. HOUSING BOND ISSUANCE
Finance Director McCarthy introduced Richard King of Lehman Brothers to the Committee. Finance
Director McCarthy noted that it was important that the Senior Housing Bonds were not issued until
a definitive plan was in place. Recent information to the Council has laid out a plan which now
indicates it is time to move forward with issuance. Over the past six months he had been
researching whether to go with a competitive sale versus a negotiated sale. This question was
brought to the Internal Budget Committee. The two major questions were raised: What will
interest rates do? What will happen in the mid-East? Because of the current instability, the IBC
felt a negotiated sale would provide more flexibility. At the November 6th Council meeting the
Lehman Brothers Bond Purchase Proposal will be presented. Currently it is estimated by Lehman
Brothers that the 20 year Housing bonds will be approximately 7.6%.
Richard King outlined interest rates over the past ten years noting that in 1980 a ten year bond was
at 14.5%. Lehman Brothers will present the official statement to the City Council on November 6th.
Committeemember Johnson asked if slowness in spending bonds in the past had an effect on the
bond rate. Richard King stated that it did not but put a managerial burden on Finance Director
McCarthy and his staff because of the tax exempt rates.
This was an information item only and will be presented at the Council meeting under Other
Business.
REQUESTED UTILITY ADJUSTMENT FOR KENT MEADOWS
Customer Services Manager Lindsey requested that this item be removed from the agenda since Eric
Schwabe was not present.
Finance Director McCarthy reviewed the letter sent by Mr. Schwabe on behalf of Kent Meadows
noting that the water was definitely used.
CITY OF KENT
([ ECONOMIC AND ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. (! : ;syU
P.O.Box 976•626 Columbia St.NW•Suite 2-A
Olympia,Washington 96507 Eyv,ivctHING DEPT.
(206)352-5090•FAX(206)357-6573
October 1, 1990
File#: 4083
Mr. Don Wickstrom Mr. Bob Morrison
City of Kent Water District No. 111
220 4th Ave. South 13335 SE 248th Pl.
Kent, WA 98032 Kent, WA 98042
Subject: Final Agreenieni -Joint Reservoir Equity Purchase
Dear Don and Bob:
We have revised the agreement to reflect the verbal understanding by both parties that will
lead to dissolving the joint ownership of the existing reservoir. The letter has incorporated
the changes suggested by the City and the District, and excluded the extra land purchase as
originally suggested by the District in our September 17 letter. We believe this letter now
represents a common understanding.
1. Purchase of Reservoir Equity by the City of Kent. The City will initiate the steps to
purchase the District's equity in the joint reservoir. The District's equity value is 43%
of the original total project cost of$773,643.89 as increased in the proportion to the
increase in the Consumer Price Index (United States City Average for all Urban
Consumers) all items, or the substituted index, as prepared by the United States
Department of Labor for the year the agreement to purchase is actually execS,� d. The
District's equity value in 1990 dollars is $608,780.38 (0.43 x $773,643.89 x li£f3 =
$608,780.38). The City will either pay the full amount in cash within 30 days of
execution of the agreement or make yearly payments which include therein, principle
and interest of at least $100,000.00 until the obligation is satisfied or 10 years,
whichever occurs first.
Upon notice from the City that the purchase of equity has been approved by City
Council, the District will proceed with the planning,design, and construction of at
least a 1.5 MG reservoir adjacent to the existing joint reservoir with the same overflow
elevation. The District may, at its own discretion, build a larger reservoir.
The District will meet with King County and adjacent landowners to determine the
amount of additional land required for the new reservoir. Upon determining the land
required and the conditions of potential purchase, the District will meet with the City
to determine the most appropriate way to acquire the necessary land. The City agrees
to provide a good faith effort to support the District's in its acquisition of the land,
including possible condemnation by the District, if required.
Olympia.WA Bellevue.WA Vancouver,BC Portland.OR Washington,DC
`ober 1, 1990
bwge 2
2. Interim Use of Joint Reservoir Storage Capacity. Until the District's replacement
reservoir is available for use, or 2 years from the date of execution of the equity
purchase agreement whichever comes first, the City will give its best effort to operate
the City's system to maintain the water elevation in the joint reservoir at a near full
condition to allow the District to use the reservoir during peak day conditions.
The District will modify the intertie between the District and the City at 150 Place SE
and 272nd Street to allow the manual operation of the intertie for flow from the
District well supply into the City system to replenish the water withdrawn from the
joint reservoir.
It is the District's intent not to utilize the joint reservoir requiring replacement of
District water into the City system, except under conditions where the District is
unable to meet its peak day needs without use of the joint storage reservoir. The
District will then restrict its use of the reservoir withdrawal to 750,000 gpd unless
otherwise agreed to by the City.
Although there is no limit on the number of days in which the District can use the
reservoir, it is anticipated the number of days will be less than 30 per year.
3. Compatibility of Water Quality. The quality of water from the District's wells was
evaluated for compatibility with water from the City's spring supply at the point of
mixing. Based upon an analysis of the data provided by the two utilities, and the ratio
of District water to City water in the transmission line during peak period usage, there
does not appear to be a problem of water quality compatibility or residual water
quality problems for the City. Some iron or manganese deposition is possible, even
though it is not anticipated the problem will be significant.
4. District Facilities for Replacement of City Water. It is the District's responsibility to
modify their metering and valving facilities to allow for manual operation of the inter-
tie facilities. Through joint monitoring of the metered withdrawal and replacement
water systems, the District will assume the responsibility to replace the City water
within 24 hours.
In the event the District supply system is unable to replace the water within a 24-hour
period, the quantity of water utilized by the District that is not replaced will be
purchased from the City at the established District commodity cost. The 1990 District
cost is $1.20/100 cubic feet. If the District is unable to replace the water withdrawn
from the City in 48 hours, the District will purchase the excess water at a rate equiva-
lent to the City's in-City commercial commodity rate. The 1990 City commercial
commodity rate is a $1.64/100 cubic feet.
October 1, 1990
Page 3
If the District is unable to replace the water withdrawn form the City in 72 hours, the
District will purchase the excess water at a rate equivalent to the City's outside-City
commercial commodity rate. The 1990 outside-City commercial rate is $2.00/100
cubic feet.
The method of accounting for the quantity of water to be replaced or paid for by the
District will utilize the meter reading and accumulative assessment of costs outlined
above. Exhibit A provides a sample ledger to account for the responsibilities of the
District to the City for the replacement or purchase of water. Actual payment by the
District will be required at the end of the calendar year.
In summary, it is understood that the City will include the acquisition of equity.in the joint
reservoir in the 1991 budget for.consideration by the City Council. Concurrently,the District
will initiate preliminary plans to acquire the necessary property at the joint reservoir site and
design a new facility, but defer final action until confirmation of City acquisition is approved.
Concurrently, the District will modify the intertie facilities and establish an operating proce-
dure with the City's staff prior to the summer peak water use period.
It is also understood that in the event the City has a water shortage problem due to drought
conditions or other water supply needs, the District will follow the same conservation and/or
drought response plan used by the City and will terminate use of the City supply system if the
City's supply is unable to meet City demand.
Based on the understanding outlined in this letter, the District is planning to proceed with
preliminary planning for the reservoir. We are also preparing a draft agreement for review
and signature by both parties.
Sincerely,
Robert L Wubbena, P.E.
President
RLW:sg:11
� Kent City Council Meeting
Date December 4 , 1990
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: VALLEY TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT
2 . STA' T. As__ recommended b the Public Works.
Committe uthorization for -th6"'Kayor to sign a revised
�E`rSoal agreement to establish the Valley Transportation
Benefit District deleting Auburn and adding SeaTac as
participating jurisdictions� y
P
3. EXHIBITS: Public Woks Committee material and proposed
agreement
i�
4 . RECOMMENDED BY:
(Committee, aff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
r
5. UNBUDGETED SCAL PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO_Z, YES
FISCAL PERS NNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITU REQUIRED: $
SOURCE 0# FUNDS:
7 . CITY COCIL ACTION:
Counc' member moves, Councilmember seconds
r
f
DISCUS ION•
ACTIO
Council Agenda
Item No. 3D
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
November 13 , 1990
TO: Public Works Committee
FROM: Don Wickstrom D�
RE: Valley Transportation Benefit District
We have received from the County the revised Interlocal Agreement
to establish the Valley Transportation Benefit District. This
revised agreement deletes Auburn and adds the City of SeaTac as
participating jurisdictions and revises the project list
accordingly. The proposed boundaries of the TBD have also been
modified to reflect these changes in participating jurisdictions.
The revised agreement is currently being reviewed by our legal
department. It is our recommendation that upon completion of the
legal review, the Mayor be authorized to sign the agreement.
CITY OF KENT
0C T 0 4 1990
ENGINEERING DEPT.
i RECEIVED
:...�, OCT 1
_ rasp
OFFICE Of THE
GREG NICKELS MAYOR
King County Council
District Eight
September 25, 1990
The Honorable Dan Kelleher
Mayor, City of Kent
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
RE: Revised Interlocal Agreement to Establish the Valley Transportation
Benefit District
Dear Mayor Kelleher:
On January 31 , 1990, I wrote you on behalf of the South County Area
Transportation Benefit District (SCATBD) to request that the City of Kent
approve an interlocal agreement between King County and the cities of
Auburn, Kent, Renton, and Tukwila related to establishing the Valley
Transportation Benefit District (TBD) . The purpose of this letter is to
bring up to date on progress towards forming a TBD and to request that the
City of Kent approve a revised interlocal agreement between King County and
the cities of Kent, Renton, Tukwila, and SeaTac to form the Valley TBD.
Changes in Membership and Boundaries of the Proposed Valley TBO
In my January 31, 1990 letter, I alerted you to possible changes in
membership and boundaries of the proposed Valley TBD which may affect your
city's decision to participate in the Valley TBD or which could require
future action by your city regarding the TBD. I noted that the City of
Auburn might not decide to proceed with the agreement but that the remaining
members of the SCATBD Steering Committee had agreed that, if necessary, the
formation of the Valley TBD should be pursued without Auburn's
participation. I also noted that the City of SeaTac might choose to become
a participant in the TBD.
Since that letter was written, the City of Auburn has 'declined to
participate in the Valley TBD and consequently has been dropped as a member
of the Steering Committee. At the same time, the City of SeaTac has
formally requested to become a member of the TBD. The SCATBD Steering
402 King County Courthouse, Seattle,Washington 98104, (206)296.1008
The Honorable Dan Kelleher
September 25, .1990
Page 2
Committee voted unanimously to approve that request and Councilmember Jeanne
Masters now represents the City of SeaTac on the Steering Committee. The
enclosed Valley TBD Interlocal Agreement has been revised to reflect these
changes.
The proposed boundaries of the TBD have been modified to reflect this change
in participating jurisdictions . As a result, the Valley TBD will encompass
all of the cities of Renton and Tukwila, including recent annexations, the
City of Kent west of Interstate-5, the portion of the City of SeaTac lying
between Interstate-5 and Highway 99, and portions of unincorporated King
County (see enclosed map) .
The TBD project list has also been revised from January 1990 to delete City
of Auburn projects and to add the City of SeaTac projects which had been set
aside, pending that City's .decision on TBD participation (list enclosed with
the revised interlocal agreement) .
TBD Costs and Cost Sharing
The costs for administering the TBD for the first year are estimated to be
W $153,907 based on a budget developed by the Steering Committee. The cost
includes 1 FTE professional staff, 0.5 FTE clerical . support, 'and basic
office support ($114,447) ; consultant services for preparing a financing and
improvement plan as required by statute ($252000) ; and one-time costs
associated with formation procedures ($14,460) . The costs for administering
the TBD are to be shared among the participating jurisdiction in proportion
of the percentage of population each jurisdiction has of the total TBD
population. The table below shows how the TBD costs for the first full year
will be shared.
Jurisdiction 1990 Pop. Total Poo. Start-up Annual
------------------------------------------
Kent--------------35,400--- 19.62%
$30,201 $28,963
Renton 39, 100 21 .67% $33,358 $31,990
SeaTac 15,400 8.54% $13,138 $12,600
Tukwila 12,920 7. 16% $11 ,023 $10,571
Uninc. KC 77 ,580 43.00% $66, 187 ----- $63,473
_________ --
TOTAL 180,400 100.00% $153,907 $1479596
The Honorable Dan Kelleher
September 25, 1990
Page 3
Thank you for your patience with the TBD formation process and your prompt
attention to this request for action by the City of Kent. If you or your
staff need further information about the interlocal agreement, please
contact Paul Tanaka, Director, Department of Public Works at 296-6500.
Sincerely,
Gre ckels
King Co my Council r
Cha' ATBD Steering Com 'ttee
GN/D
TO 53
Enclosures
cc: SCATBD Steering Committee
Tim Hill , King County Executive
King County Councilmembers
{ATTN: Cal Hoggard, Program Director
Jerry Peterson, Administrator
Paul Tanaka, Director, Department of Public Works
ATTN: Louis J. Haff, County Road Engineer
Karleen Sakumoto, Assistant Manager, Roads Division
Donna Gordon, Program Analyst
Frank Currie, Public Works Director, City of Auburn
The Honorable Earl Clymer, Mayor, City of Renton
ATTN: Lynn Guttman, Public Works Director
The Honorable Frank Hansen, Mayor, City of SeaTac
ATTN: Bruce Rayburn, Public Works Director
The Honorable Gary Van Dusen, .Mayor, City of Tukwila
ATTN: Ross, Earnst, Public Works Director
Don Wickstrom, Public Works Director, City of Kent
VALLEY TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
King County (the "County") , the City of ("Kent") , the City of Renton
("Renton") , the City of SeaTac ("SeaTac") , and the City of Tukwila
("Tukwila") , (hereinafter jointly referred to as the "Parties") for the
purpose of establishing a Transportation Benefit District in accordance with
Chapter 36.73 RCW.
Recitals
WHEREAS, the Parties have each experienced significant population growth
and economic development in the last decade and project continued growth and
development in the future; and
WHEREAS, this growth and development has increased the traffic on
existing roads and highways, and at intersections in South King County in and
adjacent to the boundaries of the Parties (the "Valley") beyond the capacity
of such facilities; and
WHEREAS, a failure to expand the highway infrastructure of the Valley .
will retard the growth and development of the Valley, pose health and safety
problems on its highways and endanger the quality of life within the Valley;
and
WHEREAS, the Parties individually have undertaken' substantial planning
with respect to their transportation needs and have identified major
transportation improvements within their jurisdictions as listed in Exhibit A
that will create a benefit to areas to be included in the Transportation
Benefit District; and
WHEREAS; the enormous cost of many of the needed highway improvements
and their importance to the Valley as a whole demonstrate the need for a
cooperative approach to the planning, financing and construction of these
improvements; and
WHEREAS, a cooperative approach to this transportation problem will
facilitate the application of the Parties for funding from the State of.
Washington and the United States ; and
WHEREAS, the Parties are authorized and empowered to enter into this
Agreement pursuant to Chapter 39.34 RCW and to create a transportation benefit
district pursuant to Chapter 36.73 RCW.
THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein.,
it is hereby agreed:
SECTION 1.0 FORMATION OF TBD. Pursuant to RCW 36.73.020 et. seq. , the County
shall proceed to hold• a public hearing after providing suitable public notice
as required by RCW 36.73.050. If it finds that creation of a transportation
benefit district is in the public interest, and necessitated by existing or
reasonably foreseeable congestion levels attributable to economic growth, the
County shall adopt an ordinance creating a transportation benefit district in
Valley TBD Agreement Page 2 .
compliance and accordance with this Agreement and RCW 36.73.050 (2) and (3) .
The transportation benefit district will be referred to as the "Valley
Transportation Benefit District" (the "TBD") . The boundaries of the TBD shall
be the boundaries depicted on the map attached hereto as Exhibit B and
specified by legal description in Exhibit C hereto, which area shall include
the jurisdictional boundaries of Renton and Tukwila, and those portions of
Kent, SeaTac, and unincorporated King County depicted in Exhibit B hereto,
which at a minimum, are the areas which can reasonably be expected to benefit
from improvements to be funded by the TBD.
SECTION .2.0 PURPOSE OF TBD. The purpose of the Valley TBD shall be to obtain
financing for the transportation improvements identified on Exhibit A and
other transportation improvements as may be identified by the TBD Board.
SECTION 3.0 GOVERNING BOARD.
3.1 General . The TBD shall be governed by a Board comprised of one elected
official from the Councils of King County and the Cities of Kent, Renton,
SeaTac, and Tukwila. Members of the Board shall be appointed by their
respective Councils. Each Board member shall serve fora term of two years or
until the member's term of office expires, whichever occurs first. A quorum
of Board membership, that being three (3) members, shall be required to
conduct business. hree affirmative votes are require to t ke action.
The Board shall establish .its own mb"y5'aws and rules of procedure. The Board
may establish such committees as are necessary to carry out its purpose
including but not limited to a technical advisory committee comprised of staff
representatives from each of the Parties as well as from other public and
private groups interested in transportation improvements within the TBD.
3.2 Imposition of Encumbrances on Parties. The Board shall not, in any way,
take action which directly or indirectly imposes debt or other encumbrances or
obligations on any Party to this Agreement, other than the annual
administrative budget provided by Section 6.0 of this Agreement, without the
consent of the affected Party and compliance with all applicable laws .
3.3 Dispute Resolution. All Parties have the right to request that the Board
k ' ko reconsider any decision. The Board shall komply with this request in a timely
manner and, in any event, no later than 30 days of the request. If, after
reconsideration, the affected Party and the Board cannot agree, either the
affected Party or the Board may request that the matter be submitted to
arbitration pursuant to Chapter 7.04 RCW. Should arbitration be necessary,
the affected Party and the Board shall select an arbitrator and those two
arbitrators shall mutually agree upon a neutral third arbitrator. Each party
shall be responsible for its own attorney' s fees, costs and expenses .
SECTION 4.0 POWERS OF THE TBD. The TBD shall have all the powers granted to
it by the legislature pursuant to Chapter 36.73 RCW, as such chapter may be
amended from time to time. Specifically, but without limitation, the TBD
shall have the •power to:
(a) Conduct studies regarding the transportation needs within the TBD;
J
Valley TBD Agreement Page 3
(b) Adopt a plan of transportation improvements including land to be acquired
and/or improvements constructed within the TBD;
•,� o� (c) Levy taxes and issue notes and bonds as permitted by state law;
ak' (d) Establish local improvement districts and issue bonds therein as
permitted by law;
(e) Apply for and accept grants for transportation planning and improvements
from any local or state government, the federal government or any private
person or entity;
(f) Enter into contracts with local and state government, the federal
government and any private person or entity for the acquisition of property,
improvement and construction of transportation improvements; and
(g) Hire staff or contract for staff and/or services.
(h) Do all things necessary or convenient to accomplish its public purposes.
SECTION 5.0 FINANCES OF THE. TBD.. The Director of the Office of Finance of
King County shall be the ex officio treasurer of the TBD and establish such
accounts and funds as he/she. deems appropriate for the orderly maintenance of
- the TBD's finances:
SECTION 6.0 ADMINISTRATION.
a) The Parties shall be jointly responsible for the administrative costs of
the TBD pursuant to an annual administrative budget adopted by the Board. The
A � 'Board shall adopt an administrative budget by June 30 of each year to cover
0- the following calendar year, except that, within 30 days of the formation of
the TBD, the Board shall adopt an initial administrative budget to cover the
remainder of the then-current calendar year and any additional period
necessary to achieve the normal administrative budget cycle.
z
(b) The administrative costs of the TBb`shall be shared among the Parties in
c accordance with the degree of benefit each Party receives from the TBD. For
s� the first three (3) full calendar years after the4formation of the TBD, and
until such time thereafter that the Board establishes, as part of . its annual
administrative budget, another method of determining such benefit , the
benefit shall be, determined by the percentage of population each Party has
,.a�^x"^, within its jurisdiction of the total .population within the TBD boundaries,
according to the most recent population estimates of the Washington State
Office of Financial Management.
(c) Each Party shall pay the TBD for its share of the administrative costs
semiannually on the first days. of December and June, for the budget period
immediately following each such payment, except that, payment for the initial
administrative budget period shall be made within 90 days of the formation of
the TBD.
Valley TBD Agreement Page 4
SECTION 7.0 IMPROVEMENT PLAN.
7.1 Improvement Plan Features. The TBD shall approve a plan of
transportation improvements which shall contain -the following features:
(a) A list of projects based upon those identified in Exhibit A and others as
may be identified by the Parties and approved by the TBD Board, ranked in
priority which the TBD finds are important to meet existing and future
transportation needs within the TBD;
(b) An estimate of the cost and time required to acquire property and
construct these improvements;
(c) A plan for the financing of such improvements which can include local
improvement district financing, general obligation bond financing,
contributions from the Parties, grants from public and private entities,
environmental mitigation fees, building construction and land use fees, and
other equitable participation of private developers whose developments may
'generate the need for the improvements; and
(d) A plan for the construction of the identified projects .
(e) Such plan shall utilize the existing transportation and transportation
financing plans of the Parties to the maximum extent possible.
7.2 .Improvement Plan Modifications. The plan may be modified by resolution
of the Board as provided for in this section.
� f
(a) The Board may make modifications to the plan on its own initiative or on
written requests for plan modifications may be submitted to the Board by any
Party to this Agreement, any public agency serving the area within the TBD
boundaries or any member of the public residing within the TBD boundaries.
Such requests must state the specific modifications to be made and the reasons
for the modifications. The Board shall consider all such requests.
(b) The Board may modify the project improvement list by resolution at a duly
constituted and noticed meeting of the Board, provided that for modifications
deleting or adding projects to the list, the Board shall , before deciding on
such proposed modifications, hold a public hearing at which such proposed
modifications shall be presented to the public and public testimony on -the
proposed modifications shall be taken. The public shall be given at least ten
(10) working days notice of such hearing in one (1 ) or more newspapers
distributed within the TBD boundaries.
(c) The Parties to this Agreement shall be notified of any modification of the
project list which includes one or more projects with their boundaries.
SECTION 8.0 ANNUAL REPORT. The Board shall make an annual report to the
Councils of the Parties and to the public. The report shall include the
following information:
(a) A description of the current improvement plan as described in Section 5
of this agreement;
Valley TBD Agreement Page 5
(b) A report of the status of the improvements and financing - included in the
plan;
(c) The annual budget adopted by the TBD Board and expenditures of the
preceding year; and, .
(d) Other information deemed appropriate by the TBD Board.
SECTION 9.0 TERMINATION AND WITHDRAWAL.
9.1 Duration. The initial duration of the Agreement shall be for a period of
five years from4date hereof, and shall be automatically terminated unless the
Board initiates action to extend the Agreement for a two (2) year period.
r-
'�� Thereafter, the Agreement shall be automatically terminated every two (2
years unless the Board acts to extend the Agreement, provided that after the
TBD issues debt this Agreement cannot be terminated until such debt is
retired. This Agreement may be otherwise terminated only by mutual agreement
of all Parties.
9.2 Withdrawal .
(a) Prior to formation .of a TBD by County ordinance, any Party may withdraw
from this Agreement upon 60 days written notice to the other Parties.
(b) . If the TBD has been formed by the County pursuant to RCW 36.73.020 using
published notice as the primary method of public notification of the proposed
formation and provided that the TBD has not issued any debt as of the date of
notice, any Party may withdraw from this Agreement upon 90 calendar days
written notice to the other parties .
(c) If the TBD has been formed by the County pursuant to RCW 36.73.020 and,
in addition to other methods of public notification, has notified property
owners by mail of the proposed formation, and prior to the issuance of debt
by the TBD, this Agreement can be terminated at any time with the written
consent of all Parties and agreement of all Parties as to apportionment of all
obligations of the Parties and TBD including the terminating Party.
Cl (d) After any debt issued by the TBD is fully retired, any Party may withdraw
from this Agreement as provided for in Subsection 9.2 (b) of this Section.
Vl_ (e) A Party withdrawing from this Agreement shall be entitled to a
reimbur���' Sectionsement 6, butfor notany yetaprovidedaatvtheosts timepofviously pai withdrawala for pursuant to
9.3 Obligations Upon Withdrawal or Termination. Withdrawal from or
termination of this Agreement does not relieve any of the Parties of any
obligations incurred by the TBD subsequent to the date of this Agreement and
prior to withdrawal or termination, such obligations shall be apportioned
according to the,-then current formula for sharing administrative costs under
Section 6. n {1
'P-�-��L ✓�Q-,.,i�2 c�-�-Lu_ Gt..J �c�1.�--`-��.'�..ai..CfZ e0.Cl� (�""`7 .
U r
Valley TBD Agreement Page 6
SECTION 10. ASSETS AND LIABILITIES. On termination of this Agreement, any
assets owned separately by a Party shall remain the property of that Party.
Assets acquired by the TBD shall , at the time of dissolution of the TBD, be
.- shared among the Parties according to the then-current formula for sharing
administrative costs under SEction 6. In entering into this Agreement, the
Parties do not assume liability for the actions or activities of any other
Party or of the TBD, except as provided by law or as may be agreed by the
Parties from time to time. If any Party exercises its right to withdraw from
the TBD prior to a mutual dissolution of the TBD, such Party shall waive its
right to a share of any assets of the TBD.
SECTION 11. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Agreement shall become effective upon its
execution and filing in accordance with RCW 39.34.040.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is executed this day of
19_
Exhibits: A: Projects and Priorities List
B: TBD Boundary Map
,C: TBD Area Legal Description
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Deputy Prosecuting Attorney King County Executive
Date Date
Mayor, City of Kent
Title Date Date
Mayor, City of Renton
Title Date Date
Mayor, City of Tukwila
Title Date Date
Mayor, City of SeaTac
Title Date Date
U,Lnc)NNW
Om VO/Nr V I (.1OOt001 a W NA N VNiNO� 1 fD N P�NO •fD W NOtO(DA:0 1 O r�
i O
( # I I I 1
O i �
1 I I 1
I I
I I 1 I
1
-Ix0 7c-1�a 0 M 7c 7c T; Ac c c m�m m m coo m m c �m rb
7C�0 7 1 �» 7 C 7 7 7 7 1p,C 5 1 0 7C � O 7 7 7 7 7 7 IO 10 ,�.. I H
2 2 10 10 1 = i 0 0 C 0 _. 1 Yj
iCD
D0a w 1 w m> > �~
I 1
1
1
1 I I
I 1 1 1
I —U1 fp (n 1 N V7 N j r"0 N f/J fn V1�N fJ/ I :[I-t N-I li—V1 N C:E .5 En lWi<
1 �Nm��mm 1 _.�Rlm� 7cm mmm,WUW N 1 e. �7 C3�,MNMmaN w N IV m j ry N
j � m �woi Q1DoWa.DD'�amm,<< i �° afnwa7�oW',°� ��_�•i•`� °Dm�
1 mr>••G W�Ny O��y7 �2r^�l7y�ycn�.5.-. j y W .N+�~mr-f/f fn V1�TN I. ^
j �in�D I a�..((./�,�_•a ����rn• c 1 nP 23 wGm3 ,v-�pr�^y
N W W-+ 1 2 A37 VI��jQ.r�(^��m (/7•••222 sn�����22222 L�p�7TDm -'mo rnNo
I Z d 8 01 (I�In N S� , O O O.< N N O a 31 ,
DD 1 o mD� O L, D 5= I :, m < 1
I r3 rj•� , < < 1 rymZ7Z'H < << N 1 0)�fA ,om y30 ��-, � � � ,
I �-•mn ) maI 0Do mmm g< 1VwN m � otn y1 GG C
I � � ��otn to I m��; � zcn V1-m gm. � a— 00 Km � I Fn
P,�mm z zstmPnri!nycny7-' , � ym mao N mo "No , mN
to
D . N3 1 (n - , 3 Wo OoN—WNW I
N Z OI W N IA9 I �0 31'� (n(n .�1
j O v N 1 N w � m; W w N tNDW N ; rw
mw 0 �'yy(n i �- w m 1
' 1 I
1 1 m
in X
I I I 1 2
I 1 I O
I fy
I ' I
x00000x : 000xsxxxx= i ooxxx= xxssssx x1 Z
1 1
I I 1 1
I I N N 1 rO rO rD G Omt0 mm fO m(II m V V m V V m m
m mV mV mNV mN >WaAam NO VvmmmWmNrDON - O I 0 ^ rOOTm O OOONONm
1 1 O
' I i
1 1
I I
1 I I
1
1 I 1
I I
I I 1 � I �y.y•
1
m j m N 8 mN�NAN0 WA O .+mm W Nm o VO mmm I N0 WV mWN W f000 ON W 0)W Na A WN NW WN Ii
O N[n m.IrONn �AANNAmmmO OVNW
1 O V mN1 NAm W O N N m O ONV Vp) DOO)O O Q1-+co
I I
I
I I
1 I 1 I
I f
I 1 1 W A I n 1
a� mwm +NA V m I N W +Cn rD O
m m N.NN W ' W O -"V m0)N Nm oo m I O Vow otn m y d'N 1 O O
S N�a p I rONpNAaNNp mm wo- , N-+f0 V OOp V pOOO WOW m O )•'1
1 p V W V—O m N A N m W ON MO A O V 1 O N V m i O p
I I CD
, 1 I O
1 1 I I G1.
I 1 I I
I i i I
I O N I O O 1 0 0 0 O W G l9
1 0 0 1 O O I I p n0
1 i co
1 I 1 I GL p
I I I I
1 1 I I
1 1 I
V AA CO NN-'���.+� , �.�.N
V�mTnDVa'rnWmP. I mlo •A NO)-' p�ppaltnrnAlvN
� 1 1
I , I
� 1 1
' 1 1
I , I
� I I
1
`L 0 A'Z•,�5'5'CD 5'0 ='o0 1 7c{70c�M Z' m
�Nc3�� Np�� �� f� pp 1000�� 9 9�G�a -��oto
�OOg _
OOOw ' u 91 1 K p= m �� o w =
I I O 1
' I I
1 I
, I 1
, I 1
, ' 1
, � I
i c�nDy m�y vlcn c)y-'-y 1 tn—cnvlvltn�ng���nNcncnmoO��Ya' i `� N
I in�py3.aA31m�2�
1 �'•'i� 30=+N(DN �Q@ 1 B�OIoOr J'Nv ma �� . aw
� �w CmO OO
Cst
p N1 wtyr0 ((/A/� rN^� I f7p �ow �+<.".O,p�(p yIV N I
7v � SV� Yam fA is"�� 1 S+ O yO a�l Q� <M� IV co 1 \/
1 to CA rll� �'48� f^77� I o < I�V)`Z t� 9' mvam��^ 1 Q
�S
ZO N per_N Y S N 7 b O ry .9 CIR NJ7 C A 1 �••i
I7 77V maw �OOfO V I 00 VJ 01!/) �,pee�
f'm y D�� .�m i �N to � �Npvm
1 9 --M'o m � m m 70 0"y`m
I o
to m 1
1 0 co O. I m
1
1 1 1
1
1 I I
I I 1
1 I ,
1 NNNN N NNNNNNNNN
xxxxxxsxxxx � s oxxxxsxs xxsss x � � � ro Z . .
Ix. x xsxxx � x s xsx xxsxs x 1
I 1
1II, jOV�V.+tTD WN VV Wn VCn ttDTVA P 00 I V Cn Of V DO W f90W Cc,OV jfV0
VOONWCVaD-4n n m N
0 ,1 O ^I
01 tD W GAQI i 0 �
, 1 i
1 N
1 1 �hI
, I I
1 \,
1 1 f/f y
_ a
I � A N N W��O O' ..�
N a W N W N N N m N W N N , W N.+O fn tD to A W V A V A Ill W N N W V I O I^
i Op�ppN OI W pW Or C w V4 W NO , W 0Om0-40N to Cn OO(Do O� � 1 � Q.
10 0�'m OVI O tWD (W.t N V 0 0 0 i N 08
O N O f O t l t W O N A O A N N N(D CO 0 ; v r0.-.
i
I I j
1 ,
j I 1 0
, � 1
, 1
I pOp pNp N 00)� CO
pG 0O- tDO mO Nt0 ULn1 mW N 0V ON00 Il0 WN NO�0N N A AO Vt`AN'tWO VN aD 0V0 II OV••) ^C
00101AOWWWV000NO$ OD000N n V
C7
a
co
I I
I
, I 1
I I
t � I
i O - Can N o i C
1 I I C7
1 n CD •�
I N C
I � ,
1 � 1
1 1 I
1 � I
1 � 1
•c - $DVIAPI � •4. ; EXl{IBIT 6
Kenn
ainier C&en,+n 7 + ws tt
�• 00 - Beach Sfi +\\' i:,, " VALLEY TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT
DISTRICT BOUNDARY
RY MAP
j' .,�✓,vtrt ryn Mawr it 1tr,- i
12.
Me K
I i /I I I - s TTr'•c 0'+{L -\LEh 'I+ ,•.�,r-.1 ' A:-+ ^ _ --_ _..
L 1' �-'• F r 2 r '7 m lJ'. 1
-VA i� ' � ht Ion I.._ •— W_`- 136 ST
3 spt�}T!!4'� - _!-�_ a 1 900 - - 11 < j. ;`_•- L
' I .a, 9 \.. R
I e /..:,f'1 it(� - SE,
. R sen r " ; 4.+� 11 1= i_I�jfil_ E-,''. Mc Donc
Ma Fen
T" A( ours `, a Ion •Meme vuwr
¢�".• `^ R n (/•[II ' -_- .ter r,o.c
o
• ?• I t
y, •Jh
Glo O' !11 %� �i, •a ;w Benson Aill
O .. ..t. ..171 +-it — ¢ I 116- Pe"_. ♦ a0 �..�—p:'`r..> ake
W ¢ %, {�� �y F. 7 ,i sT Y1 ICJ _1 —` 1 - — lesire .�
�• I I /.:. lU\
z U Loki ._j'I li
s _ tee-• ai . — • L
- 9 < ;
M1�
:J
AngleI _ {\ I hady Lake
1p, — I rt 14T�
" sw.T°Gm /Ih'�a- �IY Y, "V \I II.. _. � 10
Ponfhei -' .�:� G•��P
c
�I'� I�� Loke `� t•'1 I 1
.l.t — ' f.l 11- I o..._.. .,: I — -r. t.._ _ 1CITY F SEA
Tos Sr
. _ T_� ue
I -•� o.• - w•' �J < �sD a n. \IO .I �I I ST� L
p
r' J. ''eel\e _,3�-• ,r _ ' a(��1,=�-4Y->j�... �.' \- t Tfe
1., r II' ` ^ vµ •.- I:'w' I �, t'i.: a:1.-. „ c)"Ciar
•�,• :It `. �7�. .Safi' ... �7 _I 5E
SE 236 'SY
-;, ... I•
La _ i s• _+��' , I(✓• �-I —Timberla:
Fe ick
ridi P -76
!nl-Kin Olty
31 272
_� ,•±..:. o I J I .� kiP 'P°�° jci :C9tvington
S'r14
`. •.....J Lu•_ .> �. e , _ Lea
y feel f Lok I _ _ "� sT .'
I' 1'�"� � ' st o1"
i Lakc .I' Ei8]t si �—�._.. •rak� lo�s 6. ✓�
1 I vi I ra r:"" IT - srHeights i `J % 1
-u E 9oao
v ne li
_.., i21�3-- �•• ST Tj.'T _ SF� ]70 T _ Imo. E3 i.Ck Onl^o
o... ... o9to I
5 �. --
:.. Na L: L �• .
' , •: • L Neilson
i . .: .. •.Lake
4/Y
K/ Kent City Council Meeting
Date December 4 . 1990
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: NOISE CONTROL ORDINANCE
2. SUMMARY ST =: As recommended by the Public Safety
Committee, ` doption of Ordinance alf4f'" amending"Ordinance 2113
and repealing Ordinance 2673, relating to controlling noise and
providing for penalties for violations
I
3 . EXHIBITS: Proposed o dinance
F
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Pub is Safety Committee/Paul Mann
(Committee, Staf , Examiner, Commission, etc. )
1,
5. UNBUDGETED FIS PERSONNE IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL PERSONNE NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE IIIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNpS:
7. CITY COUNCI14 ACTION:
i
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3E
..........
� ,
i
j ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent,
Washington, relating to noise control; amending
the Noise Control Code (Ordinance 2113) by
j adding new sections prohibiting loud and
raucous noise from portable or motor vehicle
audio equipment, authorizing the enforcement of
j certain sections of the Code by the Chief of
Police, providing for civil penalties for
certain violations and repealing Ordinance 2673
i on the same subject.
WHEREAS, excessive noise is a form of pollution which ha
direct and harmful effects upon the health and welfare of persons
exposed to such sound, lowers the value of impacted properties an
generally adversely affects the livability, peace and comfort of
i the impacted neighborhoods and the City as a whole; and
i
WHEREAS, due primarily to the sound characteristics and
manner of use, excessive noise from portable and motor vehicle
j)1 audio equipment such as tape players, radios and compact disc
Ii players is a particularly disruptive form of noise pollution
involving said harmful effects and impacts upon persons, property,
ji neighborhoods and, when occurring in or near vehicular traffic,
�
such noise presents a danger to traffic safety; and
WHEREAS, excessive noise from said audio equipment
I
i, occurring within the city's park system has a harmful impact upon
i
� the use and enjoyment of park areas by other park users, has the
�i effect of discouraging many from utilizing certain park areas and
has caused said noise pollution harmful effects upon adjacent
private properties, persons and neighborhoods; and
�f
I
41
i
�I
!
WHEREAS, noise from said audio equipment which can be
j clearly heard seventy-five (75) feet or more from the source of
the sound is in excess of the maximum permissible sound levels
allowed to be generated or received in either residential or
commercial areas of the City, creating noise pollution within such
areas; and, when occurring in or near- vehicular traffic, presents
a danger to traffic safety; and
WHEREAS, technology has allowed the proliferation of
commercially accessible types of audio equipment, both portable
and installed in motor vehicles, which can be amplified so as to
ilproduce excessive noise which can be clearly heard seventy-five
`! (75) feet or more from the source of the sound; and
I
!I WHEREAS, the current noise control code provisions are _
�j ineffective to control the problem of excessive noise from audio
equipment because they require actual noise meter measurement of
sound, and enforcement by Building Department personnel in all
instances, rather than by police officers who can immediately
respond to reports of public disturbance noise complaints; and
I
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that excessive noise
�! being generated from such equipment is a public nuisance and
constitutes a public disturbance noise; NOW, THEREFORE,
ii
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
i
!f Section 1. Section 1. 2 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
�i amended as follows:
I I
9. 20. 08 SCOPE. This Ordinance shall apply to the
control of all sound ( (end-ybretian) ) originating from
-2
i
i�
..........
I�
I
( (statiemary) ) sources located within the limits of the City
of Kent.
Section 2 . Section 1. 3 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
amended as follows:
�I
�I 9 . 20. 12 . DEFINITIONS .
I
iiA. ( (uAyabient) ) Background sound level" means the
it ( (baekgreend) ) level of all sounds in a given environment,
independent of the specific source being measured.
i
B. "dBA" means the sound pressure level in decibels
measured using the "A" weighting network on a sound level meter.
( (as-specified-in-the-AMeriean-Natiena}-Standards-�nstitete
,.✓ specifications-S-}-3-49�}-fen-wend-}eve}-meters.-) )
it C. "EDNA" means the environmental designation for noise
abatement, being an area or zone (environment) within which
I
maximum permissible noise levels are established.
I
i
I
I D. "Emergency machinery and work" means machinery and
I� work necessary to restore property to a safe condition following a.
public calamity, or machinery and work required to protect persons,
or property from an imminent exposure to danger.
E. "Impuls ( (ive) ) e sound" means ( (a-wend-of-short
deretien-esea}}y-}ess-than-one-seeend--Frith-en-abrept-enact-and
rapid-decay---ExaMp}es-ef-seerees-of-iMpe}sine-wend-ine}ode
exp}esiens--drop-fence-impacts-and-the-discharge-ef-fireai-ms-) )
either a single pressure peak or a single burst of multiple
- I pressure peaks which occur for a duration of less than one second.
as measured on a beak unweighted sound level meter.
�! -3-
i
I
�I
I
it
II
Ili
it I
ij F. "Noise" means the intensity, duration and character
I� of sounds, from any and all sources.
�i
( (6----"Ne#se-d�sbt�rbeneeu-menne-eny-serind-rrk�eh-enneys;
ild�sbxrbs-er-pertxrb9-per9ens-raith-nerxtal-sens�t�v}t#e9--er-any
:; 9axnd-Wh�ek-�n�are9-er-cndengere-�he�r-een►ferb--kee��h;-hearing;
I
G. "Person" means any individual, corporation,
�Ipartnership, association, governmental body, state agency or other
!i entity whatsoever.
H. "Property boundary" means the surveyed line at
i
ground surface, which separates the real property owned, rented,
i or leased by one or more persons, from that owned, rented or
i
leased by one or more other persons, and its vertical extension.
I. "Public nuisance noise" means any unreasonable sound
iwhich either annoys iniures interferes with or endangers the
comfort repose health or safety of an entire neighborhood or
community, although the extent of damage may be unequal.
I I
J. "Receiving property" means real property at the
�I boundaries of which the maximum permissible noise levels specifie
in this Chapter shall not be exceeded from sources outside such
! property.
i'
K. "Sound level meter" means a device which measures
sound pressure levels and conforms to type 1 or type 2 as
�i
specified in the American National Standards Institute publication
S 1.4-1971. An impulse sound level meter shall be a peak or
i impulse unweighted sound level meter which is capable of
i
-4-
i
II
II
I
i
4
i
II
VI
I
measuring impulse sound in conformance with the Type 1 or Tvpe 2
specifications of ANSI 1.4-1971.
�� ( (i,----uSeand-�eve�u-Yneans-e-Freighted-seared-presaare-�eve�
� �nea9ared-by-age-ef-s-seared-�eve�-meter-as�ng-an-u,�u-Weighted
I
network-and-reported-es-BBA-er-BB{a}-) )
i
i
Section 3 . Section 1.4 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
amended as follows:
9 .20. 1( (6) ) 8 . STATE ENABLING LEGISLATION. This Chapter
is in conformance with RCW 70. 107, Noise Control , and Chapter
173-58 WAC Sound Level Measurement Procedures.
Section 4 . Section 1.5 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
deleted.
i
Section 5. Section 1. 6 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
i amended as follows:
! 9 .20.2 ( (4) ) 2 . NOISE CONTROL OFFICE (NCO) --PROGRAM
DEVELOPMENT. The Building Department shall be designated the
i Noise Control Office (NCO) for coordination of the sound level
i
measurement aspects and enforcement of all sections this Chapter
with the exception of Sections 9 20. 106 and 9.20. 110, and for the
i general purpose of sound and vibration abatement and control.
( ( ('the-Ne39e-eenbre�-6ffiee-{NeA}-eke��-have;-�n-addit�en-to-any
I ether-anther€ty-vested-}n-}b--the-pe*�+er-be-
�---2endaeb--er-eaase-te-be-eendaeted;-reeeereh
monitoring;-end-ether-9tad#ee-rebated-te-seared-and-vibrat�en-
M
!
f -5-
I
II
�I
I
�� B---eendnet-programs-ef-pxbiie-edneatien-regarding
the-noise-eentee�-dndrdffinittnsehhepnegaemeentrei-and-ebetement
� activities-ef-e��-mttnieipe�-departments;
I B---Prepare-and-present-reeemmendetiens-te-the-city
I
eenrei�-en-the-designation-ef-eertein-areas-es-gxiet-serves---'these
°� neise-sensitive-areas-may-ineixde;-bt�t-are-net-limited-te;
it
jeperat ens-ef-sekee�s;-� brarj:ea-epen-te-the-publie;-ehxrehes;
lihespita�s--and-nursing-homes-
Er--Study-the-existing-system-ef-trdek-rextes-Within
I the-eemmxnity�-determine-areas-With-a-reeegnisabie-sensitivity-te
I seared-and-vibration-rrhieh-ere-impacted-by-trt�ekst-reeemmend !
ehenges-er-meth£ieetien-te-the-trnek-rer�tes-te-minimise-tke-sennd
I end-vibretien-en-res#dentiai-areas-and-quiet-senes�
P---Beve�ep-e-generalised-sound-expesnre-map-ef-the
� city;-a-�eng-term-pear+-far-achieving-c-desired-�eve�-ef-quiet-in
l) the-eity;-and-eeerdinate-With-the-Planning-Bepartment-the
integration-ef-this-plan-into-tke-eemprehensive-punning-process
ef-the-eity-) )
�I� Section 6. Section 1.7 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
amended as follows:
'I
Ij
(I 9 . 20. 2 ( (B) ) 6. NOISE CONTROL OFFICE
II (NCO) --RESPONSIBILITIES AND POWERS. The responsibilities and
powers of the Noise Control Office shall be as follows:
j A. The issuance of warnings, abatement notices, and
citations of violation on the abatement and control of noise;
i�
II -6-
I�
it
it
i
�I
f B. The granting of time extensions according to
procedures specified in Section 9.20. ( (60) ) 98 ;
C. The reviewing of any permit, license, variance,
zone change, or proposed land use which may be subject to review
by City personnel, wherein noise disturbances may be a factor, to
insure compliance with the intent and provisions of this Chapter;
I
D. Coordinate the noise control activities of all
lmunicipal departments and work with appropriate municipal, county,
state, and federal agencies to implement the purposes of this
chapter and, where appropriate, enter into contracts with the
i approval of the City Council for the procurement of technical and
enforcement services.
Section 7. Section 2 . 1 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
1 deleted.
i
Section 8 . Section 2 . 2 of Ordinance 2113, as last
amended by Ordinance 2673 , is hereby deleted.
i
Section 9 . Section 3 . 1 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
amended as follows:
i
9 .20. ( (49) } 30. ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGNATIONS FOR NOISE
ABATEMENT. Environmental Designations for Noise .Abatement (EDNA)
are declared. They are based primarily on the Zoning Code, but
also take into consideration the past, present, and future usage,
as well as the usage of adjacent and other lands in the vicinity.
Designation of such EDNA's are based on the following typical uses
-7-
i
�i
�j A. Class "A" EDNA are lands where human beings
!� reside and sleep. Typically, Class A EDNA will be the following
I
types of property used for human habitation:
1. Residential;
i2 . Multi-family living accommodations;
l l
3 . Recreation and entertainment (e.g. , camps,
Ilparks, camping facilities, and resorts) ;
ii
4 . Community service (e.g. , orphanages, homes
II
i for the aged, hospitals, health and correctional facilities) ;
i
i
( (5---fee-Bream-and-vegeteb�e-vender-*aelt#e�es�)
B. Class "B" EDNA are lands involving uses
requiring protection against noise interference with speech.
Typically, Class B EDNA will be the following types of property:
i�
1. Commercial living accommodations;
2 . Commercial dining establishments;
I
3 . Motor vehicle services;
I
i1
4 . Retail services;
i
5. Banks and office buildings;
�i
I�
6. Miscellaneous commercial services, property )
i not used for human habitation;
it
�i
i�
I
I�
I
I
7 . Recreation and entertainment, property not
used for human habitation (e.g. , theaters, stadiums, fairgrounds
iand amusement parks) ;
i
� 8 . Community services (e.g. , education,
i religious, governmental, cultural and recreational facilities) .
C. Class "C" EDNA are lands involving economic
her noise levels than
I activities of such a nature that higher
experienced in other areas is normally to be anticipated.
Typically Class C EDNA will be the following types of property:
1. Storage, warehouse, and distribution
facilities;
I
2 . Industrial property used for the production
I
it and fabrication of durable and nondurable man-made goods;
3 . Agricultural and silvicultural property used
for the production of crops, wood products or livestock.
li
Section 10. Section 3 . 2 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby .
amended as follows:
�I
it 9.20. ( (44) ) 34 . ZONING CLASSIFICATION FOR EDNAIs. The
ifollowing land use zoning classifications as found in the Kent
Zoning Code are assigned the EDNA classification below:
I
I
i Zone EDNA
l
RA, R-11 MR-Dr MR-M
MR-H MR-G MHP PUD Class A
O, NCC, CC, DC, HC
II GC CM Class B
-9-
I
I
Ij
ll
:I MA, M-i, M-21 M-3 , SU
i
(Extractive industries) Class C
I
Section 11. Section 4 . 1 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
Ilamended as follows:
!' 9 .20. ( (46) ) 38 . MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE
i
I
j LEVELS. No person shall cause or permit noise to intrude into the
property of another person, which noise exceeds the maximum
permissible noise levels set forth below in this Section, with the
point of measurement being at any point within the receiving
I property. The noise limitations established are as set forth in
lithe following table after any applicable adjustments provided for
Ilin this Chapter are applied.
TABLE I -
Maximum Permissible Environmental Noise Levels
EDNA OF EDNA OF RECEIVING PROPERTY
NOISE SOURCE
Class A Class B Class C
�I Class A 55 dBA 57 dBA 60 dBA
Class B 57 dBA 60 dBA 65 dBA
I Class C 60 dBA 65 dBA 70 dBA
I
!) Section 12 . Section 4 . 2 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
` amended as follows:
l
9. 20. ( (52) ) 42. DEVIATIONS. The following deviations
from the maximum permissible noise levels are permitted:
A. Between the hours of ten p.m. and seven a.m. the
noise limitations of Table I shall be reduced by ten dBA for -
li receiving property within Class "A" EDNA's.
I -10-
i
I '
i
i
II
w �
B. At any hour of the day or night the applicable
j noise limitations in Table I and in subsection (1) above may be
I
Ilexceeded for any receiving property by no more than:
1. Five dBA for a total of fifteen minutes in
any one-hour period; or
2 . Ten dBA for a total of five minutes in any
i one-hour period; or
I
3 . Fifteen dBA for a total of 1.5 minutes in
any one-hour period.
i
Section U. Section 4 . 3 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
amended as follows:
9 .20. ( (56) ) 46. DAYTIME EXEMPTION. The following shall
be exempt from the provisions of KCC Section 9. 20.54 between the
hours of seven a.m. and ten p.m. ;
iI A. Sound originating from residential property
II relating to temporary projects for the maintenance or repair of
I
homes, grounds and appurtenances;
I B. Sounds created by the discharge of firearms on
�I authorized shooting ranges;
,I
I
C. Sounds created by aircraft engine testing and
maintenance not related to flight operations; provided, that
aircraft testing and maintenance shall be conducted at remote
I
sites whenever possible;
i
-11-
1�
li
it
i
i
I D. Sounds created by the installation or repair of
essential utility services;
tl
�l E. Sounds created by blasting.
Section 14 . Section 4 . 4 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
amended as follows:
it
it
l 9 .20. ( (60) ) 50. NIGHTTIME EXEMPTION. The following shall'
ii
be exempt from the provision of Section 9 . 20. ( (52�1}) ) 38:
it
I� A. Noise from electrical substations and existing,
li stationary equipment used in the conveyance of water by a utility;
B. Noise from existing industrial installations
I which exceed the standards contained in these regulations and _
which, over the previous three years, have consistently operated y
I in excess of fifteen hours per day as a consequence of process
;i necessity and/or demonstrated routine normal operation. Changes
in working hours, which would affect exemptions under this
i
provision, require approval of the NCO.
t
�I Section 15. Section 4 .5 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
i
amended as follows:
i
9.20. ( (64) ) 54 . EXEMPTIONS OTHER THAN RESIDENTIAL. The `
it I
I following shall be exempt from the provisions of Section
9.20. ( (48) ) 38, except insofar as such provisions related to the
reception of noise within Class "A" EDNA's between the hours of
ten p.m. and seven a.m. : Sounds originating from forest I
harvesting and silvicultural activity.
I
-12-
t
i.
i
i
Section 16. Section 4 . 6 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
amended as follows:
9 .20. ( (68) ) 58 . OTHER EXEMPTIONS. The following shall be
exempt from all provisions of Section 9 .20. ( (48) ) 38:
A. Sound created by the normal operation of motor
,ivehicles upon a public right-of-way;
I
I
B. Sound originating from aircraft in flight and
! sounds that originate at airports which are directly related to
( flight operations;
C. Sounds created by surface carriers engage
d in
„- interstate commerce by railroad;
I
D. Sounds created by warning devices not operating
(� continuously for more than five minutes, or bells, chimes, and
carillons;
E. Sounds created by safety and protective devices
` where noise suppression would defeat the intent of the device or
is not economically feasible;
F. Sounds created by emergency equipment and work
I
j necessary in the interests of law enforcement or for health, I
safety, or welfare of the community;
I
G. Sounds originating from motor vehicles racing
I
events at existing, authorized facilities;
H. Sounds originating from officially sanctioned
I parades and other public events;
-13-
I
i
i
i�
I
i
I. Sounds emitted from petroleum refinery boilers
I
during startup of said boilers; provided, that the startup
operation is performed during daytime hours whenever possible;
J. Sounds caused by natural phenomena and
�Iunamplified human voices;
!
K. Sounds created by watercraft;
itL. Sounds caused by motor vehicles, licensed or
Ilunlicensed, when operated off public highways, except when such
1 sounds are received in Class "A" EDNA's;
M. Sounds originating from natural gas transmission
11 and distribution facilities installed prior to September 11 19 .-
;i shall be exempt from all provisions of this Chapter until the
li Department of Ecology amends WAC 173-60. The NCO shall make
recommendations to the City Council concerning this exemption
after the Department of Ecology completes its .action.
Section 17. Section 5. 1 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
i
�I amended as follows:
�f
j9 . 20. ( (72) ) 62 . EMERGENCY EXEMPTION. Noise caused in they
performance of emergency work for the immediate safety, health, or
I� welfare of the community or individuals of the community, or to
restore property to a safe condition following a public calamity,
shall not be subject to the provisions of this Chapter.
( (Nabbing-in-this-Seetien-shsl�-be-eenstrxed-te-pe�n�t-le
enfareemenh;-ambnlenee;-f#re;-er-ether-emergeney-persenne�-te-make
exeessive-noise-in-the-perferYnenee-ef-their-elt�ties-When-sneh-r..-,..:se
i
is-elearly-unneeessery-) )
�i -14-
i
it
i!
'I
!I
II
i
I,w
I,
Section 18 . Ordinance 2113 is hereby amended to add a
new section as follows:
�I
�i 9 .20. 42 . EXEMPTED SOURCES. No sound source s ecificall
it exempted from a maximum permissible sound level or ermitted under
this Chapter shall be a public nuisance noise or public
I` disturbance noise as provided in Section 96.20. 106 herein.
Ij insofar as the particular source is exempted.
I
II Section 19 . Section 5. 2 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
�I amended as follows:
ij
I� 9 . 20. ( (76) )20. ( (PERMI.T-ISSsANeR---The-Nee-ls-atitherlaee�
,M Ite-grant-perm#ts-es-regt�lred-by-any-pre*�lslen-ef-tk#s-ehapter-as
sxb3eet-ta-stteh-1}mitetlens-as-te-area;-ne�se-levels,--t#me-l�mlts
` and-ether-terms-and-eendltlens-as-lt-determines-ere-appreprlete-ta
preteet-pnblie-health;-safety,--ehd-Welfare-from-the-ne�se
' emanating-therefrom---�h3s-Seet}en-shall-ln-ne-ti*ey-affeet-the-dxty
te-ebteln-any-ether-permit-er-lieense-req�lred-by-laW-for-sxeh
I
aetivltles-) )
i
ji VARIANCES The NCO shall have the authority to grant a
variance where practical difficulties unnecessary hardships and
i! results inconsistent with the general purposes of this noise
control code might result from the strict application of its
provisions.
A. Application The property owner or his/her agent
I
may make application to the NCO for a variance on forms provided
by that office.
B. Public Hearing. The NCO shall hold a public heaein
on any proposed variance and shall give notice thereof by one
-15-
1
iIl
I
i�
�I
publication in the Citv's official newspaper at least ten days
Prior to the hearing.
it
I� Notice shall be given to all property owners within a
radius of at least two hundred (200) feet of the _subiect
property's boundaries and when determined bV the NCO a areater
j distance of the exterior boundaries of the subject property.
I'
C. Conditions for Granting Variances Before any
variance may be granted it shall be shown and the NCO shallfind:
ji
i
j 1 The variance shall not constitute a grant o
special privileges inconsistent with a limitation upon uses of
i( other properties in the vicinity and zone in which the subject W
property is located; and
II2 That such variance is necessary, because of
I� special circumstances relative to size topography, location or
it surroundings of the subject property to provide it with the rights
j� and privileges enjoyed by other property owners in -the vicinity
it and in the zone in which the property is located; and
3 That the granting of the variance will not be
materially detrimental to the comfortl repose health or safety of
the public.
D. NCO Action and Validity. The decision of the NCO I
shall be final and conclusive. An variance authorized b the NCO
I( a y _ `'
shall expire by limitation if the use necessitating the variance
is not begun within one year of authorization or if the use is
discontinued suspended or abandoned for any one-year period.
I
1
i
i
-16-
i
it
it
I
I
Section 20. Ordinance 2113 is hereby amended to add a
11 new section as follows:
li 9 . 20. 74 . PUBLIC NUISANCE NOISES PROHIBITED. Pursuant tol
fl the complaint notice and letter of violation procedure set forth
II in Sections 9 20 78 through 9 20 102 the NCO may determine that a
�i sound constitutes a public nuisance noise as defined in this
�i Chapter. It is unlawful for any person to cause or for any
k' person in possession of property to allow to originate from the
lil property any sound which has been determined a public nuisance
i
noise.
Section 21. Ordinance 2113 is hereby amended to add a
I new section as follows:
I
y (I 9. 20.76. ENFORCEMENT. Unless provided otherwise b this
I
Chapter, the Chief of Police shall be responsible for enforcing
KCC Sections 9 20 106 and 9 20 110 and the Building Department
i (NCO) shall have the responsibility for enforcing the remainder.
IThe specific provisions of this Chapter which describe the NCO's
' methods for obtaining compliance with the noise standards set
�I forth herein such as sections 9 20 70 .74 . .78,_ 82 .90, . 94 ,
!' 98 and 102 are related to the civil enforcement process and
shall not be applicable to any criminal enforcement action
initiated by the Chief of Police.
where appropriate and necessary for the enforcement of
j� this Chapter, the NCO or the Chief of Police may rectuest _the
II assistance of the Noise Control Office of the Seattle-King County
1 Health Department and the Kent City Attorney.
I
1
-17-
I,
�I
�I
i
i
Section 22 . Section 6. 1 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
�Iamended as follows:
9. 20. ( (84) ) 78 . COMPLAINTS REGARDING VIOLATIONS.
Whenever a violation of this chapter occurs, or is alleged to have
joccurred, any person may file a written complaint. Such complaint
.i
' shall state fully the causes and basis thereof and shall be filed
; With the Building Department (NCO) . The NCO shall properly record
such complaint, immediately investigate, and take any necessary
'faction thereon as provided by this Chapter.
�I
i Section 23 . Ordinance 2113 is hereby amended to add a
new section as follows:
II 9 .20.82 . RIGHT OF ENTRY. Upon Presentation of the
11proper credentials the NCO with the consent of the occupant, or
i1with the consent of the owner of any unoccupied building.
;i structure property or portion thereof, or pursuant to a lawfully
issued warrant may enter at all reasonable times anv buildinct
�Istructure property or portion thereof to inspect the same
whenever necessary to make an inspection to enforce or determine
compliance with the provisions of this Chapter over which he/she
has enforcement responsibility or whenever he/she has cause to
believe that a violation of any provision of this Chapter other
than 9 20 34 or 9 20 38 has been or is being committed; PROVIDED,
if the building structure property or portion thereof is
unoccupied, the NCO shall first make a reasonable effort to locate,
the owner or other persons having charge or control of the
I� building structure property or portion thereof and demand
II entry. If the NCO is unable to locate the owner or such other
I� ersons and he has reason to believe that conditions therein `
i
-18-
I
I
I'
II
II
�I
I
create an immediate and irreparable health hazard then he shall
make entry.
I
�f
Section 24 . Ordinance 2113 is hereby amended to add a
new section as follows:
I
9 . 20.90. NOTICE AND ORDER.
I�
A. Unless provided otherwise by this Chapter,
whenever the NCO has reason to believe that a maximum permissible
j sound level of Section 9 20 38 is being exceeded that a public
jnuisance noise is being emitted or when a complaint as described
�) in Section 9 .20.78 has been filed and investigated, he may serve a
i
written notice and order directed to the owner of the property:
1person responsible for the property or operator of the source in
the manner directed in Section 9. 20. 94 Method of Service.
lB. The notice shall contain a brief and concise
I description of the conditions alleged to be in violation or to be
a public nuisance noise the provision(s) of this Chapter alleged
to have been violated the sound level readings, if taken,
i including the time and place of their recording.
II
it C. The order shall contain a statement of the
corrective action recruired and shall specify a reasonable time
within which the action must be accomplished.
I
i
Section 25. Ordinance 2113 is hereby amended to add a
new section as follows:
9 . 20. 94 . METHOD OF SERVICE. Service of the notice and
j order shall be made upon the persons named in the notice and
i'
-19-
i
II der either ersona 1 or mailin a co of the notice and
or
IIorder by certified mail postage prepaid return receipt
I� re ested to each erson at his her last k own address. If the
whereabouts of the erso s ' s u kno a d cannot be ascert fined b
the NCO in the exercise of reasonable diligence the NCO shall
make affidavit to that effect and then the service of the notice
and order upon the persons mar be made by publication once each
i week for two (2) consecutive weeks in the Citv's of icia
newspaper. The failure of any such erson to receive the notice
!; and order shall not affect the validity of any proceedings taken
it under this Chapter. Service by certified mail in the manner
provided in this Section shall be effective on the date of mailing.
i
Section 26. Section 5. 3 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
i
amended as follows: _.
9 20 ( (99) ) 98. EXTENSIONS FOR COMPLIANCE.
I�
A. Upon good cause shown by the owner or operator
of any noise source reviewed and measured under Section_
i
9 20. ( (48) ) 38 , the Building Department
_ (NCO) shall have the power
to grant an extension from the operation of this Chapter in order
to allow sufficient time for installation of needed control
equipment, facilities, or modifications to achieve compliance not
to exceed thirty days; provided, that such extension may be
renewed for an additional like period, but only if satisfac tory
Ili progress toward compliance is shown.
"i B. Any person seeking an extension shall file a
II petition with the NCO. ( (the-Ne9-she��-prelept�y-g#ve-Wr}then
i neb�ee-of-sxeh-peg#tiers-te-any-person-Fthe-hee-requested-ne��eeT
W�bh�n-five-days-ef-9xeh-pet�t4en-gin-the-neWspcper-ef-genere�
I -20-
l
;I
it
i�
�I
i
li
�� eiret�latien-xithin-this-xtxnieipality---�f-the-NeA;-in-hisfher
diseretien;-eenelxdes-that-e-hearing-xet�ld-be-advisable;-er-if-any
� person-files-a-xritten-request-fer-e-hearing-er-s-xritten
obeetien-te-a-Brent-of-sxek-extension-xithin-fifteen-days-ef-the
i
•� netiee-provided-#n-this-Seetien;-a-pt�blie-hearing-before-the-pity
�leoxneil-shall-be-held-en-the-petition---A-xritten-transeript-she}}
i
Ibe-#opt-ef-any-snek-hearing---Ne-perx�it-shall-be-issued-fer-any
� e�etensien-xntil-the-fifteen-dad*-reviex-period-has-ended.-) )
it
Any such request for an extension must be received in the NCO
I
office at least five (5) working days prior to the date set for
compliance in the Notice and Order.
i
I C. In granting or denying an extension of the date
{ set for compliance, the NCO shall file ( (and-publish) ) a written
' order, stating the facts and reasons leading to the decision.
Section 27. Section 6. 3 of Ordinance 2113 is hereby
deleted.
Section 28 . Ordinance 2113 is hereby amended to add a
new section as follows:
I9 .20. 102. ABATEMENT NOTICE. After a notice and order
1 has been served as provided in Section 9 20 98 and no recruest for
an extension in the date set for compliance has been received by
the NCO within the time frames set in Section 9.20.98, the NCO
shall issue an abatement notice. The abatement notice shall be
j' served upon the same persons and in the same manner as provided in
the notice and order Section 9.20.90. An abatement notice shall
I�
�! be final and shall serve as the NC Isnotice to the violator that
t -21-
it
I,
I
the matter has been referred to the City Attorney's office to seek
Abatement and penalties through legal process.
" Section 29. Ordinance 2113 is hereby amended to add a
new section as follows:
i
�I 9. 20. 106. PUBLIC DISTURBANCE NOISES. It is unlawful for
I� any person to cause or make or for any person in possession_ of
!I property to allow to originate from the property, unreasonable
Ii
noise which disturbs another, and to refuse or intentionally fail
!1 to cease the unreasonable noise when ordered to do so by a police
I� officer "Unreasonable noise" shall include the following sounds
�I or combination of sounds:
li
A Loud and raucous and frequent repetitive of
j' continuous sounds made by the amplified or unamplified human
voice Exempt from this prohibition are licensed vendors whose
sole method of selling is from a moving vehicle such as ice cream'
vendors and vegetable vendors The content of speech shall not be!
ji considered against any person in determining a violation of this
section;
B. Loud and raucous and frequent repetitive or
I
continuous sounds made by anv animal except that such sounds made
�I in animal shelters commercial kennels veterinary hospitals, pet
shops or pet kennels licensed under and in compliance with
Chapter 9 . 16 of the Kent City Code shall be exempt from this
subsection; provided that notwithstanding any other provision of
this Chapter, if the owner or other person havina custody of the
animal cannot with reasonable inquiry, be located by the
investigating officer or if the animal is a repeated violator of
this subsection, the animal shall be impounded by the pound mast, ;
�I -22-
i�
�I
1 I
�I
�I
II
Mew
or animal control officer in the manner provided in Section
9 16 88 subject to the redemption procedures therein.
I� C. Loud and raucous and frequent repetitive or
continuous sounds made in connection with the starting, o eration
repair, rebuilding or testing of any motor vehicle motorc cle
i off-highway vehicle or internal combustion engine;
li D. Loud and raucous frequent repetitive or
continuous sounds made within the vicinity of any school or other
institution of learning hospital nursing home court or other
designated area where exceptional quiet is necessary, while the
ilsame are in use provided conspicuous signs are displayed in
ad 'acent or contiguous streets including that the same is a cruiet
zone.
i
E. Loud and raucous frequent repetitive or
I continuous sounds created by use of a musical instrument, or other,
device capable of producing sound when struck by an object; a
I� whistle; or a sound amplifier or other device capable of
producing amplifying or reproducing sound; except such noise
emitted from officially sanctioned public events;
i
Ii F. Loud and raucous and frequent repetitive, or
continuous sounds made by any horn or siren attached to a motor
vehicle or water craft except such sounds that are made to warn
I of danger or that are specifically permitted or required by law.
,i
I,
6. Loud and raucous and frequent repetitive or
continuous sounds made in connection with outdoor construction or
:' building of structures including noise made by devices capable of
I
�,. producing sound by either striking or cutting objects such as
i
-23-
'i
I
I
11
�I
i
hammers, saws or other equipment with internal combustion en fines •
PROVIDED HOWEVER such sounds shall be exempt from the provisions
of this ordinance during-the hours of 7: 00 a.m. through 8: 00 .m. •
Monday through Sunday.
Section 30. Ordinance 2113 is hereby amended to add a
new section as follows:
i'
II 9.20. 110. PUBLIC DISTURBANCE NOISE FROM PORTABLE, OR
I
MOTOR VEHICLE AUDIO EQUIPMENT.
A While in Class A or Class B EDNA areas or park
areas residential or commercial zones or any area where
residences schools human service facilities or commercial
establishments are in obvious proximity to the source of the
sound it is unlawful for any Person to cause make or allow to be
made from audio equipment under such Person's control or ownership
the following:
1 Sound from a motor vehicle audio system.
such as a radio tape player or compact disc player, which is
operated at such a volume that it could be clearly heard bv_ a
!� person of normal hearing at a distance of seventy-five feet (751 )
or more from the vehicle itself; or
2 Sound from portable audio equipment, such as
I a radio tape player or compact disc player which is operated at �
1 such a volume that it could be clearly heard by a person of normal
I
hearing at. a distance of seventy-five feet (751 ) or more from the
source of the sound.
I
!I
-24-
li
I�
;i
it
i
i
i'
. II
B. This section shall not apply to persons
ij operating portable audio equipment upon their own premises such
as an owner or tenant or to persons operating such equipment
j! within a public park pursuant to an event under a permit issued
under Kent City Code Section 5.24 . 010, in which event other
provisions of the Noise Code shall apply.
:i C. The content of the sound will not be considered
in determining a violation of this section.
i
i
I
i Section 31. Section 6.2 of Ordinance 2113 , as last
amended by Ordinance 2673 , is hereby amended as follows:
I
I
'i 9 . 20. ( (96) ) 114 . ( (81-9imAT19N8t--MTSBEMEAN9R) ) PUNISHMENT.
�I ( (Any-person-r�*ke-vieletes-any-ef-the-prey#s�en9-ef-this-ehapter-erl
f e�f s-te-eeMp�y-rritl�-any-ef-#ts-regx�re�nents-chef f--xpen-een�*iet�e�
thereof;-be-pt�n�sl�ed-by-a-er�M�nef-fine-er-ferfe�tt�re-net-te-exeeed
iMere-then-f#ve-hundred-dalfer9-er-by-fn►pr#senn►ent-far-net-Mere
than-f88-days;-er-bath.---Eeek-day-9t�eh-v e�etien-eentfnxes-shelf-be
een9 dared-e-separate-offense-} }
A. Conduct made unlawful under Sections 9. 20. 106
i
through 9 20 110 of the Noise Control Code shall constitute a
misdemeanor as defined in Kent City Code Section 1. 02 . 080.
B. Conduct made unlawful under Sections 9.20. 38 throu h
i
9 20 102 of the Noise Control Code shall subject the violator to a
ii civil fine of two-hundred fifty dollars ($250. 00) . This fine
i
shall be cumulative and each day such offense continues shall
constitute a separate violation.
-25-
li
C. Five separate subsecruent offenses by the same
violator of the provisions contained in Section 9 20 38 throucrh
9 20 102 within a five-year period of time shall also constitute a
misdemeanor and may be punished by the criminal penalties
described in Kent City Code Section 1 02 080 and/or -a penalty in
! addition to the civil fine of two-hundred fifty dollars ($250.00)
I) for the initial act of violation and two-hundred fifty dollars
250. 00 er day thereafter until the violation is discontinued.
I
D. Nothing contained in this ( (ehepter) ) Noise Control
Code shall prevent the City from taking such other lawful action
'! as is necessary to prevent or remedy any violation.
Section 32 . Ordinance 2673 entitled:
j
,1 r
An Ordinance of the City of Kent,
! Washington, adding two new subsections to
9.20. 36 and also amending 9 . 20. 88 KCC,
referring specifically to public disturbance
noises to the Kent City Code
is hereby repealed.
Section 33 . Pursuant to WAC 173-60-110 (2) , the City
lAttorney is hereby authorized to submit a copy of this Ordinance
Ito the Director of the Washington State Department of Ecology for
I review and approval.
,I
Section 34 . Any act consistent with the authority and
i
prior to the effective date of this Ordinance is hereby ratified
and confirmed.
it
it
-26-
il
II
it
1�
11
I
Section 35. Severability. If any section, subsection,
Iclause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held
invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent
jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct
and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions hereof.
I
Section 36. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take
I effect and be in force thirty (30) days from the time of its final
passage, publication and approval by the Director of the
Washington State Department of Ecology.
I
i
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
i
1ATTEST:
II
i
I
�iMARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK
II ,
1 APPROVED AS TO FORM:
i
i
II _
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
I
I
PASSED the day of , 1990.
I
APPROVED the day of , 1990.
PUBLISHED the day of , 1990.
-27-
I
I.
i�
I
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
hereon indicated.
I
(SEAL)
I MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK
I
i
I
I
08810-320 -
-28-
I
Kent City Council Meeting
f ' Date December 4 1990
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: 1991 PROPERTY TAX LEVY ORDINANCE
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Adoption of Ordinance4.41':� setting the
property tax levy for 1991, as has been scheduled for tonight's
meeting. The revised deadline for submitting the 1991 property
tax levy to the King County Council is December 14 as no a
The ordinance reflects the increase in the City of Kent's
assessed valuation from approximately 2.8 billion dollars to
3.4 billion dollars. This increase, because of the State's 106%
levy lid, generates a reduction in the City of Kent's total levy
from approximately $3 . 14 per thousand dollars of assessed
valuation to $2.95 per thousand dollars of assessed valuation.
The $2 .95 levy rate includes 20(� for retirement of the Senior
Housing Bond Issue sold in November as approved by the City of
Kent voters in February 1990.
3 . EXHIBIT - Letter from King Coun Council, Property Tax
Ordinance and Property Tax Comp rison
4 . RECOMMENDED Y: Finance De rtment
(Committee, taff, Exam' er, Commission, etc. )
Discussed at th Council meeting of November 20.
5. UNBUD. TED FISCAL ONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAUPERSONNEL NO' : Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDIT RE UI D• $
SOURCE OF FUNDS: /
I l
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmembe moves Councilmember seconds
ti
DISCUSSION:i� --
ACTION•
`T
. 1� Council Agenda
Item No. 3F
3 /=
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent,
Washington, fixing the tax levy
therein for the year 1991.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Levy. There shall be and there is hereby levied against the property in the
City of Kent, Washington, on an assessed value of a municipal tax for the year 1991 for the
purpose and in the sums following, to wit:
Levy per $1,000 of
Fund assessed valuation Amount
For the General Fund, for the purpose of paying the general expenses of municipal
government:
General Fund 2.52618 81639,323
For Voted Bond Interest and Redemption Fund, for the purpose of paying debt service on
the following projects:
Fire Apparatus .016573 56,384
Public Safety .198655 675,852
Senior Housing .200356 681,639
PROVIDED: that the application of the general fund levy shall be consistent with and not
result in a tax revenue in excess of the limitation imposed by RCW 84.55.010.
Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30)
days from and after its passage, approval and publication as provided by law.
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED the day of 1990.
APPROVED the day of 1990.
PUBLISHED the day of 1990.
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
W hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK
3 �
King County Council
Lois North,Chair
Gerald Peterson,Council Administrator
402 King County Courthouse
Seattle,Washington 98104
(206)296-1000
November 14, 1990
RE: Submission of District 1991 Property Tax Levies to the County
Council
EXTENSION OF DEADLINE - December 11, 1990
To the Board of Commissioners:
Due to delays in the certification process, the deadline for filing
district resolutions requesting 1991 property taxes has been
extended to December 11, 1990.
THE REVISED DEADLINE FOR SUBMITTING 1991
PROPERTY TAX LEVIES IS
December 11, 1990
In order for your district to receive any property taxes in 1991,
we must have your resolution by December 11th. This applies to
basic levies provided for by state law as well as excess levies
approved by vote of the people.
If you have any questions, please call the Council Administrator ' s
Office (296-1010) or the Assessor's Office (296-5145) .
Thank you for your cooperation.
Very truly yours,
LOIS NORTH, CHAIR
King County Council
cc: Ruthe Ridder, County Assessor i
LN:JP:pc
Audrey Gruger District 1 Cynthia Sullivan D,stricl 2 Brian Derdowski District 3
Lois North District 4 Ron Sims District 5 Bruce Laing District 6
Paul Barden District 7 Greg Nickels D'sinci 8 Kent Pullen District 9
Printed on Recycled Pepe(
PROPERTY TAX COMPARISON
1990 1991 1991 Budget Change
BUDGET PROPOSED FINAL $ %
ASSESSED VALUATION 2,838,583,851 3,548,229,813 3,402,139,251 563,555,400 19.90A
PROPERTY TAX LEVIES:
GENERAL FUND 7,740,508 8,619,411 8,639,323 898,815 11.6%
FIRE APPARATUS 40,995 56,384 56,384 15,389 37.5%
PUBLIC SAFETY 1,122,769 675,852 675,852 (446,917) -39.8%
SENIOR HOUSING 681,639 681,639 681,639
TOTAL 8,904,272 10,0332286 1090539198 1,1489926 12.99A
LEVY RATES:
GENERAL FUND 2.73 2.43 2.53 (0.20) -7.3%
FIRE APPARATUS 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01 115.7%
PUBLIC SAFETY 0.40 0.19 0.20 (0.20) -50.3%
SENIOR HOUSING 0.19 0.20 0.20
TOTAL 3.14 2.83 2.95 (0.19) -6.1%
By Ordinance 2152 of the King County Council
Junior Taxing Districts are required annually to
submit the following information regarding their
tax levies for the ensuing year as a part of a
formal resolution of the Board of Commissioners.
THE KING COUNTY ASSESSOR HAS NOTIFIED THE COMMISSIONERS OF
CITY OF KENT WASHINGTON THAT THE ASSESSED VALUATION OF
PROPERTY LYING WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF SAID DISTRICT FOR THE
YEAR 1990 IS $ 3,402,139,251
REGULAR (STATUTORY) LEVY (AS APPLICABLE):
EXPENSE FUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 8,639,323
RESERVE FUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
COUPON WARRANT FUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . $
OTHER (SPECIFY). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $
EXCESS (VOTER APPROVED) LEVY:
G.O. BOND FUND LEVY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1,413,875
SPECIAL LEVIES (INDICATE PURPOSE AND DATE
OF ELECTION AT WHICH APPROVED):
$
$
TOTAL TAXES REQUESTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 10,053,198
u
THE ABOVE IS A TRUE AND COMPLETE LISTING OF LEVIES FOR SAID
DISTRICT FOR THE YEAR 1991 AND THEY ARE WITHIN THE MAXIMUMS
ESTABLISHED BY LAW.
A-A,1� lie.
(ICIMfORIZED SIGNA )
Kent City Council Meeting
Date December 4. 1990
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: GROUP HOMES
2 . SUlDUM STATEMENT: Authorize the first meeting date in
January 1991 for a
public hearing to consider action taken on October 2, 1990 by
the Council and clarify the groupings of what would specifically
be in Group I, Group II and Group III.
3 . EXHIBITS• None
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Planning Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO �L YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3G
Kent City Council Meeting
Date December 4 . 1990
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: LIBRARY SERVICES
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: The City recently participated with four
other communities in a study of library services provided by the
King County Library System. IThe need for the study was prompted
by substantial increases in the annual contract amount.1 The
Operations Committee supports the position of the Library Board
and recommends continuation of the present contract.
3 . EXHIBIiSi, Library Board Packet
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NO Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $�N/A
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember mover, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3H
Memo to: Kent City Council
From: The Kent Library Board of Trustees
October 19, 1990
Subject : Rate Increases for King County Library Services
Our Goal :
To ensure that the residents of Kent have reasonable access
to current information. . .
1) to enable them to make informed decisions in a
time when technology is changing our world rapidly
and
2) to be able to fully participate in a democratic
society.
Our Task: '
To understand the issues and advise the city council .
if the increases are equitable
Cost of Library Service
The agreement between the City of Kent and the King County
Library System allows a 50/50 cost sharing for the facility,
site and maintenance, but the library services are paid for
by the City of Kent ' s contract fee . Beginning in 1991, the
Library district has offered to pick up all maintenance costs
for the library building.
The cost of operating the Kent library exceeds the cost of
the Kent contract and will continue to do so until 1993 .
(See exhibit A)
As you know, the accounting system does not provide
information for costs in specific locales . Therefore it is
important to look at it from different perspectives .
1 . Compare Operations cost by Square Footage
You could take the operating costs and divide it by square
footage to compare the cost in Kent to other system
locations .
Overhead costs are in line with the percent of services
received. Kent library represents 6 . 4% of the library
system's square footage . Overhead costs to Kent are 6 . 37% .
Items included in overhead are listed in Exhibit B.
2 . What is provided by Kent taxpayers
Because library buildings are financed through capital bonds
funded through the library taxing district, Kent property
owners are exempt and contribute to facilities through City
of Kent revenue sources only.
In 1991, the county resident pays approximately $ .042/$11000
assessed valuation for service and operations and will also
pay up to $ . 17/$1, 000 of assessed valuation for the bond
issue in the next several years . Kent taxpayers are not
,paying on this bond, they are exempt .
There will be an additional library built in 1997 in the Soos
Creek planning area (part of Kent ' s sphere of in influence)
which again, Kent taxpayers do not fund. A third library in
the East Kent area will be built in 1997, also available to
Kent residents . (Exhibit C)
The Library System is investing in half of the downtown
library and again Kent ' s taxpayers do not contribute to their
half.
3 . Benefits of contracting with a system.
Exhibit D shows the number of Kent residents, by zip code,
who have registered for a library card at other locations
outside the City. This would imply that they found the other
location more convenient for one reason or another and may
use that facility as much as, if not more than, Kent ' s .
There are also a number of shut-ins who use only the mail
service. Another service that would be difficult for a city
program to provide in a cost-effective manner.
Kent residents consistently use three other libraries within
Kent ' s sphere of influence . They are Des Moines, Valley View
and Fairwood libraries .
The list of system-wide benefits is extensive including such
innovations as a computerized catalogue system which will be
available to home computer users in the near future . Please
see Exhibits E for others .
4 . Consider That Expectations are High!
Reviewing these and other facets of the King County Library
services convinced us that the library users of Kent have
built high expectations of the level of services available
and if the City were to decide to provide their own program,
the costs would far outweigh the benefits for years to come.
In Conclusion :
We questioned the validity and comprehensiveness of the
information in the Georgette Report making it difficult to
make a reasonable comparison of alternative options . The
council members indicated their confidence in the quality of
services provided by the King County Library System and we
realized that we did not have the resources to create a
complete comparison of costs .
1
That, coupled with the Council ' s desire to keep
administrative costs contained, we concluded that any more
investigation would be a wasteful use of City funds and
energies .
We recommend that the City Council pay the increased rates
with confidence in the level, quality and cost of King County
Library service as proposed in the October 8th City Council
meeting.
Laurel Whitehurst, Chairman
Ted Ripley, Member
Luella E. White, Member
Joanne Brady, Member
QC•i 19 190 15: 38 FROM KCLS ADMINISTRATION PAGE . 008
City of Kent - Library Contract Rates and Costs of Service
The contract amount is applied toward the cost of operations (staff,
materials, services). Capital costs of the new building are separate from the
contract; the Library District is paying for half of the capital cost of the new
Kent.Library.
The rates are based on the Assessor's Office estimate of district-wide library
levy rate of$.42/$l,000AV in 1991. This rate may fluctuate.
Please note: City of Kent residents are not paying on the KCLS bond issue
which will provide for the new Boos Creek and East Kent-area libraries, and
which will provide for the new computerized catalog, additional books and
other materials available to all users.
1989
Rate: $.28433/$1,000AV
City contract: $725,984
Cost $1;053,195
1990
Rate: $.28433/$1,000AV
City contract: $807,081
Cost: $10201,615
1991
Rate,: $.31.825/$1,000
City contract (estimate): $1,056,088
Cost: $1,630,223 (additional costs for staffing and materials for new larger
library)
The increase in the rate amount is 1/4 of the difference between the
1990 rate of $.28433 and $.42000 or $.3391.
1992
Plate (estimate): $.35215/$1,000AV
City contract (estimate): $1,168,641
Cost: $1,673,202
1993
Rate (estimate);. $.38606/$1,000AV
City contract (estimate): $1,281,195
Cost: $1,60.0,014
Also..:NewSoos Creek Library"` opens with cost: $1,224,709
Total:. $2;824,723
1994
Rate (estimate): $.42000/$1,000AV
City contract (estimate): $1,393,748
Cost: $1,665,411 (Kent)
$1:275,482 (Soos Creek)
$2,940,893
In 1997 - the new library in East Kent area will be open, starting at
operations cost of $951,935 per year. (10/10/90)
CFCi' 19 190 15: 37 FROM KCLS ADMINISTRATION PAGE . 007
Kent Library Costs
The budget information categories are explained as follows. All budget lines
are actual costs as of December 31, 1989.
Salaries/Benefits $358,425
Materials $213,642
Communication $ 24,369
Maintenance/Utilities $ 42,918
Overhead $413*841
Total $1,053.195
Salaries/benefits - For professional and clerical staff, plus benefits.
a=als - Cost includes all books, video cassettes, audio items
(records,. compact discs, cassettes - including books on tape), newspapers
and maga2 ine subscriptions, documents and pamphlets, CD ROM items.
Commu ton - Telephone and postage costs, including TDD
equipment (for people with hearing impairments) and computer
communications equipment and cost. Postage also includes all costs for
books by mail and for overdue notices.
Maintenance/Utilities - Includes upkeep and minor improvements as
well as major repairs such as a new furnace or roof or carpeting. In Des
Moines and Tukwila.- the figure shown is the formulated annual maintenance
payment to the city. In other cases, the amounts are the actual expenditures
incurred by KCLS for the utilities and maintenance of the building.
Ov�e�head - Expenditures which are allocated on a system-wide basis;
overhead'is ;alto-allocated based on the library's percentage of total system
circulation for 1989. For example: Kent, 6.37%.
Overhead includes but is not limited to;
Circulation system, including acquisitions (order) system
On-line catalog
Traveling Library Center
Film Library, including projection equipment
Programming (children's, young adult. adult)
Washington Library Network and other service fees
Deliveries
Acquiring and processing materials
Publicity and publications
Supplies
Equipment repair
Bindery and mendery
Photocopiers
Travel
Insurance
OCT 19 190 15: 36 FROM KCLS ADMINISTRATION PAGE . 005
w The New Kent. Library
The new.library, slated to open in 1991,.is a joint City-Library
District capital project. The 22,500 square foot library will feature
expanded collections and services, including:
*The Library will be a "regional" facility (one of the District's
largest) and will offer current and retrospective collections in a
variety of formats to meet diverse informational, educational,
cultural and recreational needs of users of all ages.
*The emphasis will be on collections and services providing
information*on a detailed level to business and government, the
general public, and students. The library will also include popular
materials, and services to children.
vMe library will also have a large collection of literature, fiction,
and biography titles.
*The new library will house an increased.collection with up to
225,000 items (compared to 133,000 items in the current facility).
*The Kent Regional Library will provide in-depth reference and
user services to assist people, both in-house and by telephone.
*The Library District's new computerized catalog is slated for
installation early in 1991, providing additional access to the
system's collections of materials.
*The.new building will include space for an expanded children's
collection, more reference and popular materials, space for art
display, and a public meeting room for library programs and
community use. The library will also have "business consulting
booths"•for members of S.C.O.R.E. (Service Corps of Retired
Executives) to talk with owners and potential owners of small
businesses. Business people can also use the booths for research,
and for telephone communication with their offices.
More New Libraries
The greater Kent area will also be served by the new Soos Creek
Library, to be located at the intersection of Kent-Kangley Road and
highway 18: This 15,000 square foot library is funded from the
Library District's bond issue and will open in 1992. Another library
funded-from the bond issue in the East Kent-area is a10,000 square
foot building scheduled to open in 1997.
OCT 19 190 15: 37 FROM KCLS ADMINISTRATION PAGE . 006
�"• W
cu
cu 4-J U2 D .�
u w o v >, _m coo
in ci
cd
w. N ° N va
1, ycd
m
V r~
u '� oPo
o oF�
U U
x w
a x a
� U4.
� c 00 to V2
tn
cu
co
>,o o bp
?mil
! r a n � cmoU o ac
d
> V. co
o
cd ca
to v
cN�
> °
a � cz co0cd
cd
c� cis
o o cd 0 � co
. vl.l .J .,v !J �I.� rwil na.Lm nuu.IilOrtnIV rnuc.vu-
Library Card , Registration
King County Library users rarely use a single library. one way to
determine how widely a community uses our system is to list where
library users who live in a specific ZIP code area register to receive
a library card. The residents of the 5 main ZIP codes in the Kent
area have registered to receive cards at 35 King County libraries, the
Traveling Library Center, the Youth service Center, our downtown film
library, and reference department. of the total of 64,722 registered
borrowers in the Kent area, over 20,000 have received their library
cards at -locations other than the current Kent library. Listed below
are the number o£ library .cards which are currently active for the 5
ZIP codes in •.the Kent sphere of influence and the libraries where the
cards were applied for.
KCLS REGISTRATIONS OF PATRONS BY ZIP CODE
AS OF DEC. 1989
Registering 98031 98032 98035 98042 98064 .Total
Branch
5 17
Algona 4 8 3 56 2 288
Bellevue 162 62 191 3 264
B1Diamond 68 10 6 1 38
Bothell 21 fi4 16 134
BlvdPark 54 3 159 6 1117
Burien 375 574 3 5
Carnation 1 1 67 3 407
DesMoines 406 3592 3 1
Duval 1 5 1470 56 4196 . .
Fairwood . 2541 12i 3 7
Fall City 8 . 194 6 3362
Federal Way 600 25. 3 6
Forest Park 3 6 80
Foster 37 37 20 2 82
Issaquah 29 31 1 5
Kenmore 3 1
Kent 26,350 8,382 186 9,256 449 44,623
Kingsgate 28 23 2 13 66
Kirkland 27 13 1 15 5 61
LakeHills 36 21 12 b9
MapleValley 749 63 3,5 39 44
1 14 2
MercerIsland, 31 6 14 5
Muckleshoot 7 5 12
1
Newport ` 37 6 2 55
NorthBend 8 4 18
5
Pacific 23 9 5 37
2
Redmond 35 18 2 0 75
Richmond Beach 1 1 2
Shoreline 29 17 1 60
13
Skyway 64 33 1 25 1 118 '
snoqualmie 10 3
Tukwila ' 42 _ 21 14 1 75
Valley View 206 493 5 718
2
Vashon .11 4 2 2 18.
WhiteCenter 61 88 30 2 18 4
Youth Service C. 1 2 1 4
Traveling Library' 36 7 1 366
Center 322 3
Reference 3 1 8
Film Library 6 1
Totals 32,391 16,314 217 15,217 583 64,722
King County Library System Services and
Collections Available Through the Kent Library
Traveling Library Center - TLC visits residents in four retirement
communities, one low income housing area, and one nursing home in the
Kent area every two weeks. Once a month, TLC visit the 11 homebound
residents, and take books and storytimes to three daycare centers.
Books by Mail - Place a "hold" on a book and when it comes in to any library
in the system, it will be tagged and mailed to you.
Central Purchase - Early selection and purchase of popular titles speeds the
delivery of books and other materials to the library. For example, by the time
the newest James NUchener title is reviewed or advertised in the media,
copies are ready for reserve by library users.
Programs - Kent Library features entertainment, performances, craft
demonstrations, workshops, feature films and classes for people of all ages.
Children's librarians visit the schools and child carcenters
e s and do
'booktalks' and promote use of the library. Storytimes for s
and
preschoolers are popular. The annual "summer reading program" attracts
thousands of young readers in the Kent area.
Interlibrary Loan - If the-Kent Library doesn't have the title you need, KCLS
will get it for you through interlibrary loan. The KCLS Reference Department
also serves as a system resource to the 36 community libraries, providing
answers to hard-to-find questions.
The Catalog Soon: no more.microfiche. The new catalog, which features
improved access to the system's collection, will be available in early 1991.
County-wide Library Service Where You Live and Work -Throughout nearly
all of King County, a KCLS card holder can use a library. Branches are located
as far south as Federal Way, east to Skykomish, and. north to Bothell. Library
users also have borrowing privileges with nearby districts.
Meeting Rooms - The Kent Library makes available its meeting room not
only for library programs but also for community groups.
Open Hours - The Kent Library is open 7 days a week for your convenience,
including year-round Sunday open hours.
Other Services - The Kent Library is a popular spot to register to vote, pick
up tax forms (and mail forms on "tax night"), pick up Christmas tree cutting
maps, farm produce maps, City event calendars and other municipal
announcements and publications, and other materials.
The Collection
Whether you need a company's annual report, a college catalog, car
resale data,, a film for a program, vacation reading, stock quotes -- the library
can provide the information.
SCIS has over two million items, including books, books on tape,
video and audio cassettes, compact discs, magazines, films, and goverment
documents. Reference materials are also availalbe, including computerized
databases. (10/16/90)
QCT 19 190 15: 35 FROM KCLS AD11INISTRATION PAGE . 003
r
c
Reference Services - Kent Library
These costs for reference services do not represent all the reference
services available in the library, only new services added in 1989 and 1990.
Costs include subscription and installation only; costs do not include
supplies (such as paper and ink cartridges for the reader-printers).
General Periodicals Index ("super" InfoTrac) $5,000 annual
Business Collection $10,000 annual
Magazine Collection $9,950 annual
Datatimes $7,000*
Career Resources Information $1,053
Reader-Printer (1) $7,500
Fax $2.000 eq. & installation
$42,503
*ZkUatimes is charged based on use. nefeeforBelleme in 1989 was$7,=.As more and more
people use this service that provides access to newspaper articles, the cost will continue to rise.
Reserves
Kent Library users requested 27.072 items from other KCLS libraries during
1989. In the first 7 months of 1990, on the average, a Kent Library user has
requested an item from another KCLS library every 7 minutes during open
hours.
The Catalog
The new on-line catalog (to replace the microfiche) will provide better
access to the system's holdings through public access terminals.
*The new Kent Regional Library will have 20 terminals for the public's
use; 10 for staff use.
*The new Soos Creek Library will have 16 terminals for the public's
use and 9 for staff use.
*The new East Kent area library will have 18 terminals for the public's
use and 8 for staff use.
The new circulation and catalog system is funded from the library district's
1988 bond issue and is not being paid for by Kent residents.
Additional InfoTrac Electronic Stations
The King County Library System'is currently talking with software vendors
about including the InfoTrac service on all of our public access catalogs. This
means that each terminal (300+ system-wide) would include both the
catalog to our system's holdings and the magazine information currently on
InfoTrac, updated monthly. This is a new service, not currently available at
other libraries in the United States. (10/16/90)
r
a
� i
Kent City Council Meeting
Date December 4 . 1990
Category Other Business
1. CEDAR MEADOWS NO. SU-90-4
2 This meeting will consider the Hearing
Examiner's recommendation of conditional approval of an
application by J&G Industry for a 15-lot single family
residential preliminary subdivision. The property is located on
the west side of 116 Avenue S.E. , approximately 100 feet north
of S. 229th Street.
a
6
3 . EXHIBITS: Mem , staff report, Hearing Examiner minutes and
findings and r commendation
4. RECOMMENDED BY Hearing Examiner. 10/31/90
(Committee, taff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
With approval with 12 conditions.
5. UNBUDG FI ERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL PERSONNE NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REOIRED: S. N/A
SOURCE OF FUNDS,:
7 . CITY COUNCIL AgON:
Councilmember_- fi� 1 moves, Councilmember � seconds
to accept/mGdl-fyfre- e� the findings of the Hearing Examiner; to
adopt/ the Hearing Examiner's recommendation of
approval with twelve (12) conditions of the Cedar Meadows
No. SU-90-4 15-lot single family residential preliminary
subdivision.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
\ � �✓ Council Agenda
�'j Item No. 4A
November 26, 1990
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
The Kent City Council will be considering the Cedar Meadows
Preliminary Plat #SU-90-4 at the regularly scheduled public meeting
on Tuesday, December 4, 1990 at 7 : 00 p.m, in the Kent City Hall,
Council Chambers.
The City Council has the option to adopt or reject the
recommendations as set forth by the Hearing Examiner in the
findings issued October 31, 1990. If the City Council deems that
a change in the recommendation is necessary, the Council will
schedule a public hearing.
Marie Jense , CMC
City Clerk
The Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendations and the minutes
of the meeting are available in the Kent Planning Department for
perusal.
The following parties of record were notified of this meeting on
J & G INDUSTRY WALTER NORTH KAREN SITYNE
18124 RIVIERA PL SW 22617 113 PL SE 11317 SE 228TH PL
SEATTLE WA 98166 KENT WA 98031 KENT WA 98031
JOAN HEHR O A HUNTINGTON ANNE/STEVE CHATMAN
13470 SE 242ND ST 22708 114TH PL SE 11410 SE 229TH
KENT WA 98042 KENT WA 98031 KENT WA 98031
JEFF MANN MARIANNE HERIOT RICHARD H NORDON
PAC-TECH ENG INC 11418 SE 229TH ST 11416 SE 229TH PL
6100 SOUTHCTR BLVD KENT WA 98031 KENT WA 98031
#100
SEATTLE WA 98188 EUGENE W KRAMER
11412 SE 229TH PL
JON ROSE KENT WA 98031
PAC-TECH ENG INC
6100 SOUTHCTR BLVD MAX FULLNER
#100 22809 116TH AVE SE
w SEATTLE WA 98188 KENT WA 98031
CITY of Wtld
CITY OF KENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
MEMORANDUM
November 29, 1990
MEMO TO: MAYOR DAN KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: CEDAR MEADOWS #SU-90-4
On October 17, 1990 the Kent Hearing Examiner held a public hearing
to consider a request by J & G Industry for a 15-lot single family
residential preliminary subdivision. The property is approximately
3 . 5 acres in size, and is located on the west side of
116th Avenue SE, approximately 100 feet north of S 229th Street.
On October 31, 1990 the Hearing Examiner, oval of
this preliminary subdivision with the ollowing conditions:
A. PRIOR TO OR IN CONJUNCTION WITH RECORDATION OF FI PLAT:
1. The final plat mylar or linen shall show a dedication of
property (minimum size of 7, 200 square feet) as common
open space for the subdivision. The open space
dedication shall be on the southern portion of the
subject property; the exact boundary of the dedication
shall be determined by the Planning Director upon
submittal of an accurate tree plan for the site.
2 . The final plat mylar or linen shall bear a notation which
states that development on all lots shall comply with
City of Kent solar setback regulations.
3 . The final plat mylar or linen shall bear a notation which
states that an accurate tree plan shall be required prior
to the issuance of any development permits for the lots.
Further, an accurate tree plan identifying all trees with
a caliper of six-inches or greater shall be submitted to
the Planning Department for approval prior to issuance of
any grading permits for road or other work associated
with the subdivision.
4 . Obtain City or appropriate utility district approval of
detailed engineering drawings and construct or bond for
the following:
a. Sanitary Sewer: Extend gravity sanitary sewer
system capable of serving all lots and any adjacent
service areas.
Memo To: Mayor Dan Kelleher and City Council Members
November 29, 1990
Page 2
b. Water: Extend public water system to meet domestic
and fire flow requirements of all lots.
C. Storm System: Extend the public storm water system
to service the plat and any adjacent tributary
areas.
d. Cul-de-sac: Provide full street improvements to
proposed South 228th Place, including an asphalt
paved roadway 28 feet in width from curb to curb,
curb and gutter, sidewalks along the frontage of
all lots within the plat, street lights, storm
drainage, underground utilities, street signs, and
related appurtenances. The cul-de-sac turnaround
shall have a curb return radius of 45 feet and a
right-of-way radius of at least . 50 feet.
e. 116th Avenue: Widen and improve the west half of
116th. Avenue Southeast for the entire portion
abutting the subject property. Improvements will
include asphalt paving 18 feet in width as measured
from the street centerline to face of curb, curb
and gutter, sidewalks, street lighting, storm
drainage, underground utilities, and related
appurtenances. Curb return radii shall be 35 feet
at the intersection of South 228th Place and 116th
Avenue Southeast.
f. Rights-of-way: Dedicate all necessary right-of-way
and provide all necessary easements both on-site
and off-site for the above improvements.
g. SEPA: Comply with all applicable SEPA conditions.
As part of preparing the detailed analysis of
existing drainage conditions and recommended
improvements (as the follow-up to the June 6, 1990
Drainage Report) , the applicant shall notify all
parties who testified at the public hearing (names
and addresses to be supplied by the Office of the
Hearing Examiner) of the follow-up report and allow
an opportunity to comment on it (at least five
days) for the purpose of supplying additional
information on drainage conditions and necessary
improvements.
Memo To: Mayor Dan Kelleher and City Council Members
November 29, 1990
Page 3
B. PRIOR TO OR IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ISSUANCE OF A DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT ON ANY LOT•
1. Complete the construction of all improvements required as
SEPA conditions and plat conditions.
2 . The property line on the north side of the proposed
development should be clearly marked by the applicant to
avoid . intrusions into the adjacent "greenbelt" during
times of construction.
MP:ch
MP:a:su904
crry cF
CITY OF KENT
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
FILE NO: CEDAR MEADOWS ISU-90-4
APPLICANT: J & G INDUSTRY
REOUEST: A request to subdivide 3 . 5 acres into 15 residential
lots.
LOCATION: The property is located on the west side of
116th Avenue SE, approximately 100 feet north of
S. 229th Street.
APPLICATION FILED: 6/12/90
DEC. OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
ISSUED• 8/24/90
MEETING DATE: 10/17/90
RECOMMENDATION ISSUED: 10/31/90
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVED with conditions
STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Fred Satterstrom, Planning Department
Carol Proud, Planning Department
Kevin O'Neill, Planning Department
Gary Gill, Public Works Department
PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Jeff Mann, representative of applicant
John Rose
Other
Orville Huntington
Walter North
Richard H. Nordon
Max Fullner
Karen Shyne
Eugene Kramer
Steve Chatman
WRITTEN TESTIMONY: None
1
Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendation
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
INTRODUCTION
After due consideration of all the evidence presented at public hearing
on the date indicated above, and following an unaccompanied personal
inspection of the subject property and surrounding area by the Hearing
Examiner at a time prior to the public hearing, the following findings,
conclusions and recommendation are entered by the Hearing Examiner on
this application.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The applicant, J & G Industry, on behalf of the owner, Joan Hehr,
proposes to subdivide approximately 3 .5 acres into 15 residentia.l
lots. The subject property is located on the west side of 116th
Avenue SE, about 100 feet north of S. 229th Street.
2. The subject property is zoned R1-7.2, Single Family Residential
with a minimum lot size of 7, 200 square feet. The average
proposed lot size is 9 , 000 square feet. The smallest lot proposed
. is 7,800 square feet.
3 . Land use surrounding the subject property is exclusively single-
family residential development. There are two single-family
residences and two accessory buildings currently located on the
site.
4. The City-wide Comprehensive Plan Map and the East Hill Land Use
Plan Map both designate the site as SF, Single-Family Residential.
The East Hill Plan Map specifies 4 to 6 dwelling units per acre.
Both Comprehensive Plans contain goals that support development of
single-family residences in a manner compatible with surrounding
development and with the natural environment.
5. The proposed subdivision could result in as many as 15 lots.
Assuming 2 .9 persons per household, this may mean as many as 44
additional people in the area who would draw on services typically
associated with the City. Services are available as follows:
Water and Sewer
Adequate water and sanitary sewer systems are available to
serve the property. These are described in detail on page 5
of the Planning Department report.
2
Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendation
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
Streets
A cul-de-sac off on 116th Avenue SE could provide adequate
street access to the site. However, some of the right-of-way
width of the cul-de-sac would be less than the required 50
foot minimum. This is due to the City's desire to locate the
cul-de-sac opposite from the street which now exists to the
east of 116th Avenue NE and the proximity of the proposed
layout of the lots to an adjacent parcel which is not part of
the proposed plat. The City testified that a reduction of
the right-of-way to 44 feet would not jeopardize access to
the property. Some residents surrounding the subject
property expressed concerns about restricted access to
116th Avenue NE during periods of construction. Their
testimony also noted the current heavy load of traffic on
116th Avenue NE.
Storm Water System
The proper drainage of storm water runoff is the primary
concern of residents surrounding the subject property. The
storm water drainage system that presently exists in the area
does not work well. The surrounding residents noted that the
current system is inadequate for storm water drainage
throughout both the Park Mar development and the Eastridge
No. 2 development. Concerns were expressed regarding the
maintenance of a proposed detention pond on proposed lot #9 .
Concerns were also raised regarding the measurement of storm
water flow and whether it would be based on the site with or
without the existing vegetation.
Parks
The Parks Department noted that there are no community parks
available near the subject property and recommended that one
lot be preserved as open space for park use. Prospective
purchasers of homes within the proposed development will
undoubtedly have a desire and need to utilize park
facilities. The Comprehensive Plan Goals of the City include
offering a suitable living environment for families supported
by adequate public facilities. As many as 44 persons will
require public facilities, including use of parks. The
nearest public open space area to the subject site appears to
be the Park orchard Elementary School. This area is
difficult to access from the subject site and offers little
in the way of recreational opportunities.
The applicant objected to dedication of open space as a
mandatory requirement but did volunteer to either dedicate
park space or pay a voluntary payment in lieu of park
- 3
Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendation
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
development in an amount to be set by- the City as a
contribution toward a public park in the vicinity.
6. In addition to concerns about storm water drainage and traffic
impacts, two residents to the north of the subject property
expressed concerns about violation of a "green belt" easement they
said exists around the perimeter of their subdivision. A portion
of this green belt borders the subject property. The residents
are concerned that this area not be intruded upon during
development of the site or afterwards. These residents of this
area are particularly concerned about children intruding upon
their property for recreational purposes.
7. A Mitigated Declaration of Nonsignificance was issued for the
proposal on August 24, 1990. The conditions attached to that DNS
generally required studies and improvements related to downstream
storm drainage, on site detention of storm water runoff, traffic
impacts, and tree retention. That DNS was not appealed.
8. Notice of the public hearing on this proposal was properly mailed,
posted and published.
CONCLUSIONS
1. General. The purpose of the subdivision regulations, which
includes the requirement for preliminary plat approval, is to:
provide rules, regulations, requirements, and
standards for subdividing land in the City of
Kent, insuring that the highest feasible quality
in subdivision will be attained; that the public
health, safety, general welfare, and aesthetics of
the City of Kent shall be promoted and protected;
that orderly growth, development, and the
conservation, protection and proper use of land
shall be insured; that proper provisions for all
public facilities . . . shall be made; that maximum
advantage of site characteristics shall be taken
into consideration; that conformance with
provisions set forth in the City of Kent Zoning
Code and Kent Comprehensive Plan shall be insured.
Section 12. 04 .262 of the Kent Subdivision Code sets forth the
particular requirements for an application for preliminary plat
approval. That section details nine specific requirements that
must be met before a preliminary plat can be recommended for approval.
4
Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendation
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
Based on the Findings detailed above, and with the conditions
recommended in the Decision below, the application will conform to
the standards set forth in City ordinances and should be APPROVED.
2. Park Improvement. It is appropriate for the applicant to provide
some park facilities for the prospective home purchasers within
the proposed development. The applicant objected to the
recommendation of the Parks Department and the Planning Department
that there be a dedication of open space of at least 7,200 square
feet as a condition to approval of the preliminary plat. The
applicant submitted an alternative proposal (Exhibit #3) whereby
a fee in lieu of dedication would be allowed.
The recommendation of the Parks Department and the Planning
Department should be accepted as a condition of approval. The
proposal of the applicant to voluntarily agree to a fee in lieu of
dedication, while laudatory, could not be effectively or
efficiently implemented under existing state law and thus must be
rejected. While RCW 58 . 17. 110 authorizes a city to require
dedications of land as a condition of subdivision approval, RCW
82 . 02 imposes specific restrictions on the dedication of land.
That statute requires that a dedication of land be within the
w proposed subdivision and that it be demonstrated to be "reasonably
necessary" as a direct result of the proposed development. Those
requirements are met by the recommendation of the Parks
Department. An impact fee for a public facility such as a park,
on the other hand, must meet a variety of tests before it can be
imposed as a condition of approval. See, RCW 82 . 02, 1990
Amendments. These include a voluntary agreement, placement in a
reserve account agreed upon by the parties, and expenditure within
five years in accordance with a facilities improvement plan. It
is uncertain whether these conditions could be met by the City or
the applicant. The recommended requirement of a dedication of
land within the proposed subdivision best addresses the impact of
the proposed subdivision on the demand for park facilities.
3 . Drainage Concerns. The issue of storm water runoff was addressed
in some detail in the Mitigated Declaration of Nonsignificance
issued for the proposal on August 24, 1990. The conditions
imposed include the necessity of a pollution discharge permit
which will require treatment of storm water runoff prior to
discharge into the City system; an analysis of the downstream
storm water drainage system to determine if any deficiencies
exist; a commitment to correction of deficiencies with necessary
improvements as agreed to by the Public Works Department; and on-
site detention of storm water runoff in accordance with the City
Code. The analysis and identification of necessary improvements
Y 5
Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendation
Cedar Meadows
JSU-90-4
should occur prior to or in conjunction with the recording of the
final plat. The actual construction of improvements should occur
prior to or in conjunction with the issuance of any development
permit.
Testimony at the public hearing from residents surrounding the
proposed development provided valuable information on current
storm water drainage conditions. The individuals who testified,
and other surrounding residents, could be an ongoing source of
reliable information on storm water drainage conditions and
possible improvements to mitigate the impact of the proposed
subdivision. An opportunity for surrounding residents to review
and comment on the analysis of existing conditions and proposed
improvements would be helpful to assure that storm water runoff
impacts of the proposed subdivision will be adequately addressed.
4. Waiver of 50 Foot Width of Cul-de-Sac. The preliminary plat site
plan indicates the width of the east end of the cul-de-sac street
is to be 44 feet. This is less than the 50 feet required by
Section 12 . 04.354 (b) (9) of the Kent Subdivision Code. That Code,
however, provides for an exception to the Code requirements when,
in the opinion of the Hearing Examiner, undue hardship may be_-
created as a result of strict . compliance with the Code. An
exception may be allowed if the Examiner finds that:
1. There are special physical circumstances or conditions
affecting the property so that strict application of the code
would deprive the applicant of the reasonable use of his
land;
2 . The exception is necessary to insure such property the rights
and privileges enjoyed by other properties in the area and
under similar circumstances;
3 . The granting of the exception will not be detrimental to the
public welfare or injurious to other property in the
vicinity.
The proposed deviation of six feet from the 50 feet specified in
the Subdivision Code meets all necessary criteria to allow an
exception. The parcel to the immediate northeast of the proposed
subdivision cannot be required to dedicate right-of-way at this
time as it is not part of the proposal. It is appropriate to
allow a width reduction so that the lot layout as proposed can
occur without reduction in lot sizes. The proposed reduction of
six feet in width will not harm other property in the vicinity.
6
Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendation
Cedar Meadows
JSU-90-4
No one presented any testimony against the exception. The
exception should be granted.
DECISION
It is recommended that the application for approval of the preliminary
plat be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:
A. PRIOR TO OR IN CONJUNCTION WITH RECORDATION OF FINAL PLAT:
1. The final plat mylar or linen shall show a dedication of
property (minimum size of 7, 200 square feet) as common open
space for the subdivision. The open space dedication shall
be on the southern portion of the subject property; the exact
boundary, of the dedication shall be determined by the
Planning Director upon submittal of an accurate tree plan for
the site.
2. The final plat mylar or linen shall bear a notation which
states that development on all lots shall comply with City of
Kent solar setback regulations.
3 . The final plat mylar or linen shall bear a notation which
states that an accurate tree plan shall be required prior to
the issuance of any development permits for the lots.
Further, an accurate tree plan identifying all trees with a
caliper of six-inches or greater shall be submitted to the
Planning Department for approval prior to issuance of any
grading permits for road or other work associated with the
subdivision.
4 . Obtain City or appropriate utility district approval of
detailed engineering drawings and construct or bond for the
following:
a. Sanitary Sewer: Extend gravity sanitary sewer system
capable of serving all lots and any adjacent service
areas.
b. Water: Extend public water system to meet domestic and
fire flow requirements of all lots.
C. Storm System: Extend the public storm water system to
service the plat and any adjacent tributary areas.
7
Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendation
Cedar Meadows
OSU-90-4
d. Cul-de-sac: Provide full street improvements to
proposed South 228th Place, including an asphalt paved
roadway 28 feet in width from curb to curb, curb and
gutter, sidewalks along the frontage of all lots within
the plat, street lights, storm drainage, underground
utilities, street signs, and related appurtenances. The
cul-de-sac turnaround shall have a curb return radius of
45 feet and a right-of-way radius of at least 50 feet.
e. 116th Avenue: Widen and improve the west half of 116th
Avenue Southeast for the entire portion abutting the
subject property. Improvements will include asphalt
paving 18 feet in width as measured from the street
centerline to face of curb, curb and gutter, sidewalks,
street lighting, storm drainage, underground utilities,
and related appurtenances. Curb return radii shall be
35 feet at the intersection of South 228th Place and
116th Avenue Southeast.
f. Rights-of-way: Dedicate all necessary right-of-way and
provide all necessary easements both on-site and off-
site for the above improvements.
g. SEPA: Comply with all applicable SEPA conditions. As
part of preparing the detailed analysis of existing
drainage conditions and recommended improvements (as the
follow-up to the June 6, 1990 Drainage Report) , the
applicant shall notify all parties who testified at the
public hearing (names and addresses to be supplied by
the Office of the Hearing Examiner) of the follow-up
report and allow an opportunity to comment on it (at
least five days) for the purpose of supplying additional
information on drainage conditions and necessary
improvements.
B. PRIOR TO OR IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ISSUANCE OF A DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT ON ANY LOT•
1. Complete the construction of all improvements required as
SEPA conditions and plat conditions.
2. The property line on the north side of the proposed
development should be clearly marked by the applicant to
avoid intrusions into the adjacent "greenbelt" during times
of construction.
8 _.
Hearing Examiner Findings and Recommendation
Cedar Meadows
�- #SU-90-4
Dated this 31st day of October, 1990.
7:
THEODORE PAUL HUNTER
Hearing Examiner
APPEALS FROM HEARING EXAMINER DECISIONS.
Request of Reconsideration
Any aggrieved person may request a reconsideration of a decision by the
Hearing Examiner if either (a) a specific error of fact, law, or
judgment can be identified or (b) new evidence is available which was
not available at the time of the hearing. Reconsideration requests
should be addressed to: Hearing Examiner, 220 Fourth Avenue S. , Kent,
WA 98032. Reconsiderations are answered in writing by the Hearing
Examiner.
Notice of Right to Appeal
The decision of the Hearing Examiner is final unless a written appeal
to the Council is filed by a party within 14 days of the decision.
The appeal must be filed with the City Clerk. Usually, new information
cannot be raised on appeal. All relevant information and arguments
should be presented at the public hearing before the City Council.
A recommendation by the Hearing Examiner to the City Council can also
be appealed. A recommendation is sent to the City Council for a final
decision; however, a public hearing is not held unless an appeal is
filed.
"' 9
City of Kent - Planning Department
--/<YLIW I �,,.;,,�'
� ��� \ w ✓' v��� I
Y
WIwNT
�a" ���'• �/^ 12 13 14 1 1 Y t —iitv"'• / Il
L-
-� 3 T: •� 1,1 £.2281h PLC
., �._.
4 Al
3 Q 2 A rate' �.
We
� I ��„t��� l�,s• �E\ SE 229/h ST. I
a { s
APPLICATION NAME: Cedar Meadows
NUMBER: SU-90-4 DATE: October 17, 1990
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat
LEGEND —
Application site
SITE PLAN Zoning boundary
City limits
City of Kent - Planning Department
d w
N W
_ y SE 223RD ST
I +O � � zN =QN = W I W = W
224TH ST ^ < PD E �a ^aH,ay 9
SE 2 TH uwf OAS' SE -'2233RD-•PL
lfi.. .--_.. -'--
0� 9YH (A <224TH QN SE 225TH
22 M m
SE ST < a E 5TH M �' W
5E 2Z5YH FW - < W
PL = _xx� ^> i y = SE
SE 2267H ST o my "< "'a j .~�. 226 H
= Ww = O
S - < P
n <N SE /-a `i^ f ^ SE 227TH PL
�o ^
227TH ST > v ��
SE 228TH ST< SE 228TH
SE 229 W �O SE ST i H
N 7H Qyh �fsl•S• 29THo
PL W
TH. ST.
sr 1^ 5
b Q�' AoSE 230 H
ST
= SE '� Q y SE 231ST PARK RCHA `
w u 230TH�� '�� w ELE NTARY F H
1 ST I0
< o PL ti� SP 232ND ST Ow SCH L y;
d E 232ND ST a SE ^< E 232N <
SE 232ND PL 232ND C W F7`
33RD
> PL 2 w T F
ro �,�LS�SE 233RD< p� f �
N� f^ I
�W��o IL SE 234TH S7 MERIDIAN SE
,P�� a JR.H1.
17 _ , ST H�= 6i5Q SE ^ SE SCHOOL
p �O D� i 235 TH 234TH PL• \ pt�rIiC C
SE 236TH ST A �y�J ST Barricade Field O
/ SE 236TH ST
,.. in W OO
• I W SE 236TH PL W� SE 237TH 57 W hWater
,r ,
y > 1\
z a
7 E 238TN m
D
• SE 239TN
W ST ~
W N_
i SE OTH ST 17 16 y
LL 20 21
TARP
W
APPLICATION NAME: Cedar Meadows
NUMBER: SU-90-4 DATE: October 17, 1990
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat
LEGEND
Application site
VICINITY MAP zoning boundary
City limits -�
City of Kent - Planning Department
Lj1` J
Itz
D \ \ �� f�\ •M1°�� �J moo - _
4 \ I
r
� I
® ` O ° L.
r
G`
� � v
b
L
6
APPLICATION NAME: Cedar Meadows
NUMBER: SU-90-4 DATE: October 17, 1990
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat
LEGEND
Application site
ZONING / TOPOGRAPHY MAP Zoning boundary
City limits
arr of 3XtTd
CITY OF KENT
_ PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
STAFF REPORT
FOR HEARING EXAMINER MEETING OF OCTOBER 17 , 1990
FILE NO: CEDAR MEADOWS #SU-90-4
APPLICANT: J & G INDUSTRY
REQUEST: A request to subdivide 3 .5 acres into
fifteen residential lots.
STAFF
REPRESENTATIVE: Kevin O'Neill
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL with conditions.
I. GENERAL INFORMATION
_. A. Description of the Proposal
The proposal is to subdivide approximately 3 .5
acres into 15 residential lots. The average
proposed lot size is 9, 000 square feet. The
minimum lot size proposed is 7,800 square feet.
B. Location
The subject property is located on the west side of
116th Avenue SE, approximately 100 feet north of
S. 229th Street. The Kent city limits borders the
northern property line.
C. Size of Property
The subject property is approximately 3 . 5 acres.
D. Zoning
The subject property is zoned R1-7. 2, Single Family
Residential.
""' 1
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
ISU-90-4
E. Land Use
The subject property is surrounded by single-family
residential development. The property on all sides
of the subject property has been divided into lots.
There are two single-family residences and two
accessory buildings currently located on the site.
The accessory buildings and one residence will be
removed.
F. History
1. Site History
A tentative plat meeting was held for this
proposed plat on June 28, 1990. The comments
generated at that meeting are contained in
this report and reflected on the preliminary
plat submitted by the applicant. Two previous
tentative plat meeting were held in January
and March, 1989, for a proposed 12-lot
subdivision on the subject property. The
owner did not submit a preliminary plat w
application for the 12-lot plat proposed at
that time.
2. Area History
The subject property was annexed into the City
of Kent in January 1989, as part of the Hehr
Annexation. The area annexed to the City
included the subject property and the property
located to the northeast of the site. In
August 1989, the property was zoned R1-7. 2,
Single-Family Residential.
The Maple Wylde Subdivision, which abuts the
subject property to the south, was subdivided
in 1981. The Park Mar Subdivision abuts the
subject property to the west, and was platted
in 1979 . The areas to the north and east of
the subject property are also platted, and are
currently under the jurisdiction of King
County. The property to the north is
developed as a mobile home park.
2
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
II. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
A. Environmental Assessment
A final Mitigated Declaration of Nonsignificance
(#ENV-90-76) was issued for the proposal on
August 24, 1990. The mitigating conditions are
listed as follows:
1. Obtain a pollution discharge permit from the
Public Works Department in accordance with the
Kent City Code. This permit will require the
owner/developer to provide treatment of storm
water runoff prior to discharge into the
nearest City system.
2 . Analyze the downstream storm drainage system
to determine if any deficiencies exist
associated with servicing this development and
the surrounding contributory drainage area
thereto. Upon concurrence of the Public Works
Department with the findings of the analysis,
»- any necessary improvements to the existing
storm drainage systems to correct any found
deficiencies shall be constructed.
3 . On-site detention of storm water runoff shall
be provided in accordance with the Kent City
Code.
4 . The developer shall do a traffic analysis
study to identify all traffic impacts upon the
City of Kent road network and traffic signal
system caused by the proposed development.
The study shall identify all intersections at
level of service "E" or "F" or which will be
at level of service "E" or "F" due to
increased traffic volumes from the
development. These intersections are at a
threshold level for traffic mitigation.
The study shall then identify what
improvements are necessary to mitigate the
development impacts thereon. Upon agreement
by the City with findings of the study and
mitigation measures outlined in the study,
implementation and/or construction of said
3
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
mitigation measures shall be the conditional
requirement of the issuance of the respective
development permits.
In lieu of conducting the above traffic study,
constructing and/or implementing the
respective mitigation measures hereby, the
developer may agree to the following
conditions to mitigate the traffic impacts
resulting from the proposed development.
1. The developer shall execute an
environmental mitigation agreement to
financially participate and pay a fair
share of the costs associated with the
construction of the South 224th/228th
Street corridor project. The minimum
benefit to the above development is
estimated at $16, 140 based on 15 PM peak
hour trips entering and leaving the site
and the capacity of the South 224th/228th
Street corridor.
The execution of this agreement will
serve to mitigate traffic impacts to the
above-mentioned intersection and road
system, by committing funding for the
South 224th/228th Street corridor, which
will provide additional capacity for
traffic volumes within the area of the
above mentioned development.
5. The applicant shall provide a tree plan for
all trees on site of 6-inches in caliper or
greater. The plan shall show the location of
these trees in relation to proposed streets,
storm drainage facilities, and utilities.
B. Significant Physical Features
Topography and Hydrology
The subject property slopes towards the west at an
average of approximately 6 percent. There are
several significant trees located on the subject
property, particularly along the western and
southern portions of the property.
4
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
C. Significant Social Features
1. Street System
The applicants propose to construct a cul-de-
sac to provide access to the proposed lots.
The subject property currently has access to
116th Avenue SE, which is classified as a
collector street. The street has a right-of-
way width of 60 feet, 24 feet of which is
paved. The street is improved with two lanes
of asphalt paving. The east side of the
street is improved with curb and gutter and
sidewalks; the western side of the street
abutting the subject property is currently not
improved. The average daily traffic (ADT)
count on the street is 10, 000 vehicle trips
per day.
2 . Water System
There is an existing six-inch diameter water
- line in SE 228th Place located to the west of
the subject property. A 10-foot wide water
easement exists from SE 228th Place to the
western boundary of the subject property.
There is also an existing eight-inch diameter
water line in 116th Avenue SE which terminates
at the southern boundary of the subject
property.
3 . Sanitary Sewer System
There is an existing eight-inch diameter
sanitary sewer line in SE 228th Place to the
west of the subject property. A 10-foot wide
sanitary sewer easement exists from SE 228th
Place to the western boundary of the subject
property.
4 . Storm Water System
Detailed plans of the storm water improvements
will be required as part of plat approval.
Storm water mitigation conditions have already
been determined as part of the SEPA review
process.
M 5
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
5. LID's
None at the present time.
III. CONSULTED DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
The following departments and agencies were advised of
this application:
City Administrator City Attorney
Director of Public Works Chief of Police
Parks & Recreation Director Fire Chief
Building Official City Clerk
Midway Sewer District Water District 175
In addition to the above, all persons owning property
which lies within 300 feet of the site were notified of
the application and of the public hearing.
Staff comments have been incorporated in the staff report
where applicable.
IV. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW
A. Comprehensive Plan
The City of Kent first adopted a City-wide
Comprehensive Land Use Plan in 1969. The goals,
objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan
represent an expression of community intentions and
aspirations concerning the future of Kent and the
area within the Sphere of Interest. The
Comprehensive Plan is used by the Mayor, City
Council, City Administrator, Planning Commission,
Hearing Examiner and City departments to guide
growth, development, and spending decisions.
Residents , land developers , business
representatives and others may refer to the plan as
a statement of the City' s intentions concerning
future development.
The City of Kent has also adopted a number of
subarea plans that address specific concerns of
certain areas of the City. Like the City-wide
6
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
Plan, the subarea plans serve as policy guides for
future land use in the City of Kent. The proposed
application is within the area covered by the East
Hill Plan. Adopted in 1982, the East Hill Plan
provides policy statements that relate to
development within the East Hill area.
The following is a review of these plans as they
relate to the subject property.
CITY-WIDE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Comprehensive Plan Map designates the subject
property as SF, Single Family. Elements of the
Comprehensive Plan are addressed below followed by
Planning Department comments.
HOUSING ELEMENT
OVERALL GOAL: ASSURE A DECENT HOME AND SUITABLE
LIVING ENVIRONMENT FOR FAMILIES DESIRING TO LIVE IN
KENT
GOAL 2 : Guide new residential development into
areas where the needed services and facilities are
available, and in a manner which is compatible with
existing residential neighborhoods.
Objective 2 : Permit new residential
development on the East and
West Hills as the necessary
facilities and services are
available.
Objective 3 : Guide new residential growth so
that it occurs in a responsible
manner, consistent with
neighborhood objectives.
Policy 3 : Encourage infill development of
areas already served by
utilities and transportation
systems, to achieve maximum
efficiency in the provision of
services and preservation of
natural features.
7
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
Planning Department Comment:
The subject property is surrounded on all sides by
platted property and single-family residential
development. The lots proposed to be created by
this application are similar in size to the lots
surrounding the site. Since the subject property
is surrounded on all sides by developed property,
new development on the site would be considered
inf ill development. Facilities exist to provide
water and sanitary sewer service to the subject
property, and conditions would be applied to the
plat to assure that the transportation system in
the area is sufficient to accommodate the
development. Therefore, the proposed plat is
consistent with the above mentioned goals,
objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan.
GOAL 4 : Assure environmental quality in
residential areas.
Objective 1: Preserve and maintain as much
of the natural environment as -
possible.
Policy 2 : Require site design to conserve
natural features, such as
streams, steep slopes, trees,
and wetlands.
Objective 2 : Provide open green areas in the
City ' s residential
neighborhoods.
Policy 2 : Require contiguous open green
area in new single-family
subdivisions.
Planning Department Comment:
As a result of a SEPA condition and Zoning Code
requirements, the applicant must submit a tree plan
that shows the location of existing significant
trees (6-inch caliper or greater) on the site in
relation to the proposed lots. The trees located
in the proposed cul-de-sac will necessarily have to
be removed. The remaining trees will be retained
8
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
until development occurs on the individual' lots, at
which time each lot will be reviewed for tree
preservation.
As mentioned previously, this application was
forwarded to several departments and agencies for
comment. The Parks Department commented that the
proposed lots created by the application would
create a demand for close-by recreation, and that
there were no parks near the area. The Parks
Department recommends that the developer be
required to dedicate one lot for open space
purposes.
The Comprehensive Plan goals, objectives, and
policies endorses the retention of open space in
residential areas. In order to conform with the
goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, the
developer should provide common open space for a
small park and for tree preservation purposes.
EAST HILL PLAN
The East Hill Land Use Plan Map designates the
subject property as SF 6, Single Family Residential
with 4-6 dwelling units per acre. Elements of the
East Hill Plan which pertain to this application
are listed below, followed by Planning Department
comment.
HOUSING ELEMENT
OVERALL GOAL: ASSURE PRESENT AND FUTURE EAST HILL
RESIDENTS HOUSING THAT IS SAFE, OFFERS A DESIRABLE
LIVING ENVIRONMENT, AND IS SUPPORTED BY ADEQUATE
COMMUNITY FACILITIES AND SERVICES.
GOAL 1: Residential development that is related to
the availability of community facilities and
services.
Objective 1: When making decisions
concerning land use, consider
the adequacy of and impact upon
roads and other public
facilities and services
including utilities, police and
9
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4 _.
fire protection, public
transportation, schools and
parks.
Policy 1: Ensure that public facilities
and services are available or
will be available to support
development at proposed
densities.
Policy 2: Locate new single-family
detached residential
development in areas and at
densities which permit roads,
utilities, public transit,
schools and other public
facilities and services to be
provided in an efficient and
cost-effective manner.
Planning Department Comment
The proposed subdivision may eventually result in
the construction of 15 single-family dwellings.
Assuming 2.9 persons per household, an additional
44 persons would require City services as a result
of this plat.
As discussed above, adequate utilities exist to
serve the proposed plat. Conditions will be
applied to the plat to assure that impacts to the
transportation system are mitigated. To ensure
adequate fire protection to the development, water
pressures and fire hydrants in approved locations
must meet Fire Department standards.
As stated previously, the request for subdivision
was routed to the Police, Fire and Parks
Departments, as well as the Kent School District.
During the SEPA review for the project, METRO was
notified about the development. There was no
indication that the proposed project would have
undue impact on the provision of fire or police
protection, schools, or public transportation. As
discussed earlier, the Parks Department has
recommended dedication of open space for the
proposed plat.
10
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
,#SU-90-4
NATURAL ENVIRONMENT ELEMENT
OVERALL GOAL: PROMOTE ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS
WHICH RECOGNIZE AND RESPOND TO THE NATURAL
ENVIRONMENT AND THE FUNCTIONING OF NATURAL SYSTEMS.
GOAL 1: Preservation and enhancement of the
natural qualities that make the East Hill area an
attractive place in which to live.
Objective 2 : Maintain and restore the
natural character of the East
Hill community through the
retention and introduction of
native and ornamental plants in
existing and planned
development.
Policy 1: Encourage the retention and
reestablishment of vegetation
in the issuance of development
-, permits and in development
actions of the City.
Planning Department Comment:
The natural environment of the East Hill area is
highly valued by East Hill residents. These values
are reflected in the goals and policies in the East
Hill Plan relating to the natural environment. The
Plan states that emphasis should be placed upon the
retention of stands of trees and trees which form a
continuous or nearly continuous canopy, including
associated undergrowth, so that public benefits
relating to woodlands such as soil stability and
water quality can be maximized. The Plan states
that many woodlands benefits are lost if only
isolated, individual trees are retained.
The most mature stand of significant trees located
on the site are on the southern portion of the
property on proposed Lots 6 and 7 . A common open
space area should be dedicated on this portion of
the property for a community park and tree
preserve. Such a dedication would increase the
attractiveness of the site to potential home
.w 11
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
buyers, and would preserve the most
environmentally significant portion of the
property. The exact area to be dedicated would be
based on a detailed tree plan submitted by the
applicants.
B. STANDARDS FOR GRANTING A SUBDIVISION
The purpose of the City of Kent Subdivision Code is
to provide rules, regulations, requirements, and
standards for subdividing land in the City of Kent,
insuring that the highest feasible quality in
subdivision will be attained; that the public
health, safety, general welfare, and aesthetics of
the City of Kent shall be promoted and protected;
that orderly growth, development, and the
conservation, protection and proper use of land
shall be insured; that proper provisions for all
public facilities (including circulation,
utilities, and services) shall be made; that
maximum advantage of site characteristics shall be
taken into consideration; that conformance with
provisions set forth in the City of Kent Zoning -
Code and Kent Comprehensive Plan shall be insured.
Planning Department Comment:
The proposed plat is in general conformance with
the regulations of the Subdivision Code. The
Subdivision Code calls for right-of-way widths for
cul-de-sacs to be 50 feet. The proposed right-of-
way width of the eastern half of the cul-de-sac is
44 feet; the additional 6 feet will be dedicated by
the property to the north should that property ever
be subdivided. A 14-foot-wide strip of property
abutting proposed Lot 5 would be designated as an
access and utility easement instead of right-of-
way; there is an existing residence on proposed Lot
5 which is proposed to remain, and designating the
street in front of this lot as easement as opposed
to right-of-way will not create a nonconforming
front setback. All proposed sewers, water mains,
and other utilities will comply with applicable
City requirements.
12 ~y
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
C. FEASIBILITY OF DEVELOPMENT ON PROPOSED LOTS
Development on all lots in the proposed subdivision
will be subject to Zoning Code requirements for
development in the R1-7.21 Single-Family
Residential, Zoning. District. All lots must also
comply with solar access setback regulations and
the tree preservation ordinance.
Planning Department Comment
All proposed lots meet minimum lot size and width
requirements. Development on the proposed lots
also will have to meet solar setback requirements.
The purpose of the solar access setback provisions
is to provide a reasonable amount of solar access
to lots in the City so that the economic value of
solar radiation falling on those properties will be
preserved and the option to use solar energy will
be encouraged. Any structures built on the lots in
a single-family residential zone must maintain
solar access to the adjacent lots to the north.
Since the proposed lots are oriented in a north-
south direction, and since the north-south
dimension of each lot exceeds 100 feet, solar
access setbacks should not be a problem for most
lots. Because of its shape, construction on
proposed Lot 10 may have some difficulty meeting
the required solar setback.
As mentioned previously, many significant trees
exist on the site, a tree plan identifying trees
with a caliper of six inches or greater will be
required for all lots and road improvements prior
to the issuance of development permits.
D. PROPOSED FINDINGS
The Planning Department has reviewed this
application in relation to the Comprehensive Plan,
present zoning, land use, street system, flood
control problems and comments from other
departments and finds that:
1. The City-wide Comprehensive Plan Map
designates the site as SF, Single Family
Residential.
13
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows -
ISU-90-4
2. The East Hill Plan Map designates the site as
Single Family 4-6 units per acre.
3 . The site is presently zoned R1-7.2, Single
Family Residential, with 7,200 square foot
minimum lot size.
4. Land uses in the area are predominantly
single-family residential.
5. A mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance
was issued for the plat on August 24, 1990
6. The site slopes at an average of approximately
6 percent towards the west, and is covered
with native vegetation and trees. A large
stand of mature trees is located along the
southern portion of the property.
7. The site has access to 116th Avenue SE.
8. The subject property would receive water and
sewer service from the City of Kent.
VII. CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Upon review of the merits of this request and the Code
criteria for granting a preliminary subdivision, the City
staff recommends APPROVAL of the proposed subdivision
subject to the following conditions:
A. PRIOR TO OR IN CONJUNCTION WITH RECORDATION OF
FINAL PLAT•
1. The final plat mylar or linen shall show a
dedication of property (minimum size of 7,200
square feet) as common open space for the
subdivision. The open space dedication shall
be on the southern portion of the subject
property; the exact boundary of the dedication
shall be determined by the Planning Director
upon submittal of an accurate tree plan for
the site.
2 . The final plat mylar or linen shall bear a
notation which states that development on all
14 y
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
JSU-90-4
lots shall comply with City of Kent solar
setback regulations.
3 . The final plat mylar or linen shall bear a
notation which states that an accurate tree
plan shall be required prior to the issuance
of any development permits for the lots.
Further, an accurate tree plan identifying all
trees with a caliper of six-inches or greater
shall be submitted to the Planning Department
for approval prior to issuance of any grading
permits for road or other work associated with
the subdivision.
4. Obtain City or appropriate utility district
approval of detailed engineering drawings and
construct or bond for the following:
a. Sanitary Sewer: Extend gravity sanitary
sewer system capable of serving all lots
and any adjacent service areas.
b. Water: Extend public water system to
meet domestic and fire flow requirements
of all lots.
C. Storm System: Extend the public storm
water system to service the plat and any
adjacent tributary areas.
d. Cul-de-sac: Provide full street
improvements to proposed South 228th
Place, including an asphalt paved roadway
28 feet in width from curb to curb, curb
and gutter, sidewalks along the frontage
of all lots within the plat, street
lights, storm drainage, underground
utilities, street signs, and related
appurtenances. The cul-de-sac turnaround
shall have a curb return radius of 45
feet and a right-of-way radius of at
least 50 feet.
e. 116th Avenue: Widen and improve the west
half of 116th Avenue Southeast for the
entire portion abutting the subject
property. Improvements will include
15
Staff Report
Cedar Meadows
#SU-90-4
asphalt paving 18 feet in width as
measured from the street centerline to
face of curb, curb and gutter, sidewalks,
street lighting, storm drainage,
underground utilities, and related
appurtenances. Curb return radii shall
be 35 feet at the intersection of South
228th Place and 116th Avenue Southeast.
f. Rights-of-way: Dedicate all necessary
right-of-way and provide all necessary
easements both on-site and off-site for
the above improvements.
g. SEPA: Comply with all applicable SEPA
conditions.
B. PRIOR TO OR IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE ISSUANCE OF A
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ON ANY LOT:
1. Complete the construction of all improvements
required as SEPA conditions and plat
conditions. --
KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT
October 1, 1990
16
City of Kent - Planning Department
s t
IV
r• I,,. � ` � � I � I ��✓`` I lr I Jap
I I
VgtrC C ddO�Ar.NA w444111 \ � I
W tr.wT I � I �•
r`e ^
1 '
2 1 9
14
e _
..,..<.........T
A
LS £.228f4 PLP
v _
Ai
`\+ •y ° e A 5 ` 1.4
6 a z I
\
a
GO
SE 2291h Sr
o
{ a . izz
APPLICATION NAME: Cedar Meadows
NUMBER: SU-90-4 DATE: October 17, 1990
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat
LEGEND
Application site
SITE PLAN Zoning boundary
City limits -t!
City of Kent - Planning Department
S H � W
Z �- h SE 223RD ST
p o^ > Iany Zwl wIw
224TH ^ ST < P �, cy = E ^a �a �a
SE PL4TH w Or'L SE ^2233110 l fi-- •--....__.__..---"—'- '-- --
SD 1
4b 5E 2251H H m <224TH Q SE 225TH b
m
51 or< a E ST
M W W
/ /A// SE yT51H v� ^ < _ W <
1�oL1_`El! PL Z I�• ^> y Z
SE
SE 2267H ST aD �A � > n 226 H
n Co SE V) �^ r " SE 227TH PL
227TH ST�> ^
SE 228TH ST< SE 228TH i,/ •
...e:;i:}:};?::
W i:•ii};:ti•::•
SE 229T ry 7o SE ST a.
W H �h i-f.@l 229THo w
w y PL Q 4.Sy ST > 5 TH. ST.ST
Z SE '�� Qy5 SE 231ST PARK RCHA
w v~i 230TH•�� •(� ST Zy iELE NTARY HH
< PL 'r 232ND ST O> SCH L �w
>
,I E 232ND ST a SE --< E 232N <
SE 232ND PL 232ND C N �,Ey
33RD
F ` PL LL S w T
c s•9`J15E 233RD
f ILF
,yr N><p 4 i �n5� SEA 234TH ST MERIDIAN SE 2
1Oe P� 4t
•2• = STH�=' �`''!`��• SE ^ SE \ SCHOOL
235 TH 234TH PL-
SE 2367H ST A �L
�r Barricade Athl aaco n
a b J -
N� C CITY \ SE 236TH ST
a XN SE 236TH PL u h Woofer
SE 237TH ST t W Hrs�
a Z >
E 238TH m Q
SE 239TH ST _
� y ST ~ \
N_
� > SE OTH ST 17 16 m
LL 20 121
TARY
W
>
l
APPLICATION NAME: Cedar Meadows
NUMBER: SU-90-4 DATE: October 17, 1990
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat
LEGEND ti
Application site
VICINITY MAP zoning boundary
City limits
City of Kent - Planning Department
x• Q
\\ Mrx4 0 COD
l \ t] = 9
r
� �Vl V1;
e 1� a at )J IJ '•'
L.] LJ J r
� J I
O Q L) .
r a o
r
— — — i
r�
L) r ao� 1
J
� e M I n
• v o \\ Y\ �O L) t—K
p • O / 49::\1
Q
APPLICATION NAME: Cedar Meadows
NUMBER: SU-90-4 DATE: October 17, 1990
REQUEST: Preliminary Plat
LEGEND
Application site
ZONING / TOPOGRAPHY MAP Zoning boundary
City limits
PLEASE NOTE: These minutes are prepared only for the
convenience of those interested in the proceedings of the
Land Use Hearing Examiner. These minutes are not part of the
official record of decision and are not viewed, referred to,
or relied upon by the Hearing Examiner in reaching a decision.
These minutes also are not part of the record of review in the
event a decision of the Hearing Examiner is appealed. Copies
of the tape recordings of the Hearing Examiner proceedings,
or a complete written transcript of these recordings, are
available at a charge from the City of Kent. Please contact
Chris Holden at the Kent Planning Department (859-3390) if you
are interested in obtaining an official transcript.
HEARING EXAMINER MINUTES
October 17 , 1990
The public hearing of the Kent Hearing Examiner was called to order
by the presiding officer, Ted Hunter, Hearing Examiner, on
Wednesday, October 17 , 1990 at 3 : 00 p.m. in the Kent City Hall,
Council Chambers.
Mr. Hunter requested all those intending to speak at the hearing
and those wishing to receive information concerning the hearing, to -
sign in at the ' sign up sheet by the door. Staff reports and
agendas were available by the door. Mr. Hunter briefly described
the sequence and procedure of the hearing. Each person presenting
testimony was sworn in by Mr. Hunter prior to giving testimony.
CEDAR MEADOWS
Preliminary Plat
#SU-90-4
A public hearing to consider the request by J & G Industry, 18124
Riviera Place SW, Seattle, WA 98166, to subdivide 3 .5 acres into
15 residential lots. The subject site is zoned R1-7. 2 ,
Single-Family Residential. The property is located at
22819 116th Avenue SE.
Kevin O'Neill, Planning Department, presented the staff report.
Mr. O'Neill displayed some view foils delineating 1) the location
of the site, 2) zoning of the property and surrounding area and 3)
the proposed plat. A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued
with conditions on August 24, 1990. Mr. O'Neill mentioned the
water and sewer service availability in the area. A video of the
site was shown.
1
Hearing Examiner Minutes
October 17, 1990
,w
Mr. O'Neill discussed the plat in relation to the City-wide
Comprehensive Plan. Mr. O'Neill stated the plat is in general
conformance with the Kent Subdivision Code except for the cul-de-
sac width which is only 44 feet in width. The Subdivision Code
requires a 54-foot width. Mr. O'Neill stated this was discussed
with the Planning Department and Public Works Department, and the
City feels that at the time the parcel that is not a part of the
subdivision is subdivided, the six-feet could be obtained. The
City approved this plan. Mr. O'Neill stated staff is recommending
approval with conditions.
Mr. Hunter asked if there was a specific condition regarding the
cul-de-sac width.
Mr. O'Neill answered negatively.
Gary Gill, Public Works Department, City Engineer, commented the
timeline for the 224th Corridor Project is uncertain at this time;
however, the approximate construction time is ten years from now.
Mr. Gill stated that Initiative 547 and 2929 will have a
significant effect on the Corridor projects.
Mr. Hunter asked if the applicant would like to comment.
Jeff Mann, Pac Tech Engineering, 6100 Southcenter Boulevard,
Tukwila, representing J & G Industries, commented the applicant had
no objections to the recommended conditions with one exception.
The minimum lot sizes exceed the required minimum lot sizes for the
zoning district. Mr. Mann talked about the design of the entry way
into the plat and the turning radius. Mr. Mann commented there is
an existing home on the site; there will only be 14 new lots. In
addition, lot 9 .is proposed for a possible detention system. As
mentioned, there is a requirement for an on-site dedicated park
which would reduce the plat to 12 new lots. Mr. Mann submitted to
the record the modified condition request (Exhibit #3) with regard
to a park.
Orville Huntington, 22708 113th Place SE, Kent, WA 98031, lives
north of the proposed plat. Mr. Huntington wanted to know if a
fence could be located between the proposed plat and the Kenton
Firs property. Mr. Huntington felt that without a fence people
living in the plat would intrude into Kenton Firs property.
Walter North, 22617 113th Place SE, Kent, WA 98031, resides in
Kenton Firs. Mr. North commented he would like a fence between the
south property line of Kenton Firs and the north property line of
the proposed plat. Mr. North asked for an explanation of the
w 2
Hearing Examiner Minutes
October 17, 1990
drainage proposed for the plat and the effect of drainage on
surrounding properties.
Richard Norden, 11416 SE 229th Place, Kent, WA 98031, commented
about the storm water detention pond. He commented about the trees
that were removed earlier. Mr. Norden stated he would like
assurances that the storm detention facility will be maintained.
Max Fullner, 22809 116th Avenue SE, Kent, WA 98031, asked about
the 70 x 14 ' piece of land on lot 5 that overlaps into the cul-de-
sac easement. Mr. Fullner asked if the proposed utilities would be
available to latecomers.
Karen Shyne, 11317 SE 228th Place, Kent, WA 98031, talked about
the impact of storm drainage on the area. Ms. Shyne remarked
public improvements are needed.
Eugene Kramer, 11412 SE 229th Place, Kent, WA 98031, commented
about the water problem in the area and that an adequate storm
drainage system is necessary.
Steve Chatman, 11410 SE 229th Place, Kent, WA 98031, was concerned
about the drainage system.
Mr. Hunter asked for rebuttal comments.
Mr. O'Neill talked about the "green belt" area between Kenton Firs
and the proposed plat. Mr. O'Neill talked about the road design.
Mr. O'Neill reviewed the tree preservation ordinance.
Gary Gill, Public Works Department, stated full street improvements
would be construct along the entire frontage of the plat. Mr. Gill
mentioned the storm drainage requirements. Mr. Gill commented
there are construction activity standards.
Mr. Mann talked about the tree preservation plan. Mr. Mann felt
the fence requirement should be a requirement or a condition that
the developer of the home should comply with.
John Rose, Pac Tech Engineering, talked about the storm drainage
issue.
The hearing was closed at 4 :30 pm.
3 ....
Hearing Examiner Minutes
October 17, 1990
EMERALD CITY CHEMICAL
Temporary Use Permit
#TU-90-1
A public hearing to consider the request by ECCI Scientific,
20832 77th Avenue S. , Kent, WA 98032, for an extension of a
temporary use permit to allow the placement of cargo containers
used for storage as per Kent Zoning Code Section 15. 08.205 B 5 a.
The property is zoned M3, General Industrial. The property is
located at 20832 77th Avenue S.
Carol Proud, Planning Department, presented a brief history of the
temporary use permit. Ms. Proud showed transparencies depicting 1)
the location of the storage units, the location of the site and the
surrounding area zoning. Ms. Proud commented a conditional use
permit was issued in July 1989. However, this conditional use
permit has expired because no construction activity has taken place
within a year. Ms. Proud stated staff is recommending denial of
this request.
Mr. Hunter asked if the applicant would like to comment.
r Glen Dodge, President of ECCI Chemical, stated his company is in
the process of moving to Kent. He explained there were problems
with the architect in designing the project and thus, it was not
completed in time. Mr. Dodge was requesting a two-year extension
of the temporary use permit so the project could be completed.
Mr. Dodge explained that when he had first talked to the Planning
Department he was told there would not be a problem. Later he was
told there was a problem and the City was recommending denial.
Mr. Dodge submitted a letter from a neighbor to the record
(Exhibit #2) . Mr. Dodge stated ECCI Chemical had a warehouse
located in Seattle but it was not designed to handle hazardous
wastes. Mr. Dodge stated recently he turned in the hazardous waste
material inventory to the Fire Department.
Lynn Hoffman-Gross, Fire Department, stated that, in error, the
hazardous waste disposal plan was submitted to the Planning
Department in April and just recently it was forward to her office
for review. Ms. Hoffman-Gross commented this plan was a condition
of the conditional use permit and that Emerald City Chemical had to
meet SARA Title II regulations.
Larry Webb, Fire Marshal, stated his office had talked with Emerald
City Chemical and the containers for the hazardous wastes were to
be brought up to Code by January. The Fire Department would not
approve the business license until the site was in compliance with
4
Hearing Examiner Minutes
October 17, 1990
Code. Mr. Webb stated the Fire Department would probably not
approve an extension of this request past January 1991.
Mr. Dodge commented that he talked with Mike Evans of the Fire
Department and it was his understanding that the Fire Department
was willing to continue the agreement through January or February
of next year.
The hearing closed at 5:50 pm
5
............ .... .
4'
Kent City Council Meeting
Date December 4 . 1990
V Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: PARKSIDE REQUEST FOR VACATION OF WALKWAY
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: IThe Public Hearing on the vacation
request for the walkway was held October 2 and the matter
referred to the Public Works Committee for a solution. The
Public Works Committee has recommended denying a vacation
request and for the City to clean up the walkway area, move
fences that are in City right-of-way back to the property lines,
install lighting and continue maintenance for the property.
Costs for the improvements are estimated to be $5,500 which can
be funded from the Public Works Department Operating Budget.
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Committee minutes and IBC note
4 . RECOMMENDED BY•
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS•
c ! 0 '
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: 4 N✓ tip G` 'I ���,
Councilmember moves, Councilmember1:L seconds
that the request for vacation of the walkway on east side of
Parkside Division 2 Plat be denied and that the City continue
maintenance of the walkway, make the improvements as recommended
by the Public Works Department and said improvements be funded
by the Public Works Department Operating Budget.
Y�>
DISCUSSION• 7
ACTION• _ f
Council Agenda
Item No. 4B
City of Kent, Washington
Kent City Council
Date 12 4/90
Category other Business
1. SUBJECT•
Walkway - Parkside Division 2 Plat
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT:
City Council held a public hearing on vacation of the walkway
in Parkside Division 2 on October 2, 1990 and referred the
matter to Public Works Committee. The Public Works Committee
preferred not to vacate the walkway but to clean it up and
install lighting. It is estimated the cost for this will be
$5, 500. It is proposed to include as much as is possible of
this expense within the 1990 Public Works Department Street
and Engineering budget. The offset thereof should be covered
by either the under-runs in the anticipated budgetary expenses
or the over-runs of the anticipated revenues.
3 . EXHIBITS•
4. RECOMMENDED BY:
Don Wickstrom
Public Works Committee
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES x
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended_
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $5, 500
SOURCE OF FUNDS: Public Works Operating Fund
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION•
October 2 , 1990
STREETS J (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3G) -
LID 331. AUTHORIZATION to set November 6 as the
date for a public hearing on the final assessment .
roll for LID 331 - S.E.. 240th Street Improvements.
(BIDS - ITEM 5A)
JLID 335 - 77th Ave. Improvements. Bid opening was
held on August 24th. Active Construction submitted
the low bid in the amount of $1, 057 , 084 .44 and
staff recommends that this bid be accepted. DOWELL
SO MOVED, Orr seconded and the motion carried. .
STREET (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3D)
VACATION Street Vacation. ADOPTION of Resolution No. 1260
setting a public hearing for November 6, on the
application of Kelly's Cafe Americana, Inc. for
vacation of a portion of S. Central P1.
TRAFFIC (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3H)
CONTROL / Arterial Classification System. APPROVAL of the
County' s revision of the arterial classification of
S. 272nd/S. 277th St. from Urban Minor to Urban
Principal Arterial.
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4C)
Crosswalk on S. Central. Al Varney, owner of a
business located at 1303 S. Central, noted that
there is a distance of over 2 1/2 miles on Central
without any way for pedestrians to cross to Aukeen
Court and the Corrections Facility. He urged the
Council to look into the possibility of setting
aside funds to put in a crosswalk and a light for
pedestrians. WOODS MOVED that this item be re-
ferred to the Public Works Committee. Houser
seconded. The motion .carried. Woods asked that
Mr. Varney be contacted as to the time of the
Public Works Committee meeting. Dowell noted that
the Committee is aware of this request, but that
funds are not available at this time. Varney asked
that it be funded in the future.
WALKWAY (PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 2B)
VACATION Beck Request for Vacation of Walkway East Side of
Parkside Division 42 Plat. An application has been
made by Brian C. and Janice M. Beck to vacate a
portion of Tract "A" of Parkside Division #2 Subdi-
vision. Tract "A" is located between Military Road
and 38th Ave. S. at the north end of Parkside #2 .
4
October 2, 1990
WALKWAY Planning Director Harris pointed out the area
VACATION and explained that during the discussion on Park-
side Plat in 1976, it was decided that there should
be no access onto Military Road because it is a
major arterial. He noted that this leaves 2700 '
with no access from 38th to Military Road. Harris
recommended that this issue be deferred so that the
staff can work on it further, and that it be for-
warded to an appropriate committee.
The Mayor opened the public hearing. Byron Beck.
25203 36th P1. S. , noted that the walkway creates
problems such as vandalism, broken fences, and
graffiti. He noted that police reports are on
file. He also noted that there is a steep grade at
the end of the walkway and that children on bikes
often can't stop until they are onto Military Road.
He noted there is no crosswalk on Military, and
proposed that the walkway be closed. David McCaug-
han agreed with Beck, and noted that there is no
crosswalk to the Yorkshire area, that the only
crosswalks are at Reith Road to the south, and one-
and-a-half blocks north. Lucille Kemp agreed that
there has been trouble since the walkway went in.
Joe McVicar, 25334 36th P1. S. , urged the Council
to deny this request. He stated that he uses the
walkway every day on the way to the bus because it
is the only convenient way to get to Military Road.
He noted that his children use the walkway to get
to friends homes in Yorkshire, and he does not want
them to have to walk along Military Road. He
stated that they also experience vandalism even
though they are not near the walkway.
Chief Frederiksen noted that they have investigated
reports of vandalism in the area.
Greg Wingard, 18848 S.E. 269th, voiced opposition
to the vacation and suggested that the residents
participate in the Block Watch Program. Joe
Hembree urged the Council to vacate the walkway
because it is dark and unsafe. McCaughan reiterat-
ed that people have to go north or south to cross
legally in a crosswalk. McVicar stated that cross-
ing any intersection is legal, and he is not cross-
ing illegally when he uses the walkway. He also
pointed out that it is the fences that make
5
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 16, 1990
PRESENT: Jim White Ed Chow
Leona Orr Gary Gill
Steve Dowell Ed White
Don Wickstrom Mr. and Mrs. Rust
Carol Morris Alene Barton
Local Hazardous Waste Management Plan
Wickstrom explained that at the time the Local Hazardous Waste
Management Plan was adopted by the cities there were contingencies
placed upon those approvals. Kent' s concern dealt with the
composition of the Management Committee and its manner of reaching
decisions. The Solid Waste Interlocal Forum has addressed those
issues. Wickstrom indicated he felt they had satisfied any
concerns we had expressed. After discussion, the Committee
unanimously recommended the Mayor be authorized to sign the
concurrence of adoption of the plan.
Latecomer Agreement - Chutoni Estates
Wickstrom explained we had a request for a latecomer agreement with
respect to construction of street improvements for the Chutoni
Estates projects. The Committee recommended authorization for
staff to prepare the latecomer agreement and the Public Works
Director to sign same.
Request for Vacation of Walkway - Parkside Division 2 Plat
This item was referred to the Committee from City Council meeting
of 10/2 . Ed White presented a video of the area. Wickstrom
clarified that the City actually owns the Tract for which vacation
is being requested. It was noted that several of the fences have
been constructed about four feet into our property. White stated
that some of the concerns that came up were who owns it and perhaps
we should be maintaining it better and lighting it. Dowell asked
if there were any utilities within this walkway. Wickstrom stated
the storm sewer is by Military Road. Carol Morris informed the
Committee that if the City owns the property in fee it can not be
vacated but could be transferred. White stated he was not thinking
in terms of vacating it but in cleaning it up and making it what it
should have been initially. White asked - if we opened it up and
asked the property owners to move their fences back to where they
are supposed to be, cleaned it up, etc. - what would be the cost.
Wickstrom stated we would probably do the fence locations for the
property owners if they took care of their landscaping. We 'd have
to bring street lights into the area. Wickstrom stated there is
the possibility of an Eagle Scout group being willing to clean up
Public Works Committee
October 16, 1990
Page 2
the area as a merit badge project. White suggested we bring this
back before the next Committee meeting with an idea of the costs
involved. He suggested also we might want to have a meeting with
the property owners in the area. Dowell reiterated he felt we
should get the fences back on their property lines, clean the area
up and the City should maintain ownership. Wickstrom added we
would need to restrict its use by motorcycles as well.
Cran-Mar Trout Farm
Ms. Barton had contacted Mr. White asking to address the Committee.
Ms. Barton indicated the insurance agent was to be delivering a
partial payment of $4, 000 for her claim this date. Ms. Barton
distributed copies of her claim to the Committee with an
itemization of her losses totaling $11, 432 .75. In addition to this
total, she stated her claim does include one contingency relating
to a certain number of fish that survived the chlorine spill but
are in a fragile condition. It may be a couple of months before
she would be able to determine if the fish or their eggs or sperm
will survive. Thus, this is an unknown item on her claim. Ms.
Barton stated the insurance agent had indicated he could not pay
the entire amount as it would constitute a prepayment. She
contends that if he can make a $4 , 000 partial payment then a
$12 , 000 partial payment could be made and her business needs the
=•funds. Dowell asked if anyone had agreed to the figure submitted
rin her claim. Wickstrom stated we had recommended the claim be
allowed but we do not assign a value. Ms. Barton replied that the
insurance investigator did not seem to take exception to the
figures but she did not have anything in writing. Carol Morris
suggested that if the contingency included in Ms. Barton's claim is
a hindrance to settlement, she might consider filing a separate
claim for that matter. She added we would have to check the
ordinance as to length of time allowed to file a claim. The
Committee asked Mr. Chow to investigate the matter.
Corridor Funding
Wickstrom stated he had received notice from the Transportation
Improvement Board that they wanted us to submit our prospectus for
the project so they can determine if we are going to be requesting
funds for 1991. White and Dowell asked about the County's progress
on their study. Wickstrom stated the County had requested we delay
issuance of out DEIS until January to give them time to have public
meetings on their proposed alignment and for their consultants to
review our proposed alignments to see how they would fit. White
stated he is prepared to ask Council to re-evaluate their goals and
J
Kent City Council Meeting
Date December 4 . 1990
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: SEVERE WEATHER SHELTER FOR HOMELESS - RESOLUTION
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: This meeting will consider the approval
of a resolution to provide emergency shelter for the homeless
during severe weather conditions with the allocation of $15,418
of emergency funding from Human Services.
3. EXHIBITS• Memo
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Planning Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO__k_ YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $15,418
SOURCE OF FUNDS: Human Services Emergency Fund
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
adoption of Resolution�/M outlining the City's commitment to
respond to the need for emergency severe weather shelter for
individuals and families, and the allocation of $15,418 of
emergency human services funds to provide the emergency shelter.
DISCUSSION• i/AA)
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 4C
cxer of led
CITY OF KENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
MEMORANDUM
November 29, 1990
MEMO TO: MAYOR DAN KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: LIN BALL, SENIOR PLANNER
SUBJECT: EMERGENCY SEVERE WEATHER SHELTER FOR HOMELESS IN
KENT
In response to a request from the human services provider community
the Planning Department is looking at how the City can respond to
the needs of our homeless during the severe winter weather. It has
been requested that the City consider using a city facility to
provide temporary emergency shelter during severe weather
conditions.
The number of homeless persons in the City of Kent has grown
significantly in recent years. The Food Bank and agencies
providing emergency housing have seen a steady increase in the
number of persons who are homeless. The emergency shelters for
families are always over capacity. In addition to the number of
families which are turned away from shelter each month, there are
a number of single individuals and adult couples who are not being
served since the shelter services are directed towards serving
families.
What the City is looking at is saving lives during the severe
weather conditions when the lives of the homeless are threatened
due to lack of shelter.
A committee composed of Human Services Commission members,
nonprofit human services agencies, local church representatives,
and City staff have spent numerous hours during November to address
this issue. Options being considered to address the need include
the use of City buildings, local churches, and hotel/motel
vouchers.
The Human Services Commission has $15,418 of unallocated emergency
funding which could be used to provide shelter and the services
necessary to operate the shelter during the severe weather months
remaining (December - March) . The Human Services Commission
considered this item on November 29, and recommends that the City
Council allocate the $15,418 of emergency human services funds to
provide emergency severe weather shelter for the homeless. At its
December 4 meeting, the Planning Committee will be considering
action on a resolution which outlines the City's role in responding
to the need for emergency severe weather shelter for the homeless.
Memo To: Mayor Dan Kelleher and City Council Members
November 29, 1990
Page 2
In order to move forward with a plan for providing severe weather
shelter for the homeless it is necessary to define the City' s
commitment to this program. This item is on a fast timeline due to
the emergency nature of the request. We are already in the cold
weather months of the year.
Recommended Action
1. Approval of the allocation of $15,418 of emergency human
services funding to provide emergency shelter for the homeless
during severe weather condtions.
2 . Approval of a resolution outlining the City's commitment to
respond to the need for emergency severe weather shelter for
individuals and families.
LB:ch
Lin:a:CC124 .hom
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, addressing the need
for emergency severe weather shelter for
individuals and families during severe or life
threatening weather.
WHEREAS, the number of homeless persons in the City of
Kent has grown significantly over recent years; and
WHEREAS, there are no emergency severe weather shelters
for homeless families or individuals in South King County; and
WHEREAS, people without homes or access to shelter are
forced to sleep in automobiles or in public areas not sheltered
from inclement weather; and
WHEREAS, a City Council adopted document entitled Report
of the Human Services Study Committee on Human Services Policies,
states that the City should maintain active involvement in human
services and should act as a planner/facilitator and funding
provider; and
WHEREAS, the above mentioned report also states that the
City should pursue cooperative planning and/or funding with other
governmental jurisdictions or the private sector; and
WHEREAS, local non-profit agencies and religious
institutions have expressed an interest in a cooperative effort to
provide emergency severe weather shelter; and
WHEREAS, on November 29, 1990 the Human Services
Commission unanimously recommended immediate allocation of
emergency general fund human service dollars for the provision of
emergency severe weather shelter; and
WHEREAS, temperatures have dropped below 35 degrees
! fahrenheit an average of 50 nights in the last four years; NOW, k
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The City of Kent shall declare an "emergency
severe weather shelter crisis" for nights in which the temperature
is at or below 35 degrees fahrenheit, taking into account wind
chill factor, or snow conditions exceeding or expected to exceed
two inches in depth.
Section 2. In response to the emergency severe weather
shelter crisis, the City shall either provide use of city building
space for shelter, or work with a religious institution and/or the
private sector to provide other shelter space.
Section 3 . The City shall contract with a non-profit
human service agency, approved by the Kent Human Services
Commission, to provide necessary emergency shelter services.
Section 4. Funding for costs associated with providing
severe weather emergency shelter will be allocated from budgeted
City of Kent Emergency Human Services Funds.
Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington this day of 1990.
2 -
Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this
day of , 1990.
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR.
ATTEST:
MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, 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 , 1990.
(SEAL)
MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK
i
9120-320
3 -
Kent City Council Meeting
Date December 4 . 1990
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: 1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENT ORDINANCE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The Finance Department is requesting the
adoption of Ordinance Aq-5-& amending the 1990 Budget. This
ordinance consolidates all budget changes approved by the
Council during the year plus provides for other budget adjust-
ments where revenues to cover expenditures have been generated
by grants or charges for services. In addition the ordinance
increases the interfund loan from the General Fund to the Golf
Complex to cover the projected cash deficit.
This ordinance would have normally been reviewed by the
Operations Committee, but with the tentative cancellation of the
December 18th Council meeting it is being put on the agenda
under Other Business. This is to meet state auditor
requirements for budget adjustment prior to year end. The
adjustment ordinance contains no new budget provisions only the
reality of existing expenditure trends which must be covered by
a budget a7
year end.
3 . EXHIBITS: Budget Adjustment Ordinance, Explanation of
adjustments by fund
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Finance Department
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES_
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
the adoption of the 1990 Budget Adjustment Ordin nce .
DISCUSSION• rw�
ACTION• I b�T V 1
Council Agenda
Item No. 4D
MCCARTHY,TONY / KENT70/FN - HPDesk print.
-----------------------------------------
Subject: 1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENT ORDINANCE
iator: Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/FN Dated: 11/30/90 at 0901.
TO: COUNCIL PRESIDENT JUDY WOODS AND COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: TONY MCCARTHY, - FINANCE DIRECTOR
THE TOTAL OF THE 1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENT ORDINANCE IS $16,525,725. OF THIS
AMOUNT $15, 048, 312 HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL BUT IS
INCLUDED HERE TO OFFICIALLY ADJUST THE BUDGET. THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF
$1,477,413 HAS NOT BEEN OFFICIALLY APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL BUT IS NEEDED
TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE STATE AUDITOR REQUIREMENTS. EXCEPT FOR THE GOLF
COMPLEX, THE INDIVIDUAL FUNDS IN QUESTION HAVE GENERATED THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE
OR HAVE ADDITIONAL FUND BALANCE TO COVER THESE EXPENDITURES. IN THE CASE OF
THE GOLF COMPLEX, THE TOTAL LINE OF CREDIT AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GENERAL FUND
IS ESTABLISHED AT $700, 000, UP FROM $300, 000.
1OF THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AMOUNTS, THE MAJOR ITEMS ARE:
6,700, 000 FOR THE SENIOR HOUSING BONDS
21914, 111 FOR THE CITY'S SHARE OF THE KING COUNTY OPEN SPACE BOND ISSUE
41345, 110 FOR LIDS, OPERATING AND CAPITAL PROJECTS
11089, 091 FOR ITEMS APPROVED IN THE 1990 BUDGET DOCUMENT BUT NOT SET UP
AS INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS
FOR THER AMOUNTS NOT PREVIOUSLY APPROVED THE EXPLANATION IS AS FOLLOWS:
501
000 FOR PAYMENTS TO METRO FOR SEWAGE TREATMENT. BUDGETED AMOUNTS DID
NOT ADEQUATELY COVER METRO'S 1/l/90 RATE INCREASE AND THE GROWTH
IN THE CUSTOMER BASE. THE INCREASED RATE WAS PASSED ON TO THE
CUSTOMERS SO REVENUE IS GENERATED TO COVER EXPENDITURES.
427, 740 TO COVER INCREASED EXPENDITURES AT THE GOLF COMPLEX FOR CONSTRUCTION
AND OPERATING COST OVERRUNS. SINCE ADDITIONAL REVENUES OR FUND
BALANCE WAS NOT AVAILABLE TO COVER EXPENDITURE OVERRUNS, A LINE OF
CREDIT OF $700, 000, UP FROM $300, 000 FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO THE
GOLF COMPLEX IS AUTHORIZED TO COVER THIS OVERRUN. $700, 000 IS
NEEDED SINCE REVENUE IS ALSO LESS THAN BUDGETED.
256, 000 TO COVER INCREASED INSURANCE PAYMENTS TO COVER HIGHER SELF INSURANCE
CLAIMS RELATED TO ON THE JOB DEATH OF CITY EMPLOYEE PLUS INCREASED
MEDICAL, LIABILITY AND PROPERTY INSURANCE COSTS ABOVE THE BUDGET.
SINCE THE CITY IS SELF INSURED, THESE EXPENDITURES ARE COVERED BY
CHARGES TO DEPARTMENTAL BUDGETS WITH THE INSURANCE FUND'S
FINANCIAL POSITION REMAINING STRONG.
148, 000 TO COVER CENTRAL SERVICE FUND EXPENDITURES DUE TO INCREASED
DEPARTMENTAL USAGE OF POSTAGE, PRINTING, DATA PROCESSING AND WORD
PROCESSING. DEPARTMENTS PAID FOR THESE SERVICES OUT OF THEIR
OPERATING BUDGETS WHICH DO NOT REQUIRE A BUDGET CHANGE.
95, 673 TO COVER THE COST OF MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS FOR GRANTS AND PROJECT
OVERRUNS INCLUDING THE DRINKING DRIVER GRANT, GE WASTE CLEANUP,
DRAINAGE FLOOD CONTROL, AND CENTENNIAL CELEBRATION. GRANTS OR
OPERATING PROJECT BUDGETS COVERED THESE COSTS.
1 _
I
_I
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent,
Washington, amending the 1990 Budget for
adjustments made during 1990 and authorizing an
additional line of credit from the General Fund
to the Golf Complex to cover expenditures.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:,
Section 1. Changes in budget are as follows:
FUND TOTAL,,
General Fund $ 49,476
Capital Improvement 365,337
Environmental 3,000
Housing & Community Development 1,319
Other Operating Projects 230, 660
Councilmanic Debt Service 175, 337
Street Capital Project 11607, 099
Park Capital Project 3,145,738
Other Capital Project 7164IF268
Water 93 , 274
Sewerage 21971,419
Golf Complex 979, 14d
Equipment Rental 171, 050
Central Services (67, 592)
Insurance 256,000
Total Gross Budget Adjustments 17, 622 ,525
i
Less:
Internal Service Funds 396,458
Other Transfers 700, 342
Total Net Budget Adjustments $16,525,725
Section 2 . Authorization of a line of credit from the General
Fund to the Golf Complex Fund in an amount not to exceed $700, 0000
up from $300, 000. The funds will only be used as needed and will
be reauthorized if needed as of December 31, 1991.
Section 3 . Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect
and be in force thirty (30) days from the time of its final
passage as provided by law.
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
i
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
2 -
'I
i
I
PASSED the day of , 1990.
APPROVED the day of , 1990.
PUBLISHED the day of , 1990.
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.
(SEAL)
MARIE JENSEN, CITY CLERK
I
l
5480-180
- CITY OF KENT
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENT ORDINANCE
ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATIONS
FUND CARRYOVER BUDGET ORDINANCE #2890 ORDINANCE # TOTAL
General Fund 28,292,645 49,476 28,342,121
Street 784,606 784,606
Capital Improvement 3,027,615 365,337 3,392,952
Environmental Mitigation 386,655 200,781 3,000 590,436
Housing & Community Dev 300,302 234,112 1,319 535,733
Other Operating Projects 304,640 98,866 230,660 634,166
Voted Debt Service 1,229,809 1,229,809
Councilmatic Debt Service 2,837,568 175,337 3,012,905
Special Assessment Debt 1,990,184 1,990,184
Street Capital Projects 21,629,254 3,475,000 1,607,099 26,711,353
Park Capital Projects 1,416,979 243,695 3,145,738 4,806,412
Other Capital Projects 36,132,129 648,298 7,641,268 44,421,695
Water 18,080,406 10,556,653 93,274 28,730,333
Sewerage 30,486,905 8,904,322 2,971,419 42,362,646
Golf Course 6,016,138 2,432,688 979,140 9,427,966
Equipment Rental 1,231,931 171,050 1,402,981
Central Services 3,219,395 2,238,450 (67,592) 5,390,253
Insurance 2,375,171 256,000 2,631,171
Firemen's Relief & Pension 121,237 121,237
Economic Development Corporation 18,074 18,074
TOTAL GROSS BUDGET 117,972,803 70,941,705 17,622,525 206,537,033
Less:
Internal Service Funds 5,786,382 396,458 6,182,840
Other Transfers 4,671,212 700,342 5,371,554
TOTAL NET BUDGET 117,972,803 60,484,111 16,525,725 194,982,639
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
GENERAL FUND
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 28,292,645
Error in Original Ordinance #2890 (1) (9,317)
Budget Adjustments
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds (2) 5,206
Previously Approved with Council Date:
Library Service Analysis Study 3/20/90 5,000
Kent Kherson Mural 4/03/90 10,000
Kent Cultural Center Feasibility Study 4/03/90 10,000
Secretarial Position for K C Fire District 37 6/19/90 24,111
Expand Youth Day Camp 7/03/90 4,476
-------------
Total Budget Adjustments 49,476
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 28,342,121
SOURCES OF FUNDING -
------------------
Budget Ordinance 27,287,607
Beginning Fund Balance 2,981,487
Ending Fund Balance (1,976,449) 28,292,645
Error in Original Ordinance #2890 (9,317)
Budget Adjustment Source:
Fire Protection Dist 37 24,111
Recreation Fees 4,476
Ending Fund Balance 30,206
Budget Change from 1,976,449 to 1,946,243
-------------
Total 49,476
TOTAL SOURCES 28,342,121
(1) The 1990 Budget was adopted prior to final corrections
(2) A 1989 unexpended Capital Outlay budget carried forward to 1990.
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 3,027,615
Budget Adjustments
Previously Approved with Council Date:
LID 300 Pay-off 2/06/90 162,603
First Avenue Plaza 3/20/90 60,000
Kent-Kherson Peace Park 5/01/90 50,000
Central Telephone System Upgrade 7/17/90 80,000
LID 330 Prepayment of Assessment 8/07/90 12,734
-------------
Total Budget Adjustments 365,337
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 3,392,952
SOURCES OF FUNDING
------------------
Budget Ordinance 2,980,419
Beginning Fund Balance 1,182,951
Ending Fund Balance (1,135,755) 3,027,615
Budget Adjustment Source:
Ending Fund Balance 365,337
Budget Change from 1,135,755 to 770,418
-------------
Total 365,337
TOTAL SOURCES 3,392,952
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
ENVIRONMENTAL FUND
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 200,781
Carryover Budget 386,655
Budget Adjustments
Not Previously Approved for the Budget Amount:
GE Apparatus Clean Up Site 3,000
-------------
Total Budget Adjustments 3,000
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 590,436
SOURCES OF FUNDING
------------------
Budget Ordinance 200,853
Carryover Budget 386,655
Beginning Fund Balance 493,857
Ending Fund Balance (493,929) 587,436
Budget Adjustment Source:
Environmental Mitigation Permits 3,000
-------------
Total 3,000
TOTAL SOURCES 590,436
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUND
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 234,112
Carryover Budget 300,302
Budget Adjustments
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds:
Planning 8 Administration (1) 807
Catholic Community Services S. KC Center Acquisition (1) (1,506)
Kent Community Health Services (1) 2,018
-------------
Total Budget Adjustments 1,319
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 535,733
SOURCES OF FUNDING
------------------
Budget Ordinance 234,112
Carryover Budget 300,302 534,414
Budget Adjustment Source:
Federal Grant 1,319
-------------
Total 1,319
TOTAL SOURCES 535,733
(1) Entitlement was increased $1,319 after budget was adopted.
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
OTHER OPERATING PROJECTS FUND
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 98,866
Carryover Budget 304,640
Error in Original Ordinance #2890 (1) 100,000
Budget Adjustments
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds:
Police Confidential Fund (2) 43,787
Previously Approved with Council Date:
Wetlands Inventory 12/19/89 12,000
Kent Cultural Center Feasibility Study 4/03/90 10,000
Cultural Center Study 11/20/90 2,200
Not Previously Approved for the Budgeted Amount:
Centennial Celebration Cost Overrun 11,738
1990-91 Drinking Driver Countermeasure Grant 50,935
Total Budget Adjustments 230,660
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 634,166
SOURCES OF FUNDING
------------------
Budget Ordinance 98,866
Carryover Budget 304,640 403,506
Error in Original Ordinance #2890 100,000
Budget Adjustment Source:
Beginning Fund Balance 23,787
State Grant 56,935
Seized Money/Asset Proceeds 20,000
Transfer from General Fund 29,938
Total 230,660
TOTAL SOURCES 634,166
(1) The 1990 Budget was adopted prior to final corrections
(2) To carryover budget for current year activity
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
" COUNCILMANIC DEBT SERVICE FUND
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 2,837,568
Budget Adjustments
Previously Approved with Council Date:
LID 300 Pay-off 2/06/90 162,603
LID 330 Prepayment of Assessment 8/07/90 12,734
-------------
Total Budget Adjustments 175,337
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 3,012,905
SOURCES OF FUNDING
------------------
Budget Ordinance 2,837,568
Budget Adjustment Source:
Transfer from Capital Improvement Fund 175,337
-------------
Total 175,337
TOTAL SOURCES 3,012,905
30-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
STREET CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 3,475,000
Carryover Budget 21,629,254
Error in Original Ordinance #2890 (1) 50,000
Budget Adjustments
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds:
224th & EVH Intersection Improvement (3) (165,000)
LID 327-WVH Imp/Meeker-212th (4) 66,124
Previously Approved with Council Date:
Canyon Drive Guardrail * 2/02/88 231,343
LID 328-WVH S 212th to S 189th * 10/18/88 225,858
EVH 192nd to 180th * 10/18/88 40,837
Frager Road Guardrails 12/19/89 44,100
LID 328-WVH S 212th to S 189th 12/19/89 360,000
Canyon Drive Guardrail 12/19/89 532
LID 335-77th Avenue 2/06/90 973,800
LID 330-64th Avenue 4/03/90 29,478
LID 328-WVH S 212th to S 189th 4/03/90 886,222
LID 330-64th Avenue 6/05/90 (1,399,988)
LID 335-77th Avenue 10/16/90 110,908
272nd To 277th Corridor Mitigation (R43) (2) 55,012
104th Ave Signal Improvement 256th & 260th (2) 44,605
224th-228th E. Corridor Mitigation (R42) (2) 25,184
LID 328-WVH S 212 to S 189 (4) 28,084
Total Budget Adjustments 1,607,099
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 26,711,353
30-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
STREET CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND (CONTINUED)
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
SOURCES OF FUNDING
'--'-"----'-'-_'-
Budget Ordinance 3,475,000
Carryover Budget 21,629,254 25,104,254
Error in Original Ordinance #2890 50,000
Budget Adjustment Source:
LID Assessment Prepayments 243,000
Federal Grant 542,670
State Grant 360,000
Miscellaneous Contributions 123,686
Mitigation Agreements (40,199)
Proceeds-LID Bonds 327,942
-------------
Total 1,607,099
TOTAL SOURCES 26,711,353
~ * Grant approved in 1988, budget increased when monies were actually received
(1) The 1990 Budget was adopted prior to final corrections
(2) Per State Environmental Policy Act Ordinance #2494
(3) To Delete Budget from the Capital Improvement Program added in error.
(4) Increase amount to final LID Roll.
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
PARK CAPITAL PROJECT FUND
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 243,695
Carryover Budget 1,416,979
Budget Adjustments
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds:
Special Pops Kitchen Renovation (1) 32,140
North Park Tot Lot Rehabilitation (1) 24,275
Special Pops Handicapp Access (1) 14,509
Kiwanis Tot Lot 4 Rehabilitation (1) 7,048
Previously Approved with Council Date:
Special Pops Kitchen Renovation 2/06/90 28,878
Russell Road Picnic Shelter 3/06/90 13,200
Glenn Nelson Park 3/06/90 30,000
King County-Lake Fenwick Trail 3/06/90 899,700
King County-interurban Trail Improvements 3/06/90 1,082,096
King County-Green River Corridor Trail Improvemnts 3/06/90 889,115
First Avenue Plaza 3/20/90 60,000 _.
Kent Kherson Mural 4/03/90 10,000
Kent-Kherson Peace Park 5101/90 50,000
Special Pops Kitchen Renovation 8/07/90 3,218
Russell Road Picnic Shelter 8/07/90 3,759
City Arts Program 11/20/90 (2,200)
-------------
Total Budget Adjustments 3,145,738
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 4,806,412
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
PARK CAPITAL PROJECT FUND (CONTINUED)
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
SOURCES OF FUNDING
------------------
Budget Ordinance 243,695
Carryover Budget 1,416,979 1,660,674
Budget Adjustment Source:
County Grant 30,000
King County Open Space Bonds 2,870,911
Transfer from General Fund 7,800
Transfer from Capital Improvement Fund 110,000
Transfer from Housing & Community Development Fund 77,972
Transfer from Kent Kherson Park Project 6,977
Transfer from East Hill Neighborhood Park Project 13,200
Transfer from Other Capital Projects Fund 28,878
-------------
Total 3,145,738
TOTAL SOURCES 4,806,412
w (1) Park capital project budget of Housing & Comm Development funding
omitted in error.
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
OTHER CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 648,298
Carryover Budget 36,132,129
Budget Adjustments
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds:
Mobile Data Terminal Band Project (1) 22,500
Previously Approved with Council Date:
Library Construction Project 3/20/90 550,000
Library Construction Project 5/15/90 368,768
Senior Housing Bond Project 11/06/90 6,700,000
Total Budget Adjustments 7,641.268
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 44,421,695
SOURCES OF FUNDING
------------------
Budget Ordinance 648,298
Carryover Budget 36,132,129 36,780,427
Budget Adjustment Source:
Local Grant 918,768
Transfer from Central Service City Automation Project 22,500
Proceeds-GO Bonds 6,700,000
Total 7,641,268
TOTAL SOURCES 44,421,695
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
WATER FUND
- 1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 10,556,653
Carryover Budget 18,080,406
Error in Original Ordinance #2890 (1) 21,000
Budget Adjustments
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds:
Pump Stn Diesel Tank Replacement (2) 25,000
Previously Approved with Council Date:
Clark Springs Water Source 1/16/90 75,000
LID 335-77th Avenue 2/06/90 20,000
LID 328-WVH s 212th to S 189th 4/03/90 116,946
LID 330-64th Avenue 6/05/90 (267,878)
LID 335-77th Avenue 10/16/90 16,206
-------------
Total Budget Adjustments 6,274
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 28,643,333
-------------
Internal Transfer-Clark Springs Water Source 75,000
Pump Stn Diesel Tank Replacement 12,000
TOTAL GROSS EXPENDITURES 28,730,333
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
WATER FUND (CONTINUED)
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
SOURCES OF FUNDING
-------------`----
Budget Ordinance 10,086,203
Carryover Budget 18,080,406
Beginning Fund Balance 4,326,150
Beginning Fund Balance (3,855,700) 28,637,059
Error in Original Ordinance #2890 21,000
Budget Adjustment Source:
Transfer from Sewerage Fund 25,000
Proceeds-LID Bonds (114,726)
Ending Working Capital 75,000
Total 6,274
TOTAL SOURCES 28,643,333
-------------
Internal Transfer-Clark Springs Water Source 75,000 _..
Pump Stn Diesel Tank Replacement 12,000
TOTAL GROSS SOURCES 28,730,333
(1) The 1990 Budget was adopted prior to final corrections
(2) To combine Water 8 Sewer portion of project to a Water Capital Project Account
Budget approved during the 1990 budget process.
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
SEWERAGE FUND
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 8,904,322
Carryover Budget 30,486,905
Error in Original Ordinance #2890 (1) 1,237,000
Budget Adjustments
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds:
Lower Garrison Creek Stg & Det (1) (310,000)
Previously Approved with Council Date:
LID 335-77th Avenue 2/06/90 267,904
Water Quality Program 2/20/90 37,800
Valley Detention Basin 2/20/90 78,750
Lower Garrison Creek Stg & Det 2/20/90 47,250
Mill Creek Trunk 2/20/90 45,439
LID 328-WVH S 212th to S 189th 4/03/90 (332,583)
LID 330-64th Avenue 6/05/90 1,199,167
Miscellaneous Sewer Replacement 6/19/90 50,000
277th Improvement/SR 167 to EVH 6/19/90 (50,000)
LID 331-SE 240th, 108th to 116th 10/16/90 50,000
LID 335-77th Avenue 10/16/90 20,692
Not Previously Approved for the Budgeted Amount:
Sewer Additional Operating Costs-METRO Rate Increase 550,000
Drainage Additional Operating Costs-Flood Control 30,000
-------------
Total Budget Adjustments 2,921,419
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 42,312,646
-------------
Internal Transfer-LID 331- SE 240th, 108th to 116th 50,000
TOTAL GROSS EXPENDITURES 42,362,646
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
SEWERAGE FUND (CONTINUED)
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
SOURCES OF FUNDING
---------`--------
Budget Ordinance 9,389,328
Carryover Budget 30,486,905
Beginning Fund Balance 1,824,869
Ending Fund Balance (2,309,875) 39,391,227
Error in Original Ordinance #2890 1,237,000
Budget Adjustment Source:
Utility Sales-General Customer 550,000
LID Assessment Prepayments 81,832
State Grant 209,239
County Grant (310,000)
Proceeds-LID Bonds 1,073,348
Ending Working Capital 80,000
-------------
Total 2,921,419
TOTAL SOURCES 42,312,646
-------------
Internal Transfer-LID 331- SE 240th, 108th to 116th 50,000
TOTAL GROSS SOURCES 42,362,646
(1) To reduce budget for County grant which was never authorized
30-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
GOLF COURSE FUND
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 2,432,688
Carryover Budget 6,016,138
Budget Adjustments
Previously Approved with Council Date:
Golf Course Reorganization 1/16/90 93,816
Driving Range Improvements 2/20/90 31,729
Automated Tee Time System 4/03/90 20,000
Golf Complex Merchandising 5/15/90 278,115
Not Previously Approved for Budgeted Amount:
Golf Course Project Overruns 127,740
Golf Additional Items for Resale 194,500
Golf Addtional Personnel & Insurance Costs 105,500
-------------
Total Budget Adjustments 851,400
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 9,300,226
-------------
Internal Transfer-Golf Course Project 127,740
�. TOTAL GROSS EXPENDITURES 9,427,966
SOURCES OF FUNDING
------------------
Budget Ordinance 2,519,778
Carryover Budget 6,016,138
Beginning Fund Balance (50,836)
Ending Fund Balance (36,254) 8,448,826
Budget Adjustment Source:
Previously Approved:
Operations Revenue 488,001
Ending Working Capital (Increase from 36,254 to 100,595) (64,341)
Not Previously Approved:
Operations Revenue (300,000)
Line of Credit from General Fund (300,000 Approved 5/15/90) 700,000
Ending Working Capital (Decrease from 100,595 to 72,855) 27,740
Total 851,400
TOTAL SOURCES 9,300,226
-------------
Internal Transfer-Golf Course Project 127,740
TOTAL GROSS SOURCES 9,427,966
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 1,231,931
Budget Adjustments
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds: (1) 171,050
Previously Approved with Council Date:
-------------
Total Budget Adjustments 171,050
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 1,402,981
SOURCES OF FUNDING
------------------
Budget Ordinance 1,559,460
Beginning Fund Balance 987,626
Ending Fund Balance (1,315,155) 1,231,931
Budget Adjustment Source:
Ending Working Capital 171,050
Total 171,050
TOTAL SOURCES 1,402,981
(1) A 1989 unexpended Capital Outlay budget carried forward to 1990.
29-Nov-90
CITY OF KENT
CENTRAL SERVICES
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
, Budget Ordinance No. 2890 2,238,450
Carryover Budget 3,219,395
Error in Original Ordinance #2890 (1) (288,592)
Budget Adjustments
Previously Approved in Prior Year or Other Funds:
GIS Data Entry (2) 20,000
Modification of Accounts Payable System (3) 10,000
Previously Approved with Council Date:
Central Telephone System Upgrade 7/17/90 80,000
Not Previously Approved for Budgeted Amount:
Central Service Additional Postage & Printing Costs 80,000
Data Processing Additional Sperry Maintenance Costs 52,000
Word Processing Additional Police Activity Costs 16,000
-------------
y Total Budget Adjustments (30,592)
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 5,427,253
-------------
Internal Transfer-City Automation Project (37,000)
TOTAL GROSS EXPENDITURES 5,390,253
29-Nov-90
SOURCES OF FUNDING
------------------
Budget Ordinance 2,238,450
Budget Carryover 3,219,395
Beginning Fund Balance 86,462
Ending Fund Balance (86,462) 5,457,845
Error in Original Ordinance #2890 (288,592)
Budget Adjustment Source:
Unanticipated Revenue(Charges to Other Funds) 148,000
Transfer from General Fund 20,000
Transfer from Capital Improvement Fund 80,000
Transfer from Central Service Fund 10,000
Total (30,592)
TOTAL SOURCES 5,427,253
-------------
Internal Transfer-City Automation Project (37,000)
TOTAL GROSS SOURCES 5,390,253
(1) The 1990 Budget was adopted prior to final corrections
(2) Previously approved in the General Fund
(3) Previously approved in the Central Service Operating Fund
29-Nov-90
INSURANCE FUND
1990 BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS
SOURCE OF
AUTHORIZATION EXPENDITURES FUNDING
------------- ------------ -------
EXPENDITURES
------------
Budget Ordinance No. 2890 2,375,171
Budget Adjustments
Not Previously Approved for Budgeted Amount:
Workers Compensation Additional Claims 50,000
Health/Medical/Life Additional Admin & NMI Costs 200,000
Liability/Property Additional Assets 6,000
-------------
Total Budget Adjustments 256,000
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 2,631,171
SOURCES OF FUNDING
'-`----"-----"--
Budget Ordinance 2,409,935
Beginning Fund Balance 1,914,355
Ending Fund Balance (1,949,119) 2,375,171
Budget Adjustment Source:
Unanticipated Revenue(Charges to Other Funds) 226,000
Ending Working Capital 30,000
Total 256,000
TOTAL SOURCES 2,631,171
�.
Kent City Council Meeting
) , Date December 4 . 1990
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: MANAGEMENT STUDY CONSULTANT SELECTION
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The City Management Study Committee,
comprised of the Operations Committee, three department heads
and three members of the Chamber of Commerce, received 11
proposals, interviewed three firms and selected the Warner Group
to complete the Management Study. ika- rPIu rsts
orr CQ&4nPjj t--O-
enter into a contract with the Warner Group. W0005 So Move---D-
` Cev\&,A7 CQ Ct Vk& +JAJ� tM.vtum Ca AA)Lk cQ .
3 . EXHIBITS:`y Letter from the Operations ,Committee
4. RECOMMENDED BY Operations Committee and Management Study
Committee ,
(Committee, Sta\f,f, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
i
4
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL PE L IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: R commended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REOIIIkED: $41 . 00-54 , 000 (Depending on scope of work
SOURCE OF FUNDS: General Fun
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Co4cilmember seconds
authorization t r enter into a contra with the Warner Group.
,y
DISCUSSIOT.'
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 4E
November 28, 1990
To: Judy Woods, President, and members of the City Council
From: Christi Houser, Chair of the Operations Committee
Subject: Selection of the Management Study Consultant
As you know, the City Management Study Committee is comprised of
nine members including the Operations Committee, three department
heads and three members from the Chamber of Commerce. We received
11 proposals and narrowed the field to three for interviews on
November 14, 1990. Unfortunately, the Operations Committee members
were unable to attend the interview session due to conflicts in our
work schedules. However, we asked the remaining six members of the
Management Study Committee to proceed. They completed the
interviews and have recommended that the Warner Group of Woodland
Hills, California be selected to assist the City with the
management study. The Operations Committee did not have a meeting
on November 27th. However, the Committee does concur with the
selection and recommends that Administation be authorized to enter
into a contract with the Warner Group.
CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
_. A.
R E P O R T S
A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT
B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE i
C. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
D. PLANNING COMMITTEE /
E. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
F. PARKS COMMITTEE
G. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS_ _ nt- Y—
n- l
MEMORANDUM
DATE: November 28, 1990
TO: Mayor Dan Kelleher
City Councilmembers
FROM: Roger Lubovich, City Attorney
SUBJECT: UTILITY EXTENSION ORDINANCE
This report is a follow-up to the inquiry from Councilmember
White at the November 20 Council meeting whether or not the City
is required to extend utility services beyond its boundaries. As
I indicated at that time, the City is not required to do so.
Washington law currently allows a city to connect its sewers or
to extend its water service outside of its boundaries to
requesting property owners (RCW 35. 67 . 310, 35.92 . 170, see
attached) . This service may be provided by the city under such
terms, conditions and payments that the city may prescribe by
ordinance, evidenced by a written agreement. By authority of
this statute, the City of Kent has set forth the terms and
conditions required of a property owner to obtain such service in
Ordinance 2696, codified at Kent City Code (KCC) Chapter 4 . 22 .
Since it is also the City's policy to extend utility service to
- property outside its boundaries only in areas it will later seek
to annex, one condition which must be satisfied is that the
zoning of the area seeking to obtain utility service should be
compatible with the City's Comprehensive Plan designation for the
adjacent area. The City is now engaged in an update of its
Comprehensive Plan, so a decision on the consistency of the Plan
designation to the proposed area in the interim must be made by
examining the land use policies adopted subsequent to the
original Plan enactment.
At the November 20 Council meeting, Ordinance 2696 was amended to
allow the Planning Director to have the responsibility to make
this determination of consistency during this interim period.
utilext.doc
1
o.
Municipal Utilities t 35.92.230
shall be a valid claim of the owner thereof only as 35-92.190 City may nd water system outside
against such fund, and the amount of the revenue of the limits—Cannot condemn Irrigation system. No city or
utility pledged thereto, and shall not constitute an in- town may exercise the pover o` eminent domain to take
debtedness of the city or town within the meaning of or damage any waterwork storage reservoir, site, pipe
constitutional or statutory provisions and limitations. line distribution system or any extension thereof, or any
They shall be sold in such manner as the corporate au- water right, water appropriation, dam, canal, plant, or
thorities shall deem for the best interest of the munici- any interest in, or to any of the above used, operated,
pality. The effective rate of interest on the bonds shall held, or owned by an irrigation district. [1965 c 7 § 35-
not exceed the effective rate of interest on warrants or .92.190. Prior: 1933 ex.s. c 17 § 2A; RRS § 9502-2A.
bonds to be funded or refunded thereby. Interest on the Formerly RCW 80.40.190.1
bonds shall be paid semiannually. The bonds shall be Eminent domain by cities:Chapter 8. '2 RCW.
executed in such manner and payable at such time and
place as the legislative authority shall by ordinance de- 35.92.200 City -may extend water system outside
termine. Nothing in this chapter shall prevent a city or limits—Contracts for outside service. A city or town
town from funding or refunding any of its indebtedness may enter into a firm contract with any outside munici-
in any other manner provided by law. Such bonds may pality, community, corporation, or person, for furnishing
be of any form, including bearer bonds or registered them with water without regard to whether said water
bonds as provided in RCW 39.46.030. shall be considered as surplus or not and regardless of
(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) of this section, the source from which such water is obtained, which
such bonds may be issued and sold in accordance with contract may fix the terms upon which the outside dis-
chapter 39.46 RCW. [1983 c 167 § 69; 1965 c 7 § 35- tribution systems will be installed and the rates at which
.92.150. Prior: 1935 c 81 § 4, part; RRS § 9492-4, part. and the manner in which payment shall be made for the
Formerly RCW 80.40.150.) water supplied or for the service rendered. [1965 c 7 §
Liberal construction---Severability-1983 c 167: See RCW 39- 35.92.200. Prior: 1961 c 125 § 1; 1957 c 288 § 8; 1933
.46.010 and note following. ex.s. c 17 § 3; RRS § 9502-3. Cf. 1917 c 12 § 1. For-
35.92.160 Funding or refunding bonds—Recourse merly RCW 80.40.200.]
of bond owners. When such funding or refunding bonds 35.92.220 Acquisition of water rights. A city or
have been issued and the city or town fails to set aside town, situated within or served by, an irrigation project,
and pay into the special fund from which they are pay- or projects, owned or operated by the United States
able, the amount without regard to any fixed proportion government, a water users' association, associations, cor-
out of the gross revenue of the public utility which the poration, or corporations or another city or town or
city or town has, by ordinance, bound and obligated it- towns, where the legislative authority deems it feasible
self to set aside and pay into the special fund, the owner to furnish water for irrigation and domestic purposes, or
of any funding or refunding bond may bring action either, and where the water used for irrigation and do-
against the city or town and compel such setting aside mestic purposes or either, is appurtenant or may become
and payment. [1983 c 167 § 70; 1965 c 7 § 35.92.160. appurtenant to the land located within such city or town,
Prior: 1935 c 81 § 5; RRS § 9492-5. Formerly RCW may purchase, lease or otherwise acquire water or water
80.40.160.) rights for the purpose of furnishing the city or town and
Liberal construction---Severability-1983 c 167:See RCW 39- the inhabitants thereof with a supply of water for irriga-
.46.010 and note following. tion and domestic purposes, or either; purchase, con-
struct or otherwise acquire systems and means of
35.92.170 City may extend water system outside distribution and delivery of water within and without the
limits. When a city or town owns or operates a munici- limits of the city or town, or for the delivery of water
pal waterworks system and desires to extend such utility where the owner of land within the city or town owns a
beyond its corporate limits it may acquire, construct and water right appurtenant to his land, with full power to
maintain any addition to or extension of the system, and maintain, repair, reconstruct, regulate, and control the
dispose of and distribute water to any other municipal- same, and if private property is necessary for such pur-
ity, water district, community, or person desiring to pur-
poses, the city or town may condemn and purchase or
chase it. [1965 c 7 § 35.92.170. Prior: 1933 ex.s. c 17 § purchase and acquire property, enter into any contract,
1; RRS § 9502-1. Cf. 1917 c 12 § 1. Formerly RCW and order any and all work to be done which shall be
80.40.170.] necessary to carry out such purposes, and it may do so
Water districts:Title 57 RCw. either by the entire city or town or by assessment dis-
tricts, consisting of the whole or any portion thereof, as
35.92.180 City may extend water system outside the legislative authority of the city or town may deter-
limits—May acquire property outside city. A city or mine. [1965 c 130 § 1; 1965 c 7 § 35.92.220. Prior: 1915
town may construct, purchase, or acquire any water- c 112 § 1; RRS § 9495. Formerly RCW 80.40.220.1
works, pipe lines, distribution systems and any exten-
sions thereof, necessary to furnish such outside service. 35.92.230 Acquisition of water rights—Special as-
[1965 c 7 § 35.92.180. Prior: 1933 ex.s. c 17 § 2; RRS § sessments. For the purpose of paying for a water right
9502-2. Cf. 1917 c 12 § 1. Formerly RCW 80.40.180.] purchased by the city or town from the United States
(1989 Ed.) ITitle 35 RCW—p 2911
..�.. ...... �.
Title 35 RCW: Cities and Towns
es interested in any particular such sewer service s fur hed after the charges be- 7 § 35.67.310. Pri
tav enter judgment of foreclo- come delinquent an( npai until the charges are paid. 9354-19.1
a, and tracts and the action The right to enfo cn by cutting off and refus-
al 35.67.331 Wa
mdMng defendants and tracts. ing water service sl al t,:; exercised after two years Combined facilitie
y separately the amount of the from the date of t`.e recorcing of sewerage lien notice provide that its ti
interest, penalty and costs except to enforce payment ,)f six months' charges for
The judgment shall have the which no lien notice is required to be recorded. [1965 c 7 bage and refuse c
nent as to each tract described § 35.67.290. Prior: '941 c 11, § 10; Rem. Supp. 1941 § acquired, construe
appeal shall not invalidate or 9354-13.] either by combinir
,t as to the property concerning All powers grante
-n. In the judgment the court struct, maintain a
35.67.300 Sewer districts and municipalities— cised in the joint
rein described sold at one gen- Joint agreements. Any city, town, or organized and es- and operation of s
of sale shall issue pursuant tablished sewer district owning or operating its own if a general indeb
ent of the judgment. Judgment sewer system, whenever topographic conditions shall or all of the cost c
iy one or more separate tracts make it feasible and whenever such existing sewer sys- such a cc
nd the court shall retain juris- tem shall be adequate therefor in view of the sewerage f shall tion obe f incurred
s. [1965 c 7 § 35.67.250. Prior: and drainage requirements of the property in such city, authorized by a v(
n. Supp. 1941 § 9354-10, part.] town, or sewer district, served or to be served by such
election conducte
system, may contract with any other city, town, or orga- Provided further,
:ien foreclosure—Redemption. nized and established sewer district for the discharge shall be construec
:ct to the right of redemption into its sewer system of sewage from all or any part or 1 contrary. [1969 e:
e of sale. [1965 c 7 § 35.67.260. parts of such other city, town, or sewer district upon
7, part; Rem. Supp. 1941 § such terms and conditions and for such periods of time *Reviser's note: °th
this section, RCW 3
as may be deemed reasonable. RCW 35.67.340,and
Any city, town, or organized and established sewer
sale acquired property—Dis- district may contract with any other city, town, or orga- 35.67.340 Ste
ter deed is issued to it pursuant nized and established sewer district for the construction operation by a c
may lease or sell or convey any and/or operation of any sewer or sewage disposal facili- provided for in Rt
ivate sale for such price and on ties for the joint use and benefit of the contracting par- statutes relating
de' -pined by resolution of the ties upon such terms and conditions and for such period of a city or town
)o. any provision of law, char- of time as the governing bodies of the contracting parties of the systems i
contrary notwithstanding. [1965 may determine. Any such contract may provide that the
construction, or c
941 c 193 § 8; Rem. Supp. 1941
responsibility for the management of the construction tern shall be gove
and/or maintenance and operation of any sewer disposal tablishment and i
facilities or part thereof covered by such contract shall r system. [1969 ex.
e sale acquired property— be vested solely in one of the contracting parties, with 1941 c 193 § 1:
taxes. After the entry of judg- the other party or parties thereto paying to the manag- w
part.]
tinst any tract, the city or town ing party such portion of the expenses thereof as shall be -r:
:neral taxes or purchase certi6- agreed upon. [1965 c 7 § 35.67.300. Prior: 1947 c 212 § ryY
35.67.350 Pe
jr general taxes on the tract or 3; 1941 c 193 § 11; Rem. Supp. 1947 § 9354-14.] '"`q
)unty tax foreclosure or from the
l.�tr mission. It is un
?Y cause to be mad
:Went of foreclosure against any 35.67.310 Sewers—Outside city connections. Ev- s with any sewer
ery city or town may permit connections with any of its which is connect
wn may pay local or special any
as-
:1inquent or are about to become sewers, either directly or indirectly, from property be- of any city or to
-act has been foreclosed upon for yond its limits, upon such terms, conditions and pay- city or town. [19
ents and the time for redemption ments as may be prescribed by ordinance, which may be 1; Rem. Supp. 1'
redeem it. required by the city or town to be evidenced by a written
expended for the purposes enu- agreement between the city or town and the owner of
i except upon enactment by the the property to be served by the connecting sewer.
body of a resolution determining If any such agreement is made and fled with the A
,ssity of making the expenditure. county auditor of the county in which said property is D SIDEW SIDEW `
,3. Prior: 1941 c 193 § 9; Rem. located, it shall constitute a covenant running with the
] land and the agreements and covenants therein shall be Sections
binding on the owner and all persons subsequently ac- 35.68.010 Authe
e lien—Enforcement—Alter- quiring any right, title or interest in or to said property. 35.68.020 ResolL
additional and concurrent method If the terms and conditions of the ordinance or of the 35.68.030 Resole
reement are not kept and performed, or the payments 35.68.040 'Side
ut' zed in this chapter any city ag p p 35.68.050 Asses:
)wr, nunicipal water system may made, as required, the city or town may disconnect the tion-
'or the enforcement of the lien by sewer and for that purpose may at any time enter upon R 35.68.060 Meth
--rvice from the premises to which any public street or road or upon said property. [1965 c 35.68.070 Colle:
(1989 Ed.) (1999 Ed.)