Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
City Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 02/18/1992
Cit of Kent ng Coty Cou ncol l Meetim Anda 1 CITY OF v4T Mayor Dan Kelleher Council Members Judy Woods, President Jim Bennett Paul Mann Christi Houser Leona Orr Jon Johnson Jim White February 18, 1992 Office of the City Clerk ... ... .. . 1A CITY COUNCIL MEETING mavn�'� February 18, 1992 Summary Agenda MAYOR: Dan Kelleher COUNCILMEMBERS: Judy Woods, President Jim Bennett Christi Houser Jon Johnson Paul Mann Leona Orr Jim White 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 ✓�Xi Proclamation - National Engineers Week( 2 . PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Water, Sewer and Drainage Utility B. Street Utility1A 1: ,, 3 . v/CONSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes ��- B. Bills -� C. Amusement Entertainment Devices - Ordinance 4, �D. Helen Street - Street Vacation - Ordinance ' C ' E. Human Service Commission Appointment --->F. Civil Service Commission Appointment G. Mutual Aid Agreement H. Defining Indecent Exposure - Ordinance I. Penalty for Possession of Marijuana - Ordinance J. 1991 Asphalt Overlay Project K. Solid Waste - Ordinance I L. Riverwalk Park Grant Acceptance 4 . OTHER BUSINESS A. Planning Commission Recommendation to Amend Kent Zoning Code Enforcement Procedures (ZCA-9172) - Ordinance 5. BIDS None 6. CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS 7. REPORTS 8 . 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) Proclamation - National Engineers Week Kent City Council Meeting - , Date February 18 , 1992 Category Public Hearings 1. SUBJECT: DRAINAGE UTILITY 2 • SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been set for the public hearing on modification of the drainage utility rates. Corresponding therewith is a proposed reduction of the water rates and the absorption of Metro's 1992 sewer rate increase. In addition, a five-year drainage utility capital improvement program is proposed for adoption along with financing for the first year's program 3 . EXHIBITS: Memorandum from Public Works Director 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: OPEN HEARING: PUBLIC INPUT• CLOSE HEARING: 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds approving the amended Drainage Utility Capital Improvement Program along with establishing project budget for the first year's program therein and funding same from a combination of revenue bonds, unencumbered sewerage funds and project reallo- cation as noted in the Public Works Director's memo and that the City Attorney be directed to prepare: (1) the necessary ordinance approving the drainage utility rate modification, including the water rate modification and absorbing the 1992 Metro sewer rate increase; (2) the ordinance authorizing the sale of revenue bonds to finance the Drainage Utility' s first year Capital Improvement Program and establishing interim financing therefor. OR the hearing on the rate modification for the drainage utility be continued to the March 3 Council meeting. DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 2A�K' DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS February 13, 1992 TO: MAYOR KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON WICKSTROM t�)10 RE: DRAINAGE UTILITY C. I .P. & FINANCIAL PLAN This issue was discussed at the January 14th Council Workshop. For your convenience attached is the Fact Sheet that was presented at that time. Also included are the packets which were presented to the Public Works Committee at their January 7th and December 17th Board meeting. In essence, the Public Works Department is seeking an increase in the Drainage Utility rates (present rate established in 1985) to fund both the utility on-going maintenance and operation costs and the 1st year' s improvements of its 5 year Capital Improvement Program. Said 1st year ' s improvements are estimated to cost $6 , 536, 000 and is targeted to address the flooding problems along lower Mill Creek (Smith St. to 180th St. ) and along upper Garrison Creek (Benson Center, East Hill area) . Of the $6, 536 , 000 $3 , 800 , 000 would be revenue bonds, $2 , 030, 000 would be unencumbered sewerage funds and $706 , 000 would be reallocated project funds. The proposed rate increase varies with respect to the needs of the particular drainage basin. The net increase ranges from $0 . 83 to $2 . 01 per month for a single family residence. The financial impact is offset by a proposed water rate reduction and the absorption of METRO' s 1992 sewer rate increase. The net affect is a revenue neutral program. However, because not all drainage customers are City sewer and water customers , not all will benefit from the offsets. If nothing is done, the present problem including the personal and property damage, will only get worse. The significant flooding that presently occurs infrequently will become a yearly event. Also the environmental quality of the City' s streams and creeks will continue to degrade. For these reasons the Public Works Department is recommending that City Council adopt the proposed 5 year c. I .P for the Drainage Utility; authorize implementation of the first year ' s improvements thereof; approve the financing proposal therefore (1992 drainage rates, unencumbered funds, project fund reallocation) ; approve the water rate reduction and concur with the absorption of the METRO rate. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS January 3, 1992 TO: PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE FROM: DON WICKSTROM RE: FINANCIAL PLAN AND REVENUE PROGRAM FOR STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY As discussed at the December 17th Public Works Committee meeting, I have reviewed the original C.I.P. for the above referenced Plan and Revenue Program and propose the amendments as noted on the attached. Said amendments reflect both 1) updating thereof (it was originally prepared with the intent to implement in August or September) ; and 2) focusing in on the immediate flooding problems. By this updating and focusing, the proposed first year capital improvement program increases by $1,651,000 to $6,536,000 (originally $4,885,00) . While the proposed utility rate increase was predicated on the $4,885,000 first year's program, no change in the proposed rates is recommended. Instead, it is proposed to finance the difference via combination of unencumbered sewerage funds and project funding reallocation. The original first year's C.I.P. was proposed to be financed as follows: $3,800,000 Bond 11085,000 Unencumbered Sewerage Funds TOTAL $4,885,000 The amended first year's C.I.P. is proposed to be financed as follows: $3,800,000 Bonds 2,030,000 Unencumbered Sewerage Funds 706,000 Project Reallocation «� TOTAL $6,536,000 $424,000 Lower Garrison Creek project (D37) 217,000 James Street Storm (D50) 65,000 Upper Mill Creek (D42) $706,000 . Adequate funds exist within the unencumbered fund balance of the sewerage utility fund to make this additional transfer. Neither the sewer utility's operating budget or its capital improvement program will be impacted. Also, said transfer would not affect the proposed absorption of Metro's 92 rate increase. As was also mentioned at the December 17th Public Works Committee, attached is a table which hopefully clarifies the financial effect on individual customers of this combination rate increase / decrease / absorption. n �31 C H 4] H cn a , a• w H. Dy It wa or w � n Bar rt o m N o an on � r' r ro (D ro N (D ny rt o o rt N r• n ft r n (D n o r n N r- O r r- n (D O �l O C x o E b O N r• N O 'C < < 4 n xd Y n O �3• rt o r (] (D CD �3- n b B r r 6(DoD (Dr° m fD H F' O N. to C] (D rt :� < a O a cn a rt n x * (D rt z (D x to w m n {�v ~ to (..( p K N o O G 9 N O H O � a ron o a ° n o w LQ (DR' m w rt a o r rtr r. ro m N m n r 0 In b o r x N 1 w o o � H H 9co 'Coo O roro > H H W W N N C) � � ? OD O %D O W O w O W w roH � 0 0 CA mo nc r w N N Nco o w in co Ln Ja r oo . Z .a w O m D, kD o H �U O O N N L r Li o � u� w o m L'i v N � OD a o m P F HH O `V W -{A lcjyt, N N O O O -Y4J W tD xwrom a rrw n o n 0 rooxn (� c7ro c „ m t 3 y ro3 n (D (D 0 oro n rt v (D N %7 ~ O Ma ab rt (D �. (D G w h'-U) 1 - 'W.1 . r n rr E V-S n ( m n n r• r• rt0 m r ( 1 - 0 r r + m 0 0 nnmoamr-p In n n H. r' z �3 rY !D a m (D FO rt r rr w w Y G 0 rr a aamwl-• � "w � tr0 MM 'Y (DK r '- � (D rt G rr w o G G (D C7 n m r• m m H. F" m G ' r, n �- (t ID G a n w (D a a0 (D a F•• :3 H- H. Hnw r (D n z tO n o d C3 (D G (D r n r rwt. 1 Inrt to rt (D MW � Fn' (D rt 1 Y (D t F' rt (D 0 £ M M �j a 5Y1 GO O n aM0 0 o w r rr tr (D n n n M M J r w M� r w m W 0 r r 9 a q 1'' w (D m �o D 5 n W w M rt rt � 0 (D n F N H- n (D r w £ rt G b T rt �r O w rt m O rri F-+ p. o w t O r h G �' Pt H FA (D t w l i a � a %n t7rr rt a G W P R' � � O r10 VO rt m a (D (D a m n rt w w < mro r U, o N w ID w n r r rt w 0 r- � a w ,o w 0 w h D r m x rt n r- m N 0 w M • K (D M a o D n w M` n tr x w a r- 1-' tr x W �n Ln rt ro � tj n ro o w o f- n � ,n n Li N w m ('' n m ko Go w g O U r P) E In o G � r t 0 a rr 0 w (,, 0 o o co ,o 0 tr a co w w N ' , A N 'g (n M r• M rr r (D G n rt 1 - rt m n o w G n w w N Y rt a Ln w O W Co 9 w r cc U, m r- 0 tr n 1 • n w n F I.. rc. w 8 m w 0 mac} K � o o l N Oco n O , O O Cl) n w f fr 1 r f' r N 1 `G a r• r- r•E O= r-• r- 'J a r� r N ct rr q rr +� w rt . g a in rr .n rt N w N rD (D 7' = F- fD ^< in ]" _ rr'*� G NI. P• N . _ 7 w r7 7 fD H (D rn < fD (D A• 7 Fj H. rt D) (D rr n rt rr O m n 5 m .. (D (D � r{ (D O r rD`< F rt m rs r-a H O o p n a G " n (D l< rr a H ¢,O O rt y n N o f p (D O N rf 0 • < ° g n � UGI G (D (D �- n m ° E O Q. - A o • G o 10 G G G iH G G n Mara rrt M o u N Pi Gr rt. tS rr rt 7' ] r- rt SD• r- 0 '7 O O N (D 'LJ ct rs ,. O O n 0 0 G G rD rt n r M G Q' 7 rD '0 O V) 0 rt fD � m (D G- 10 51 n rr G' rr O G rt a o P. _ o r 0 rrG D, rO ir' (D (7 N (D ri £ M N r r ^ (DN. 0 +n ri N � lJl w N rt I P N O v P. H w G rt Pli En �4 M H H Y w p ¢ rt o ry a O C H n r r o p r.(D < 7 (D C H m w r m MK Q r• rt rf y ° N w vP-w N w < ca rt (D Q rW - y r ° tr a (D N a O M 0 0 0 o O (Drt < G H m m m m �'G r•rt b 0 0 0 0 r rnr G G' H y H 13 p r Q r O M G O N '< z z ° W O _ W pi H tn< x rt0 MH rt M DY rt r M O K K oz n rn3H N H ^ < O O u, m m i., rt rt m J co N w En - r K N o ° o o HDi10roH (D J J J J n rt r{10 ° rt - J J {nrt (D a ° a ° (D r'b n N N N N a G O rt rt 0 0 N a N � ncrn3 r r vID rtrtp r r n r.n G `(D r rt 0 0 0 0 (D r•(D o. rr (D < rr < 0- 0 (D �7 N 'j rt L]V1 rt - � � o N r ([rrljQjj G, `C n ro 0 y m (D H N N '�1 J W r N 'jJ fU H N O Ul H W W rt w n N P. O • P M W N fD n a r - UI A"G m M C tt (D w o O �l a N fD (D Ut o P- �l o a (D In . (D N O 'o t'( n O rl n ro O :r Ih F-' a VI �Ela r r (Dn row (D r h 'O a J a O 0 m xo O r n H O N a n O H +l N (n K P. G O O ly O n K •4 .': 'n G 5 I.^ O (D �j m a r to a K m O (D (D Y V) K a " m m O m (D ff r7 m M (D r rt (D r (D Ul rt m ?v m H O"tJ UI (t ;C 4J O a H m O rt rt r ro fn O r (D J rt G U) Cr C a H-A r a rt > fD ^ r ti (D fD a (D r a 03 ti C X O - W O N r °;° 'JJ ft V1 m rf (f) N C vl G o rt - o\° (D G n a (D W N H H O a moa. � o aG n 1. C fr n [a o n a . p rt (D 9) C Ln rry C a (D J (D O m D m m (D 7 C a P, m 0 m U) m rt0 a � I � rt � M a rt � � m r- N m 0 � M y H r-o w r7 m a O C ?' o o N o 0 Hj O C 7 fDCD r, y o ~' r. MK o r rfn h K P a rf m iq r LQ H ro (D a V)K m w rro yzrom rjo N H V�i rt rj a O M ti . N J O ^ O (D C � 7 0 ,p U, to ri y . w m H."'0 .fi- H ft (D 7 ,3' H y .n J p" H W r O O (n K z M O O ^ wwa t+ w tnC X rf0 M H - N N m w N F'-`J y H K K n C y H H ^ C 0 0 O M fr (t `A fn m w � v H x C7 1-0 a O !D ~ W N H ^ (7 rta Oro rf - r-ro � aNrt � W fD O r ncm � N m ' tnG rfrf ° U, U, n r- m H N u ro rf U J O 7 0 o rt m r K rt K tiz VI m w 4 K - a Hezv m ° o m < x nmrhm m mn w r m r ttr N J O O w r r �wl m a G m o a m m w a - nQa r • or- mm m rtrtm m Nw7 aVI m m U1 m W rn wow � 0 `nym n n HctL9 o m mh E P-� ° p' w0 wH ra E r'O m rrtm rt : m m 0 LJ m a rt rt tt m rt a tt r- r- rt o m n y n < Umi m w N O n, � r-rt J n n r o � IQ m o m a 7 0 7'W r G r £ rt " mP- n m e w r-r C 'Cr n m r � m r- m r-o rt K IQ rt (D O m m rt K• m 5Ct m x a o r-m m rt c a rr w m m m H n x 1 �3, a a m a x w c N � N a m w w x m n rt w P. w IQ C rt ocn t1 m O rm w m rr r a m rt cn In - piJ v 7 � a O _ m J1 M m 0 O y H �j 7 o rtrt rt Erorocn > Cro ro r-u� N o.0nj nwo < H � m - m r.m ° C m ti y m am ro ~o r-rt t y f-t b < v n w m a' w t< C m N- �w 't m W rLA H a P.W cc I m a m K m r m m r ° < m a > xa m o ca m x o < mrr zo N• N. N -� O m < y ryJ a o +n 11 N.rt 7 `.'O Cu � � H H K t o HQ z VI K i 7 O mK � O O m r z n N co y C� r-o ocn < x rt °H. [h H rt IQ r rt n 3 w N th O m r rt r Z � n rt c a � y � U) y m rn ^ < O ° rt rt ° m r CD a m i H � oroH � z m m n yarn Oro o n r rn m w ° w ° 00 vw o � rt n m w m J m Q m 0 r WZT rt 0 O r rr m rt m r o K rtK 0 m w < r rt �a N ' K DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS November 26, 1991 TO: Public Works Committee FROM: Don Wickstrom RE: Financial Plan & Revenue Program for Storm Drainage Utility Attached is the above referenced Financial Plan & Revenue Program. It reflects the anticipated financial needs of the Storm Drainage Utility over the next six years. Said needs are driven by both increased maintenance and operational costs and construction of certain capital facilities. Over the next six years, annual maintenance and operational costs are estimated to increase by $729 , 000 while capital expenditure, as reflected in the attached Table 1, will total an estimated $25, 556 , 000. The capital program addressed both flood control and water quality needs of the City' s storm water system. To finance both the M&O costs and this capital improvement program, annual adjust of the utility' s service rate is required. Table 2 reflects the 1991 proposed utility rate. It also reflects the utility' s anticipated service rate for the subsequent years. It should be noted, however, that since subsequent-year rates, including the timing of their implementation, are subject to a re- evaluation, they are presented here only as a comprehensive glimpse of what can be anticipated. Table 3 presents a comparison of the proposed 1991 rates with respect to the existing rate and Table 4 reflects the net financial impact thereof on the utility customer. While it' s the Public Works Department ' s recommendation that Council approve the proposed 1991 Storm Utility Rates, we are also proposing that the financial impact thereof be partially offset by both a water rate reduction and absorbing the 1992 Metro sewer rate increase. With respect to the financial status of the Water Utility, our review thereof, as reflected in Table 5, denotes that a 13% ($540, 000) reduction in revenue could be absorbed through 1997 without impacting either its operation or the implementation of its capital improvement program (Table 6) . While we project through 1997 that a rate increase may not be necessary, one critical factor impacting same is the ramification of the Safe Drinking Water. Act. Should Kent Springs or Clark Springs or both be classified as Financial Plan & Revenue Program for Storm Drainage Utility November 26, 1991 Page 2 surface water sources then treatment of the waters therefrom will be required. As such, a rate increase will most likely be necessary to finance construction of said treatment facilities. A decision thereon would probably come some time in 1993 . With respect to said decision, by removing the last of the customers presently serviced off our Kent Springs transmission main, we could possibly get a waiver which would defer the treatment plant requirement to, hopefully, beyond 1997 . With regard to implementing a rate reduction, we recommend, in lieu of just an across the board percentage reduction, modifying our rate structure to a two-tiered structure composed of a winter rate (October-April) and a summer rate (May-September) . The intent thereof would be to instill a water conservation element within our rate structure. By doing so, we would be in accord with both the recent amendment to the City' s Water Comprehensive Plan and the County-adopted South King County Critical Water Supply Plan. Our proposed modifications of the rate are as follows: Proposed Winter Summer Existing* (Oct-April) (May-Sept) Inside $1. 64 $1. 24 $1. 64 Outside $2 . 00 $1. 61 $2 . 00 * $/100 cubic feet With respect to the sewer utility, our review of its financial status as reflected in Table 7 denotes that it could absorb the 1992 Metro increase (3% or $212 , 477) without impacting either the utility' s operation or the implementation of its capital improvement program (Table 8) through 1997 . Our assumption herein is that future Metro rates will be passed through to the customer as has traditionally been done. Table 9 reflects the financial impacts of both the water rate reduction and the absorption of the 1992 Metro rate increase. Essentially, for the single family residences, these equal or exceed the impacts of the proposed 1991 Storm Utility rate increase. It should be noted that while the storm utility' s rate increase is anticipated to generate $226, 523 more revenue than the proposed cut/absorption, it is revenue neutral to its general customers . Financial Plan & Revenue Program for Storm Drainage Utility November 26, 1991 Page 3 This is because said $226, 523 equates to the net combined increase of the City' s ($218 , 321) and the State ' s ($8 , 388) utility bill. For the record, however, it should be noted that some storm utility customers are neither water or sewer customers (primarily those customers west of I-5) . As such, they will see an increase. These are, however, within the basins least impacted by the proposed storm utility rate increase. In conclusion, the Public Works Department recommends that Council adopt the proposed 6-year CIP along with the respective 1991 Storm Utility Rate. Also, in conjunction therewith, it is recommended that Council adopt the proposed reduction/modification to the water utility rates along with the absorption of Metro ' s 1992 rate increase. MCCARTHY,TONY / KENT70/FN - HPDesk print. ----------------------------------------- Silhject: DRAINAGE UTILITY FINANCIAL PLAN - FISCAL NOTE C itor: Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/FN Dated: 12/03/91 at 0907 . THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS PROPOSING A DRAINAGE RATE INCREASE TO FUND THE FIRST YEAR OF A SIX YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM THAT ADDRESSES THE STORM DRAINAGE NEEDS OF THE CITY. THE SIX YEAR PROGRAM TOTALS 25 . 6 MILLION DOLLARS , WITH THE 1ST YEAR PROGRAM TOTALING 4 . 9 MILLION. THE PROGRAM IS PROPOSED TO BE FUNDED BY A RATE INCREASE OF BETWEEN 32% AND 110% DEPENDING ON DRAINAGE BASIN. THE TYPICAL WEST HILL SINGLE FAMILY CHARGE WOULD INCREASE FROM $. 92 TO $1.70 PER MONTH. A TYPICAL EAST HILL SINGLE FAMILY CHARGE WOULD INCREASE FROM $2 . 50 TO $4 . 36 PER MONTH. THIS RATE INCREASE IS PROPOSED TO BE REVENUE NEUTRAL IF THE CITY 'S BILLING TO ITSELF IS EXCLUDED IN THAT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS PROPOSING A 13% WATER RATE REDUCTION AND THE ABSORBTION OF THE 1992 METRO RATE INCREASE OF 3% OR $212 ,477 THAT IS USUALLY PASSED ON TO THE RATE PAYER. INDIVIDUAL RATE PAYERS PHOUGH WILL SEE A RATE INCREASE IF THEY HAVE RELATIVELY HIGH DRAINAGE CHARGES --OMPARED TO WATER USAGE. THE CITY OF KENT' S GENERAL FUND CHARGE WOULD INCREASE 3ECAUSE IT PAYS THE CHARGE FOR ALL CITY STREETS AND RELATIVELY SPEAKING HAS I VERY LOW WATER BILL. THIS GENERAL FUND INCREASE HOWEVER IS REFLECTED IN THE �ITY'S 1992 BUDGET. DUE TO DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE CITY FLOODING PROBLEMS, THE IBC RECOMMENDS THE DRAINAGE UTILITY FINANCIAL PLAN INCLUDING THE WATER RATE REDUCTION AND THE METRO RATE INCREASE ABSORPTION AS A COST EFFECTIVE MEANS OF PROVIDING DRAINAGE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS. TABLE 1 1991 - 1996 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM STORM CAPITAL PRCJECTS Fiscal Year Description 1991 992 1993 _1994_ 1995 1996 Total Mill Creek (Auburn) 8 Mullen Slough Flood Control Improvement 25 (1) 104 108 84 116 120 557 Green River RT Bank Levee Improvement 350 (1) 260 270 280 290 300 1750 Valley Detention 3400 1664 2208 7272 (4) Mill Creek Flood & Erosion Control 100 338 540 286 145 1409 Garrison Creek Flood E Erosion Facilities 586 (2) 1040 1182 1680 302 4790 Horseshoe Acre Storm Pump Station 85 (1) 280 365 CADD Workstation 7 (1) 7 Miscellaneous Drainage Improvement 315 (1) 328 340 353 365 378 2079 East Hill Shop 134 134 Shops Remodel 9 (3) 90 99 Water Quality Sampling Stations 104 (6) 104 Stream Restoration R Streamside Tree Planting 31 (6) 4 (6) 38 (6) 5 (6) 78 Lake Fenwick Restoration 156 156 Storm Drainage Outfall Treatment Facilities 353 2688 3185 6226 Mill Creek Non-Paint Action Plan 8 304 162 56 530 Total 4885 (5) 4298 (7) 4841 3600 3944 3968 25556 Project costs escalated for inflation at 4 percent per year. (1) Previously approved in the amount shown in the 91 Budget. (2) $300,000 thereof was previously approved in the 91 Budget. (3) 91 Budget approved at $11,375 therefore understated herein. (4) Doesn't reflect total project cost. Total cost is $14,514,000 of which Utility's share is 50 percent with the balance being financed via ULID (5) Additionally 91 Budget also approved $6,500 for Salmon Enhancement, $24,000 for re-roof of shed row. (6) Additional projects not reflected in recent C.I.F. update. (7) Recent C. I.P. update includes $11,000 P.W. hazardous mat storage, $20,000 spray handling facilities, $4,000 yard drainage treatmen' 1218E-30E TABLE 2 PROPOSED RATi;S* Basin 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 $/ESU/Month West Side F, O. P & N 1 . 75 2 . 09 2 . 25 2 . 36 2 . 57 2 . 69 Mill Creek (Auburn) & Mullen Slough K, M, D. E, 1 . 76 2 . 12 2 . 29 2 . 42 2 . 64 2 . 76 Lake Fenwick (L) 1. 76 3 . 00 3 . 12 3 . 30 3 . 53 3 . 64 East Side Mill Creek Upper (6) 4 . 38 5 . 30 6 . 63 6 . 75 6 . 94 7 . 00 Lower (A) 4 . 51 5 . 62 7 . 06 7 . 39 8 . 30 8 . 70 ULID 306 (Q) 2 . 23 2 . 66 3 . 30 5 . 97 3 . 67 3 . 78 Garrison Creek Lower (B) 2 . 98 4 . 12 5 . 1.4 6 . 35 6 . 78 6 . 90 Upper (J&I) 2 . 84 3 . 91 4 . 85 6 . 00 6 . 37 6 . 33 Direct (C) 2 . 11 2 . 53 2 . 75 3 . 63 4 . 56 5 . 01 Soos Creek (H) 1 . 75 2 . 07 2 . 25 2 . 36 2 . 57 2 . 69 *Includes 3 . 5% City Utility Tax TABLE 3 RATE COMPARISON Existing Proposed** Net Basin 1991 1991 Change West Side F, O. P. & N 0 . 92 1 . 69 0 . 77 Mill Creek (Auburn) & Mullen Slough K,M, D, E 0 . 92 1 . 70 0 . 78 Lake Fenwick (L) 0 . 92 1 . 70 0 . 78 East Side Mill Creek Upper (G) 2 . 45 4 . 23 1 . 78 Lower (A) 2 . 50 4 . 36 1 . 88 ULID 306 (Q) 1 . 07 2 . 16 1 . 09 Garrison Creek Lower (B) 2 . 11 2 . 80 0 . 77 Upper (J&I) 2 . 06 2 . 74 0 . 68 Direct (C) 0 . 97 2 . 04 1 . 07 Soos Creek(H) 0 . 92 1 . 69 0 . 77** **Exludes 3 . 5% City Utility Tax Oo 00 00 0o A O \ O O y 00 t-Y (D O n \ n \ n ao O (D N Vl N O (D < (D O !C (� O (D (D O In G D < O E3 c (D r-r A, -h a w a n r,> -S N n n_ fD c r t r o N N H m CO CD w -? c) O) W N N �--+ Cn O CD O CD O O O U t Cn CO p W -A Cn -A O W V V O Cn U1 O Ur - O -r O _ CO i-' N lD ID O , to U1 ? CD . W � �-' 00 O CO Co NNO v Z 3 X^ m 3 C Cn O (n O V (n N � �`- CO al .- -P lD Co O V H Cn o (n o � C--) (n fr1 _ cn o v _ ? O (T N O V W CO 0T � O LJ (D -Tl V Vt W N Vl �-. Cn Ol CD " CO m rr Z a T W O) O� Cn CD V Cn N N .-� ^ rU r ,O, �' lD OD O V �--� (n O Cn F-. .ta Cn N O V W U' CD E 7r A O O) co CD (T i---� .p p (D V Vl W N Ul �--+ Lr Q) CDco 1-4 n x 3 n (o W N r\) CO Ut .p lD Cn W ~ (_ O VNCn OCO CT tv ^� \ OC l D 00 Cn rV ? lD N O CO N Co V �� ' --nr co co Y o m v r+ � C" W rV f--. N 3 ? O NLo (n CO N CT (n W N �--, r H m N -4 Cn rn � LD ca �-- CD n CD-A O Co V Ut .p. (n r ) (D O0 "S -1 D CD N H O O V W C X _p V N) W N � f-{ ? V � Ql N CO O CO m O ti-- .F.. CD .A Co V �-. -F v N CD m Q) CD CO �J Cn N v l00 �'' (.) n CD v � m y �-` Cn lD Ut O V -0. N Rl N C r O O) Co O V O OJ `D Ul Co Lo CO Cn W lD W (D - L Ul V CO U1 N W Co Ol CD tD W co .A (In O Ol Co V CD O) -P IV Cn co -A W lD W CO P ? �-• C n CD ..p N W (Ln 4p CO orn CO V w •' '� m Co X W V J> O CT W N N .- CDlD W lD -P LO O) to V lD �.�, W --A ..�. Cn lD O co ^ CD W Co Cn Cn O) N W (D Co lD .A W O `l n rt (Jl -A. O W V V O a) i--. V, O cn 4� O CO lD Ut -P CD F S mW O� �--' Ol �-+ W CD CO CO N N O V " -5 P. (U (D n j n Z O W m 3(�fn.-.p O to o ° ' x o l<v, LO y �* J sm m to w n Jm cve w _n m m c w J C o N w o � 'o m m o m m-- m o rtfD �+ rt G n � k C n -•n n rt �l O lit N O G O �n O O o' m o an ro � w p w vm c A a v c n •� �»'oo� T -s o f* o m w w a m vtn tli O 0 � O o° 0 0 —o m m m 3 n n P. I< f V p m 0 • w A O ~ O N ' O m S Z 1p W A N ltt N N A CO Cn N r A ~ -1 cow V� W O �� r1 tD N Ql V G \ •S (n V A C Q1 W W A N ti O CL mmmW O W W N Vl A N O Ol N N O W (n r+(n N Co m O O O co W V O �-• (n W N A rn �-O O O O t n W N V� N tD A V W N V N � cot O O O O a\ O W O cn A ap w 7J O�AAm0 7J W A O OlO tp Cn 000 A O iD `� 0-J Cil ham-• V .. .. .. .. V O N� A O co m m co V Ol N ' S n W i--•W�-•w m �O O N O ip G O O Q�W G n fDco 0 W w C,N C. Ot�--•(T Nt0 l � rt O rt N V (n V A N Lil — Ln1 W N O� N V� m m C Z T w O W V V A O A 0 0 0 (n O l l 0 rt N Q.�r rF O O O M 0.3 O Cn O O to N� cn O O O O V W G (D V� -p rr w 0 A O (n coto(n CoW N O O O O m m . nw -" c O 1p O tp(p O_ tp W w d�--•_n O l0 O O coN lD W O O A W i0 O \CO] tOm Z p N A N co A N(n O O 00 QiA - iD Z O�O r•\In w W O V Ql pi 1p ip W O O O CO(n w � n Q w O fn N V W N N N N W p� C �O N A V N W l 1p W O In A Ol t0 N Ol W (P N 0 0 0 V A lD C N P.-S W O W �D 1p N V W .• V .• .• .• Q1 O rt O O V V W O O O ip O O �p W ip C O O � = A S � O O � N N N (n N W N N {a N W V N Vt A co l0 W Cn N W O (n Alp l0 N N l0 s m � V \ n Cn O A O 1p A [n 0 0 0 W N ✓� �•. T N O N m m O O l0 tp AN V N OOO ipO � N V iE m m ,-r w -s rt 9 0' m c � rt rt m v o_ w rt '..0 cc ---J m cn -P w N C 1--+ � 0 O w X C w "D co 0 'a n o ciao o n :+ � c J aw c w 0 a _ '� m w \ � In p� N � r ro CD o v b o a [ oaj 0 o cn o m r -�cn >v -- o rD CD w w -5 -7 n n < 'c n CD w n ro c, (D v w n n O O o b Cn (n (D ct C (n ::f Ll > C -,. ctCD lO (D n n -10 I I N I A I II .• I O III CD .. O m--7 O N W O Co C, cn[n N O (D O I W I O O O Cn N O I--• A N (n O N n to 00000cnC) I u � fl � I < n o cD II CO I cn w ro co w (D N II N I W N Iy, Q II Ql I Q) O II N I W kn II •• I O H �_� N � lD 0 � it CD CD U� N Cn pl CD 0 v V I .p CD O Cn Co CT) [n A [n N �—, NO O v. '�' �. II + m -0 It w II Ol �^ CDCn cn Cn O Cn N I p (— -< yW CC Cn W CD CDcD �? O N II I i -n mII W I II N I "J II CD H N O D O m If Cn I N C O vcocn CDII It N I L m m z n rn l wCON N co LrD 'J II �l I .A O cn n A A II I CD II N I nJ if II N O W I O W D It -P I O -P lD If Ul II W I W II N O If -F. I O .A LD F I C A CD Ol II N CZ) N 1 Cn I O n II I V II L� I i__. QJ I� II - I .. (D lD II cs I Cn O co II O I O � G. fZo ^^ 11 m n Z 3 W r' O •n O 3 Ln •AW N : m m • 0 -0 O r+ -• w O -S o cn •Is O r+ m rD n (D C m F--I r+ O w r+ w -5 "5 (D N -I O C I-I Ln (O O w C ---I r+ w LO (D s "O C O w n C-) r+ (D (D N 'n C (D (D r+ -' C O =r -5 O r+ -+• w I-• N 'S C.(D (D C E3 w (O C') O 7 r+ w n z N (D (D -s =r L-+ w m r+ C (D C (Cl r+ p m w O O O n -• g N < n rD L< (D X -5 n n c C lT r+ O C CD N LT'D LO O J• N O LO (D -' (D � r+ (D m n w a -S -'• C LT -h ^ w O N (D (D (D = m Ln X ^ N r— X a n (D -s n -P m — (n OTJ O m N NO w m LTA a r+ v � n n omw -. 5 w (D 'S N > > (D -� N o n n w w C�. m -S N :3 m = • m m n n n w a m c+ 'S N CD m N =k w a e •A (n .PC rno o a. \ m W 'S Ln O 7 L< I-• m M 4P F--• V V I m (D _0 w N LT V ci V CON cn co W FP. I � m M S W P Ui W W O LO N O CO w O N ? LD "S m CT O I-• Ol O N LO I--• N V W CO W N I lD < N L< J• V CD CO co Ln LD M Ln LD FJ 00 m .P I m O 03 O V O O Lb CO V Ol 00 O W O 4P w C O O CO V V OJ LT W F (n O V O CO (D `i I w -$ V V Ul CO V I 1 O co V in (n X. N V N W 00 LO -A O O O m V N •A O IN L" I LD N N O .P I--• Ln. .P W Ut W I-• I LO W a iD C) iD lO iCOO O O O Coc CO CD rn CD C) O C) N L LD S co M) CD N lo LO 1p (T V V LD •-' O CO O W I I ^ r LT cn I--• 00 co rn oD co I O' Ln ,--• Us O N N N CO LD W (n I I-• N m V Ln W V V N LO N W O I-' O N Ol I (O O E J W I--' N (Jl L LD I---• N V W m W 4P I LO Z m + C •S CD -P. o- Po N Ol V LnJ• -t) W CD -P N N N V W lO V F-' CO cn N I -• W ? Ul N r+ n -' V CD Ol m -A -A CD V W C:) I-' C) �--• I .Z7 m C) �-' Ln O m m CD CDLD I--• �-+ OO O W CD C) (-n CD cn I LO m n C co O --A C) 'S C N I-� LD lD Ol L-+ LD lD I m =:00 CO Nan I r+ C 'S w Cn Ln O O V W LD m W N I IJ 'S Rl w m V Ol V Ln U7 co N N N N N V I LO O m C'� .Z -n 'S w N co LO Li W W W ? I--• A V W I--' W LD I lD - -n m C m 0 o •- - •• I Ln to O m W O LD CO CO W V m CO 77 J• • C1-0 VN -0 -A O V V 'J Ln CO -P O O O -P I � m w m N CD I-• W W CO O W N +'l O W CD to co N 'w -5 I LD y n w N •-ij I N (n 'n >--• O — m r+ LO V N O O LO m O -1 w Ul co co •P W O W W LO I r-• a O W W -P .P N N -P I-• I--• . N LO I LO n I--• m O I-• O (n V LD LO V LO O O m co N W V I LO '5 CA LO LD LO .. .. .. ,. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. I Ol m w LO r+ LO •-S CT O N O O W LO LO OO W O m 0) w --� N\ O N O O O LT co CO CO t-• N Ln -P O O O W I N w :E O CD cn V OI co OLO m C \ r+^ r-+ I CD LD (D CD C O CD N m O I--� r-� co N O I n m w V N •A• m m L--` W O W V I t-• O O r+ I--• Ln (n W W H V N N co W N I-• I LO 7 m m O CT I--• I-' W Ln O •--• V W W co I LD (y •D . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. I V C m LO O W W F V CO Ln . LO cn CO 'S Cn O Ln Ln (n (T Di W LD O O W O V I CD 3 N) O Ui Ln O LD (n V O V 0 CD 1 -s m I CD r+ N 0 J. Q a m w J M C n -A W N r� •'O W N O O v (D V1r J D 333 w S (D � n . (D w X �. —I w L< O Z) Cr -1 m to c+ o n n w r a s Ln 0 n (D v w -5 Cn m o � � v w � "s � w � cn J s s -vtn (D CD (D w s o D Jwm o2� 177 oo (o J1 = C_- Ln 0 we s to N v n (D o o c m (D C) (D (D �c n n (D c n s s cn (Dm (D w N n o r D o ra C E3 0 w C+ (D O O (D 'T D m P ( ti -; -$ 7 w (D w 'S 'S C r 3 S (D '5 n (D �P N �r n 5 -G V) J� rr c-r -s w u � � It w 1 .a -a o w CD o (D o II Co O V V O W O Ul O Cn N CSl V O N n N I I V I O Ut C) O CD O C7 N O CD (T1 Ul C) r' rr to 11 I (D o L to (D w fD N II I� I W w CD C (D n' II V 1 W N a)Ql O 11 (7) I (T O O O CT -A (D n. I II I In W I Lo II - I � C"� O V it N I co N CD O V• Z (n II V� I O V W CO V O Cn O Cn V O (n (D (D m C7 I O Cn -A 0000 N C) -AI-' Cn0 C+ n'r C+ � � �---{ .'C7 I-t C7 l u II Ql I N CD D r'" -G 00 II A I O cn Cn Cn Cn � --IC:)O iD • II C) 0 0 0 0 -!� �-' Ul C) N II., D v !— ;�Q 7Z I r O m II CO I O 1-- CD "O G Z 11 A I n n gym -{ 11 rn 1 o a, w O 3 C✓ m rrl Z II I n —I I ~ II C11 I I-� >✓ I-� iD N 'l7 II Cn I V W CO O) lD .m O N 41 O II I II I 3 II Ol I O II �o I CD n Cn II I II I H I CD II V I V Ljo of I Ul Ol I I I II D II N I N II tJl I LO CD II O I O V (D t✓ II I O lD 0 00 O 00 CDI O TABLE 9 IMPACT OF PROPOSED RATE REDUCTION ON SELECTED CUSTOMERS' Average Monthly Savings Monthly per Savings Proposed per Metro T o t a l W a t e r Water Rate R a t e Monthly Class & Individual Customer Existing Modifica- Absorption savings Based on Water Consumption Rate ($) tion ($)" ($) ($) Residential Customers Inside Kent With very low consumption; e.g. , one-person household, limited yard uses. 3/4" meter, 300 cu ft/month 7.12 0. 68 0.60 1.20 With low to moderate consumption; e.g. occupants away from home much of the time. 3/4" meter, 500 cu ft/month 10.40 1. 14 0.60 1.60 With average consumption; e.g. small family with yard uses. 3/4" meter, 800 cu ft/month 15.32 1.82 0.60 2.20 With high consumption; e.g. , large residence, irrigation system 1-1/2" meter, 1,600 cu ft per month 29.54 3. 64 0.60 3.90 Commercial Customers Inside Kent With very low consumption; e.g. , small store with no special water uses. 3/4" meter, 900 cu ft/month 16.96 2 .05 0.60 2.65 With low consumption; e.g. , service station. 1" meter, 2,500 cu ft/month . 43.45 5. 69 1.67 7.39 With medium consumption; e.g. , large apartment building. 2" meter, 12,000 cu ft/month 200.80 27 .30 8.00 35.30 With high consumption; e.g. , very large office building. 4" meter, 25,000 cu ft per 426.80 56.88 16. 67 73.55 month With very high use; e.g. , major industry 8" meter, 750, 000 cu ft per month 12,337.50 1,706.25 500.00 2,206.25 8" meter, 1,500,000 cu ft per month 24,637.50 3, 412 .50 1,000. 00 4,412.50 Excludes 3.5 percent utility tax Average monthly savings is the calculated 7 months' savings divided by 12 months. IMPACT OF PROPOSED RATE MODIFICATION ON SELECTED CUSTOMERS' Average Net Monthly Monthly S a v i n g s M on t h l y Impact of Per savings Proposed Net Proposed per Metro T o t a l Drainage Monthly Existing Water Rate Rate M on t h l y Rate Difference Class & Individual Customer Water Rate Modifica- Absorption savings Increase ( saving) Based on Water Consumption ($) tion ($)° ($i (S) (S) (S) 'esidential Customers Inside Kent With very low consumption; e.g. , one-person household, (0.51) - limited yard uses. 7.12 0.68 0.60 1.28 0.77-2.01` 0.73 3/4" meter, 300 cu ft/month With low to moderate consumption; e.g. occupants - away from home much of the (0.97)- time. 10.40 1.14 0.60 1.74 0.77-2.01` 0.27 3/4" meter,500 cu ft/month With average consumption; e.g. small family with yard uses. (1.65)- 3/4" meter, 800 cu ft/month 15.32 1.82 0.60 2.42 0.77-2.01` (0.41) With high consumption; e.g. , large residence, irrigation (3.47)- system 29.54 3.64 0. 60 4.24 0.77-2.01` (2.23) 1-1/2" meter 1,600 cu ft/month 7ommercial Customers Inside Kent Ben Franklin 324 W. Meeker St. 13,00 sq ft lot 100% covered 5 employees (?) 5.62 0.49 0.60 1.09 16.70 15.61 Office Complex. 24909 104th Ave S.E. 1.25 acre lot 59% covered 80 employees 188.33" 12.06 4.32 16.40 29.61 13.21 Riverwood Apartments 24620 Russell Road 17 acre lot 48% covered 336 residential units 7 employees 4314' 601.10 17°..37 776.47 350.10 (426.37) Reynolds Metals 27402 72nd Avenue 24.3 acre lot 35% covered 135 employees 6052.83' 800.73 224 .64 1025.37 122.95 (902.42) Boeing Aerospace Co. 20403 S. 68th Ave. 470.2 acre lot(° 37% covered 9261 employees 23,106.46('n 2,683.58 920.57 3604.15 6168.97 2564.82 Excludes 3.5 percent utility tax Average monthly savings is the calculated 7 months' savings divided by 12 months Reflects a low to high range. The actual amount is dependent on the specific basin the residence is in. ' Doesn't include the monthly meter charge. Includes facilities on west side and east Side of West Valley Highway DRAINAGE UTILITY RATE PROPOSAL FACT SHEET o Need - Flood Control, Water Quality and Operation & Maintenance o Capital Improvement Program - 92-96 Total $22,909,000 ( see attached) - 92 Program - $6,536,000 Targeting: * Lower Mill Creek Flooding * Valley Flooding * Upper Garrison Creek Flooding o Financing - Through Rate Increases and Cash on Hand Proposed yearly rate increases through 1996. Present rate established in 1985 with the formation of the Utility. 1992 Program $3,800,000 Revenue Bonds 2,030,000 Unencumbered Fund 706,000 Project Reallocation $6,536,000 Proposed rate increases (see attached map) Net increase - 83 cents to $2.01/ESU/month ESU = Equivalent Service Unit = One Single Family Residence o Financial offsets (Revenue Neutral) Total Rate Impact $1,279,000 Water Rate Reduction 840,000 Absorb Metro Increase 212,477 � City & .State Share 226,709 NET $( 186) 0 Not all customers are City sewer and water customers o Attached table denotes financial effect on individual customers rJ o County - (Recent rate increase) $7.17/residence/month through'- 1995 $8.33/residence/month 1995 0 Water Rate Reduction Proposed Winter Summer Existing* (Oct-April) (May-Sept) Inside $1.64 $1.24 $1. 64 Outside $2.00 $1.61 $2.00 * $/100 cubic feet o Implementation Schedule 1/14 City Council Workshop -Review all utility billing mods 1/26 Letter sent to all utility customers with 1/31 bills 2/10-14 Open special phone to explain individual customer changes 2/18 City Council - Public hearing on rate changes and Street Utility formation 3/3 City Council - Continued public hearing on rate changes and Street Utility formation 3/25 Modified bills sent to all customers TABLE 1 -1-993 1992 — 1996 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM STORM CAPITAL PROJECT; DES. .PTION -1994 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 TOTAL Mill Creek (Auburn) & Mullen 0(') 428 Slough Flood Control .,-sL 9g4 103 84 116 120 6-54 Improvement 0 n 840 Green River RT Bank Levee 17-59 Improvement 388M�+ 26B 270 280 290 gggm+ 3400 2953 72720) Valley Detention(`+ 3494 -1664 2298 919 Mill Creek Flood & Erosion ills .286 g6 }4.5 1409 2 Controlo) }gg 33-9 649 Garrison Creek Flood & Erosion 1626 853 958 1353 Facilities(o 586_-1 }040 }}82 �68a 4G2 4790 280 Horseshoe Acre Storm Pump 86-5 Station 230 CARD Workstation -7 1764 Misc Drainage Improvement 3-lbM) 328 340 353 365 378 29*9 E Hill Shop 134 134 90 Shops Remodel 92) 90 44 Water Quality Sampling Stations 104(6) 104 Stream Restoration & Streamside Tree Planting 31�� 038�e 5tm 78 100'o 100 Lake Fenwick Restoration ?-66 IS-6 Storm Drainage Outf all(') 1762 3485 5620 Treatment Facilities 353 2-6 'T'ro5 62- H-"1-Greek-Non-Point—Ae t4^n F-1-an-m+ 8 304 462 TOTAL 4&B SLI) 42-9811! 484i 3600 3944 3968 2-55-56 6536 22909 Project Costs escalated for inflation at 4 percent per year. {}�-Prereas�y-a ppxeved-trt-the�neunt�#iew+r-i.r-t,`-,�9T.`�u�iget,- (-2-y-$389v-989-t�ieree€-s+ae-preve'ta-appraved-rn--t-h -T1---;udget-r i-3i 91 b"gam€Peev«t $1- ; her {4j-8eeen't ref,gt --being-f:-nanee (5) drt-ienai-J-y-r- 4-budget-alse--,sppz oYed-$brs�.T=ro=->ai:„orr-bnhaneeme+r+T-`r��rOB6-€ar-rE-ree€-o€-eked-z©w,- ��`--"ddtt-iena4-ptoj�etwaot-r-eYlee`-�'^-�eeent-�,�a-pdate�- {-7 Reeent--G ! rapda7=erne-lude�. '-r0A&-r"�Wrhasardeiae-n+a t��t©ra4�e�-y"e-0v�88-egraY-hand4-rn ieo-r-64-rSA4 .1rattiage-t-rea tmen t- (a) Presently budgeted funds adequate to do 92 program. (b) Anticipate securing Army Corps of Engineers grant for which tt;e 1993-95 would constitute our local match. (c) Update schedule (d) Combined funding for 91-93 into 1992 and moved ahead, 94 & 95 program. (e) Combined funding for 91 & 92 and adjusted balance of funding program so as not to affect rate increase forecast. (f) Reduced scope of work. (9) Deferred balance of project to 1997. (h) Project anticipated a grant which didn't materialize. CURRENT RATE 0. 00 - PROPOSED RATE � I I DRAINAGE UTILITY Ifi n SEIZVICIi AM'A ,,,EPnnEa 0i ,E nxcf,z LA. n cI t, a NE NI PoOuc Nonns a2runzNENt� SCALE: 1"=4000 Ton tit o : � i PLaNIRE IRI CS OOELJpEa Faa`I PEAIRL P4afaf HRPMi + � aNN RPRIL. l9tla / L\ tj R CC ant y I223 gi l �T Lz+gFM!I t �♦ '.� 1 I � 1 �^ I � � �, � r- -L - 6 R �T T Jill zs AD f'! r , \ I...- T. S 277TH T). I • ' '. - DRAINAGE BASINS ft y Cit Kent Council Meeting Date February 18 , 1992 Category Public Hearinas 1. SUBJECT: STREET UTILITY 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been set for the public hearing on formation of a street utility and implementation of a proposed rates. Implementation of the street utility rates as proposed will be offset somewhat by the elimination of the City's utility tax to its water, sewer and drainage customers. 3 . EXHIBITS: Memorandum from Public Works Director 4. RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: OPEN HEARING: PUBLIC INPUT• CLOSE HEARING: 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember !,`� � moves, Councilmember L � seconds the hearing on formation of the Street Utility be continued to the March 3 Council meeting. DISCUSSION• ACTION: Council Age da Item No. 2B DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS February 13, 1992 TO: MAYOR KELLEHER ND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON WICKSTROMk-W RE: STREET UTILITY As discussed during the deliberation on Resolution 1270 (copy attached) and also at the January 14th Council Workshop, the creation of a Street Utility is the last major hurdle necessary to solidify the financial support for implementing the 272nd/277th Street Corridor project and two phases of the 196th Street Corridor. Total cost of these three projects ranges from $51 million to $65 million. Because of this magnitude, the financial support consists of a conglomerate of various revenue sources including State grants, King County funds, vehicle registration fee revenue, City gas tax revenues, local improvement districts, councilmanic bonds, cash on hand, mitigation payments, and street utility revenue. Attached is a Street Utility fact sheet which was originally presented at the January 14th Council Workshop. The fact sheet has been modified to reflect our conclusion per the January 17th Transportation Improvement Board (T. I . B. ) Action. The good news, as you are already aware, was that they approved our grant per the 196th/200th Street Corridor (West Valley Highway to East Valley Highway) . The bad news is that they 're not interested in any significant grant increase on the 272nd/277th Corridor. The results assuming the worse case scenario would be a 9 year funding time line for implementing these projects . No matter how you look at it, what we have is a financial window of opportunity for implementing these projects. Without the Street Utility, the grant funding (totaling $19 - 21 million) will be lost. T. I . B. ' s recent request for grant application resulted in $95 million in requests for which only $15 , 000 , 000 - $25, 000, 000 in funding was available. No other outside funding source is available to either fund these projects or are of a magnitude to offset the need for Street Utility funding. Available federal funding is more in the $100, 000 to $200 , 000 range and is limited to safety type improvements. As Council recalls from the Workshop, a voter approved issue ($15 , 000, 000) actually costs the individual homeowner more than the utility charge. Also, over the 20 year debt service life $12 , 000, 000 would be spent on interest alone. As reflected in the attached proposed street utility ordinance, the service rate proposed is $1. 90 per month per residential unit or full time equivalent employee. It is estimated the utility would generate $1, 273 , 000 per year. In keeping with the discussion presented during Council ' s deliberation of Resolution 1270, it is proposed to lessen the financial impact on the individual customer by eliminating the city' s utility tax on its sewer, water and drainage utility charges. The attached table summarizes the net effect thereof on various utility customers. The Street Utility is critical with respect to implementing these corridor project and they are critical with respect to addressing our traffic congestion needs. Under the Growth Management Act, concurrency between land use and the capacity of the city' s transportation system is mandated. Without that concurrency, development can't occur. Also under the Federal and State Clean Air mandates, traffic congestion will need to be addressed as a means of reducing air pollution. For the above reasons, the Public Works Department recommends Council proceed with implementation of the Street Utility. RESOLUTION /C� A RESOLUTION of the city council of the city of Kent, Washington, relating to the city ' s Transportation System and the intent to create a Street Utility. WHEREAS , the City Council is responsible for the public health, safety and general welfare of the people of Kent; and WHEREAS, the city ' s traffic congestion problem is a significant and serious problem; and WHEREAS, traffic congestion results in accidents involving both personal injury and property damage; and WHEREAS, resolution of the city ' s traffic congestion problem is the City Council ' s number one target issue; and WHEREAS, presently many City intersections and some streets are operating at or beyond their capacity; and WHEREAS, future traffic projections .indicate that without significant improvements to the City ' s transportation system the traffic congestion problem will only be exacerbated; and WHEREAS, the City ' s 1984 Comprehensive Transportation Plan and the 1988 Green River Valley Transportation Action Plan denote the necessity of constructing three additional east/west cross valley corridors as a means of relieving the City ' s congestion problems ; and WHEREAS , transportation financing has always been an obstacle per addressing the city ' s traffic congestion problems ; and WHEREAS , the 1990 State Legislature authorized several optional financial means to assist in addressing the needs of the local transportation system; and WHEREAS, One of the local options is the establishment of a street utility under RCW 82 . 80 . 040 et. seq., which requires that the local government develop and adopt a specific transportation program in order to levy or expend transportation funds ; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby ordered and resolved by the City of Kent as follows : Section 1. The Council finds that traffic congestion is a major and serious problem within the City of Kent. Section 2 . The Council further finds that a critical element of the solution to the problem is the implementation of transportation improvements . Section 3 . The Council further finds that additional revenue sources will be required in order to implement and maintain these improvements. Section 4 . The Council hereby declares its intent to create a street utility and directs staff to proceed with the development of the necessary studies, plans, reports, ordinances, etc. associated therewith . ADOPTED at a regular session of the Council of the City of Kent this < day of aA, 1991. CONCURRED in by the Mayor of the city of Kent this day of _ 1991. Dan Kelleher, Mayor ATTEST U Marie Jensen, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Rog Lubo ich City Attorney ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE declaring the existing street system of the City of Kent to be a public utility, setting forth the classification of customers subject to charges, providing for the levying and collection of such charges and creating the Street Utility Fund, from which monies shall be spent for the construction, maintenance, operation and preservation of the street utility. WHEREAS, traffic congestion in the City of Kent is a significant and serious problem which results in accidents involving both personal injury and property damage; and WHEREAS, in addition to the fact that many streets and intersections in the City are operating at or beyond their maximum capacity, future traffic projections indicate that essential transportation system improvements must be constructed or traffic congestion will be significantly exacerbated; WHEREAS, the Kent City Council, as the legislative body responsible for the health, safety and general welfare of the people of Kent, has made resolution of the City' s traffic congestion problem their number one target issue; WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature, in recognition of this growing problem throughout the state, authorized cities to utilize several options in order to address the financial needs of local transportation systems such as the establishment of a street utility under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) , Section 82 .80. 040 et secs. , ; WHEREAS, the Council, in Resolution , authorized the establishment of a street utility in the City and to provide for the levying and collection of such charges, and the creation of a street utility fund, from which monies shall be spent for the construction, maintenance, operation and preservation of the streets as a public utility; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Street System a Public Utility. The City of Kent hereby declares that its existing street system, including all street lighting, traffic control devices, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, parking facilities and drainage facilities, together with such extensions, additions and betterments thereto as may be authorized from time to time, shall be constructed, maintained, operated and preserved as a public utility of the City, beginning March 1, 1992 , all as authorized by and pursuant to RCW 82 . 80. 040. Section 2 . Definitions. As used in this ordinance: A. "Business" means all activities, occupations, trades, pursuits, professions and matters engaged in or located within the City limits with the object of gain, benefit, advantage or profit to the business enterprise or to another person, directly or indirectly. 2 B. "Business enterprise" means each location at which a person engages in business within the City. C. "Employee" means any person employed at any business enterprise in the City, except casual laborers not employed in the usual course of business. A sole proprietor is not an "employee" when the business enterprise is located within a housing unit. All officers, agents, dealers, franchisees, etc. , of a corporation or business trust, and all partners of a partnership (except limited partners) are "employees" within this definition. D. "Full-time equivalent employee" means the calculated number of employees derived by dividing the total yearly number of hours reported on the preceding quarterly State of Washington Labor and Industries Reports by one thousand nine hundred twenty (1, 920) hours. E. "Housing Unit" means a building or portion thereof designed for or used as the residence or living quarters of one or more persons living together, or of one family. F. "Low-income disabled" means those persons eligible for a reduction in utility rates as described in Resolution 980 of the City of Kent. G. "Low-income seniors" means those persons eligible for a reduction in utility rates as described in Resolution 980 of the City of Kent. 3 Section 3 . Administration of Utility. The Director of Public Works, through the Department of Public Works, shall operate and administer such public utility and enforce this ordinance; and there shall be kept a classified system of accounts or revenues and disbursements as prescribed by the State Auditor, in conjunction with the City Finance Director and Finance Department, all as required by law. Section 4 . Rates and Charges -- Purpose. The City shall levy charges for the use and availability of its streets in a total annual amount of up to fifty percent of the actual costs of maintenance, operation and preservation of facilities under the jurisdiction of the street utility, all authorized by and pursuant to Chapter 82 . 80 RCW. Section 5. Street Utility Customer Charge -- Residential . As of March 1, 1992 , the Public Works Director shall impose upon . each residential housing unit served by the street utility, a uniform customer charge of one dollar and ninety cents ($1. 90) per month; provided that the residential housing units described in Section 7 shall be exempt from this charge. Section 6 . Street Utility Customer Charge -- Business. A. Amount of Charge. As of March 1, 1992 , the Public Works Director shall impose upon each business enterprise served by the street utility, a uniform business customer charge of one dollar and ninety cents ($1. 90) per full-time equivalent employee per month. 4 B. Calculation of Charge. The monthly business customer charge shall be calculated by multiplying the number of hours reported during the preceding quarter of the year on the quarterly State of Washington Labor and Industries Reports by $0. 003958 per hour. This figure will be approximately one dollar and ninety cents ($1. 90) per full-time equivalent employee per month when based upon one thousand nine hundred twenty (1, 920) hours of employment per calendar year. C. Under-reporting of Employees. Upon the City' s request, a business shall provide copies to the City of its quarterly reports as submitted to the State Department of Labor and Industries, reporting employee hours worked. If at any time during the year it appears that the number of employees in a particular business enterprise have been under-reported for the purposes of this ordinance, an additional charge in the amount of such under- reporting shall be due. D. Applicability. 1 . For purposes of this ordinance, any business operating within the City limits of the City of Kent shall be subject to this business customer charge, regardless of whether the business ' employees work within or without the Kent city limits. 2 . For any employees whose nominal place of business is within the City limits of the City of Kent, all hours will be subject to the street utility charge. Any employee regularly reporting to work within the City limits shall have all of that employee' s time subject to this charge, even if portions of the employee ' s time are spent outside the City of Kent, for 5 example, a realtor or outside salesperson. For an employee normally employed within the City of Kent, who for extended periods of time reports to work outside the City of Kent, (for example, a contractor' s employees reporting directly to job sites, ) then the employer may by affidavit report the number of hours actually worked within the City or the percentage of time worked within the City based upon one thousand nine hundred twenty (1, 920) hours annually, and pay the charge based upon those figures. Section 7 . Exemptions from Street Utility Customer Service Charges. Charges imposed by this ordinance shall not be applicable to: A. Public property exempt from property taxes under RCW 84 . 36 . 010 ; B. Public property subject to leasehold interests and exempt from the leasehold tax under Chapter 82 . 29A RCW; and C. Property used for nonprofit or sectarian purposes, which if said property were owned by such organization would qualify for an exemption under Chapter 84 . 36 RCW; and D. Residential housing units to the extent of their occupancy by low-income senior citizens and low-income disabled citizens as provided in RCW 74 . 38 . 070 (1) . Section 8 . Credits against Street Utility Customer Charge. All business enterprises subject to this ordinance shall be credited the full amount of any commuter or employer tax paid for transportation purposes by the business, against the street 6 utility customer charge. In no case, however, shall the credit exceed the street utility business customer charge. Section 9. Adjustment of Street Utility Customer Charge. Requests for adjustments of the monthly business street utility customer charge shall be filed with the Finance Department and must be accompanied by a copy of the preceding quarterly report to the State Department of Labor and Industries, reporting the employee hours worked. For businesses that did not file the report with the State, an affidavit can be filed with the Finance Department reporting the hours worked or the number of equivalent full-time employees. Section 10. Billing of Street Utility Charges. The rates and charges set out in this ordinance shall be effective and shall be computed and billed from time to time by the Director of Public Works through the Finance Department as a separate charge on the sewer bill or in a separate bill, and shall become due and payable to the City as stated in such billing. Any street utility charge which becomes delinquent shall become a lien upon the premises and be enforced in the same manner as rates and charges for the use of systems of sewerage under Chapter 35. 67 RCW. Delinquent charges shall bear interest at eight percent (8%) per annum. Section 11. Street Utility Fund Created. There is created in the City Treasury a special fund to be known as the "Street Utility Fund. " Any and all revenues collected and received for the use of the street system as set forth in this ordinance, or in connection therewith, shall be credited to the fund and all revenues collected shall be used for transportation purposes only, 7 including but not limited to: the operation and preservation of roads, streets and other transportation improvements; new construction, reconstruction and expansion of city streets, and other transportation improvements ; development and implementation of public transportation and high capacity transit improvements and programs and planning design; acquisition of right-of-way and sites for such transportation purposes. Section 12 . Refunds of Street Utility Charges. The Director of Public Works, in operating and administering the municipal street system as a public utility, is authorized to make refunds where any charges paid under said ordinance are found to be erroneous, or to require adjustment; and the Finance Director is authorized to draw and the Finance Department to pay the necessary warrants on the Street Utility Fund, upon certification by the Director of Public Works that the refund is authorized. Section 13 . Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Section 14 . Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force and effect five (5) days from the time of its final approval and passage as provided by law. DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR 8 ATTEST: BRENDA JACOBER, DEPUTY CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY PASSED the day of 1992 • APPROVED the day of , 1992 • PUBLISHED the day of 1992 • I hereby certify that this is a true and correct 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. (SEAL) BRENDA JACOBER, DEPUTY CITY CLERK stutil .ord 9 STREET UTILITY/CORRIDOR FUNDING FACT SHEET Council Target Issue: Traffic Congestion TOTAL C O S T PROJECTS (1,000) GRANT' LID COUNTY OTHER 272/277TH CORRIDOR CCC - Auburn Way North 16, 280/ 4,247/ 5,530/ to SR 516 30,0004 6,247 9,000 - 6 , 503 / j 14,753 196/200TH CORRIDOR - Orillia Road to WVH 12,741 3,204 2,153 5,573 1,811 196/200TH CORRIDOR WVH to EVH 22,044 11,497' 5,331 5,216 TOTAL 50,785/ 18,948/ 13,014/ 13,530/ 64,785 20,948 16,484 5,573 21,780 1 TIB a) over-obligates grant funding 3:1 b) Approved additional projects in 1992 2 Orillia Road to mid Green River Bridge - King County portion - agreement pending 3 TIB approved $9,373.025 with balance to be reviewed at the construction funding stage. Worst case scenario. OTHER 4 Year Cash 6 Year Cash 9 Year Cash / Flow Forecast Flow Forecast Flow Forecast ' Cash 5,800 5,800 5,800 Gas Tax' 1,272 1,947 3,012 VRF' 1,564 2,307 3,480 St. Util.' 4 ,263 6,618 10,326 12,899 16,672 22,618 Reflects 2% per year growth Project Schedule: Construction-wise 4-5 years; however, funding-wise dictates 5-9 years Growth Management Act o Thirteen key intersections at E/F service level as per 1989 analysis (no existing capacity - see map) o Concurrency - Requires that transportation improvements be in place with new development or the financing thereof in place such that improvements will be in within 6 years. o Corridor Projects - 5-9 years to implement. o Prohibit new development if concurrency is not achieved. o Without Corridors land use then becomes primary mechanism to achieve concurrency o Noncompliance - State can withhold City tax revenues Street Utility Maximum Rate - Residential $2/month/residential unit - Other $2/month/employee Maximum revenue can not exceed half of the street operation and maintenance budget (maximum revenue $1,273,000 = $1.90) Proposed Rate - $1.90 o Must give full credit for HOV and HCT employee tax if implemented by Metro or King County. o Monies generated can only go towards transportation M&O and constructio n. o Can't divert existing monies out of street budget. o Proposed Exemptions - Public property, property used for nonprofit or sectarian purposes, and residential housing units occupied by low income seniors and low income disabled. Offset Financial Impact (See Table) o Delete the Customer City Utility Tax (3. 5%) on City Sewer, Drainage and Water utilities. o City doesn't provide these utility services to all its constituents. Other Cities Renton' $4.35/employee/month tax on just businesses via B&O authority Bellevue' $3.35/employee/month tax on just businesses via B&O authority Funds collected are dedicated for transportation improvement. Neither have charge on residences. Implementation Schedule 1/14 City Council workshop - review all utility billing mods 1/28 Letter sent to all utility customers with 1/31 bills 2/10-14 Open special phone to explain individual customer changes 2/18 City Council - Public hearing on rate changes and Street Utility formation 3/3 City Council - Continued public hearing on rate changes and Street Utility formation 3/25 Modified bills sent to all customers IMPACT OF PROPOSED RATE FOR STREET UTILITY IMPLEMENTATION ON SELECTED CUSTOMERS' Net Monthly Monthly Monthly U t i l i t y S t r e e t Difference Tax Utility ( Saving ) Class & Individual Customer S a v i n g s Charge ($) Based on Water Consumption M ($) Residential Customers Inside Kent With very low consumption; e.g. , one-person household, limited yard uses. 3/4" meter, 300 cu ft/month 0.98 1.90 0.92 With low to moderate consumption; e.g. occupants away from home much of the time. 3/4" meter,500 cu ft/month 1.09 1.90 0.81 With average consumption; e.g. small family with yard uses. 3/4" meter, 800 cu ft/month 1.27 1.90 0.63 With hig`h� consumption; e.g. , large sidence` ir, ri re gation system 1-1/2" meter 1,600 cu ft/month 1.76 1.90 0.14 Commercial Customers Inside Kent Ben Franklin 324 W. Meeker St. 13,00 sq ft lot 100% covered 5 employees (?) 1.53 - 9 .50 7.97 Office Complex 24909 104th Ave S.E. 1.25 acre lot 59% covered 80 employees 13.68 152 .00 138.32 Riverwood Apartments 24620 Russell Road 17 acre lot 48% covered 336 residential units 7 employees 344.21 651.70 307.49 Reynolds Metals 27402 72nd Avenue 24.3 acre lot 35% covered 135 employees 475.24 256.50 (216.74) Boeing Aerospace Co. 20403 S. 68th Ave. 470.2 acre lot(° 37% covered , 9261 employees 2009.51 17, 595.90 15,586.39 Excludes 3.5 percent utility tax ° Includes facilities on west side and east Side of West Valley Highway ,MJ ulArw.n I pp •.,.__.__ �,I t � CRITICAL < LOS rum✓1 I INTERSECTIONS • j Y r f INIn tl AA lr £ I • i � laar, 1 Wll A It I til £ I nt BBf/NG NfBOJPNCf � [: t Ina C i I•r ram+ /wwlMCw lw/! x Rfw, JfwDwl r vA/tw nM. R ++« w•+u � E I nm a area reM nr }' � x r p 8 E un R Qi luA n_ • RIIIA II I LF OON + + m 1 ( u<rw r C 6 f x •mr wfw! [ 1 In, 11 f /AR.f r j n uru n w•+t n 1 n[wf MIKw �C Y J «It fw1•/•Y /II?/M1/ 1f f Y/ _ 11 1 Avtfrtl rnw wslY 3.,.s E f rwV r j A/IT x � t„x 1 a C i t rA 1 aLl r• b «IR,f n+lt T LLJ £ fAAA e x R E R Ir E nn, _ od Arr!W 1,ct CFN/fB In .K//!f ARl i CONSENT CALENDAR 3 . city Council Action: Councilmember u -�C ,� moves, Councilmember A) 'i'� seconds that Consent Calendar Items A through L be approved, Discussion Action a A. Approval of Minutes. Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of January 21, 1992, with the following addition to the last paragraph on page 8: Upon a question from Dowell, Angelo explained that the budget was balanced with the proposed fee increases. Dowell recommended to the Council that they approve the fees before they approve the budget in the future. Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of February 4, 1992 . 13B. Approval of Bills. Approval of payment of the bills received through February 18, 1992 after auditing by the Operations Committee at its meeting 1l, at 5: 30 p.m. on March 2, 1992 . {J C� Approval of checks issued for vouchers: Date Check Numbers Amount Approval of checks issued for payroll: Date Check Numbers Amount Council Agenda xTian Vr -, -' n Kent, Washington January 21, 1992 Regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at 7 : 00 p.m. by Mayor Kelleher. Present: Councilmembers Bennett, Houser, Johnson, Orr, White and Woods, City Administrator Chow, City Attorney Lubovich, Public Works Director Wickstrom, Planning Director Harris, Assistant City Administrator Hansen, Fire Chief Angelo, Parks Director Wilson, Personnel Director Olson, Finance Director McCarthy, Information Services Director Spang and Police Captain Byerly. Approximately 40 people were at the meeting. Councilmember Mann was not in attendance. PUBLIC East Hill Annexation. Charles Kieffer requested a COMMUNICATION copy of the 10% petition filed at the Council meeting of August 6 , 1991. Wickstrom agreed to provide it to him. BMX Track. A young man from the audience asked whether a BMX track will be built in the area. Mayor Kelleher suggested that he take the matter before the Parks Committee and that he speak with Parks Director Wilson regarding the date and time of the next meeting. Need for Communication. Gary Volchok, First Vice- President of CB Commercial Real Estate Group, Inc. , addressed the Council on the need for more communication and cooperation between and within City departments. He suggested that the City work with its departments so that when a government employee has given specific, definite directions to a permit applicant, who carries out these directions by spending time and money to comply with the government requests, the same department does not negate that time and money expended by refusing the applicant ' s documentation and changing its direction. He noted that new jobs and business expansion are mandatory and that sanity, cooperation and communication in government offices must be restored. Kent Jaycee Week. Mayor Kelleher read a proclama- tion declaring the week of January 19 to January 25, 1992 as Kent Jaycee Week in the City of Kent and encouraging citizens to recognize and appre- ciate the past and continuing service provided by the Kent Jaycees. The proclamation was presented to Dawn Jackson. 1 January 21, 1992 PUBLIC State of the City. Mayor Kelleher noted that COMMUNICATION great things are being accomplished in the City during one of the most dismal economic periods of recent memory. He stated that the city' s efforts to achieve its goals has clearly been successful, while resisting the temptation to raise taxes. He noted that almost every goal set for the community is related to growth. A copy of the Mayor' s statement is attached to the minutes. CONSENT WOODS MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A through CALENDAR H be approved. Johnson seconded and the motion carried. MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3A) Approval of Minutes. Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of January 7 , 1992 . STREET (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3G) UTILITY Street Utility. ADOPTION of Resolution No. 1306 setting February 18 as the date for a public hearing on the formation of the street utility and implementation of the street utility charge. STORM (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3H) DRAINAGE Storm Drainage Utility. ADOPTION of Resolution UTILITY No. 1307 setting February 18 , 1992 as the date for a public hearing on proposed rate changes for drainage utility. PROCUREMENT (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4F) Procurement and Contract Authorization Ordinance. This ordinance establishes rules and procedures for entering into procurement contracts for the purchase, lease or rental of supplies, material, equipment or services, excluding public works improvements. This ordinance, as well as the related public works improvements ordinance and the Planning Department consultant contract ordi- nance, which are also being considered on this agenda, was discussed at the December 3 , 1991 Council meeting and referred to committee for fur- ther review. The ordinance provides for informal and formal bidding procedures at specific bid level amounts as well as rules for authorization by the Mayor and Council . The City currently does not have any formal procedures for these types of contracts. 2 January 21, 1992 PROCUREMENT Lubovich noted that this ordinance would bring the City up-to-date with State law and would provide general guidelines for procurement. He explained that under the proposed ordinance, departments could purchase items under $7500 without going through a formal process; that purchases between $7500 and $15, 000 would require an informal process of three telephone or similar quotations; and that purchases over $15, 000 would require a formal bid process, publication of notice, and acceptance by Council . He pointed out that pro- fessional contracts, emergencies and sole source procurements are excluded. HOUSER MOVED for the adoption of Ordinance No. 3024 establishing rules and procedures for non- public works purchases, rentals and leases. Woods seconded. Bill Doolittle stated that he has not seen many items regarding hiring consultants on the agenda for Council approval. He noted that there are currently frozen positions in the City and that having the Mayor sign for consultants without Council approval may not be the right pro- cedure. He also noted that he has not seen many items regarding the purchase of major items such as police cars and heavy machinery come through on the agenda for Council approval . There were no further comments and the motion to adopt Ordinance No. 3024 carried with White opposing. PUBLIC (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4G) WORKS Public Works Improvements Ordinance. This ordinance amends the City Code to bring the public works authority section in conformance with the current State statutes. Pursuant to State law, cities with a population of over 20, 000 are required to follow public works procedures set forth in RCW 35 . 2 . 620 . Our current code refer- ences RCW 35 . 23 . 352 for cities under 20 , 000 popu- lation. This matter was considered at the December 3 Council meeting and sent back to Com- mittee for further consideration. 3 January 21, 1992 PUBLIC Lubovich explained that since the current City WORKS Code references cities under 20, 000 in population, it is invalid and needs to be updated since Kent' s population is over 20, 000 . HOUSER MOVED for the adoption of Ordinance No. 3025 amending the City Code to bring the City in conformance with State law regarding public works improvements. Woods seconded. The motion carried. PLANNING (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4H) DEPARTMENT Planning Department Consultant Contracts Ordinance. This ordinance would delete a para- graph in the existing City Code that requires the City Council to establish the terms of compensa- tion for all consultants hired by the Planning Department. Deletion of this paragraph would require the Planning Department to hire consul- tants pursuant to the rules and procedures estab- lished in the Procurement and Contract Authoriza- tion Ordinance. This matter was considered at the December 3 Council meeting and sent back to Committee for further consideration. Lubovich recommended adoption of this ordinance in order to be consistent with the procurement ordi- nance. HOUSER MOVED for the adoption of Ordinance No. 3026 amending the City Code to establish pro- cedures to be followed by the Planning Department in contracting for consultant services under the Procurement and Contract Authorization ordinance. Woods seconded. The motion carried with White and Bennett voting nay. FINAL (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3C) PLAT Canterbury Place Final Plat No. SU-89-4 Authori- zation to set February 4 , 1992 for a public meeting to consider Canterbury Place Final Plat map. The property is approximately 4 . 5 acres in size and is located north of S.E. 248th Street between 98th Avenue South and proposed 100th Avenue South (extended) . 4 January 21, 1992 GROWTH (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3E) MANAGEMENT Growth Management Planning Council Interlocal Agreement. Approval of and authorization for Administration to execute the Growth Management Planning Council Interlocal Agreement. The City Council Planning Committee has recommended approval of the proposed Growth Management Plan- ning Council Interlocal Agreement in response to the Growth Management Act. The legislature requires that county planning policies be ratified or adopted by July, 1992 . King County, in con- junction with county cities, proposes to create the Growth Management Planning Council which will be composed of representatives from Seattle, King County and Suburban Cities. This item was origin- ally on the City Council Agenda for December 17, 1991, but was pulled because of a revision to the agreement. PERMIT (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4A) FEES Fire Permit Fee. At the present time, the permit fees are issued under the Uniform Fire Code. The adoption of this ordinance would remove the fee schedule from ordinance form and authorize the Fire Chief to prepare a fee schedule commensurate with the cost of administration and inspection involved in the processing, issuance and renewal of such permits and certificates, which schedule would be approved by Council resolution. The fee schedule shall govern the amount of fees for any permit or certificate authorized under the Uniform Fire Code. Lubovich noted that this item, as well as plumbing permit fees, building permit fees, mechanical per- mit fees and a resolution regarding all fees was returned to committee for further consideration on December 3 , 1991. He explained that the ordi- nances take the fee schedule out of the ordinance form and put it in fee resolution form. He added that it would modify the plumbing and fire permit fees. Upon White 's question, Fire Chief Angelo noted that raising the fees would not enhance the level of service, that it is an update of the fees rela- tive to other jurisdictions in the area. He 5 January 21, 1992 PERMIT explained that he looked at fees as a part of the FEES budget process and that the fees have not been raised for ten years or more. Steve Dowell stated that the increases in the fee structure are too great and pointed out that the City has $1. 3 million more in income than expected. He noted that other fees such as the garbage fee, will be increased and asked that the Council consider a smaller increase in permit fees. He suggested a maximum 20% increase. Russ Stringham, owner of The Hungry Bear, noted that the fire permit fee would increase 100%. He pointed out that other fees are also being raised, as well as utility rates and property taxes. He said that lower fees would send a message that this is a pro-business community. Don Rust, owner of The Bagman Sandwich Shop, agreed that the proposed increases are too high, noting that he would not be opposed to a moderate increase. ORR MOVED for the adoption of Ordinance No. 3020 related to the Kent City Code Section 13 . 02 . 020. Woods seconded and the motion carried with White opposed. (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4B) Plumbing Permit Fees. At the present time, the permit fees are issued under the Uniform Plumbing Code. The adoption of this ordinance would remove the fee schedule from ordinance form and would authorize the Fire Chief to prepare a fee schedule commensurate with the cost of administration and inspection involved in the processing, issuance and renewal of plumbing permits, which schedule would be approved by Council resolution. This matter was considered at the December 3 Council meeting and sent back to Committee for further consideration. The fee schedule shall govern the amount of fees for Plumbing Permits authorized under the Uniform Plumbing Code. ORR MOVED for the adoption of Ordinance No. 3021 related to Kent City Code Section 14 . 16 . 070. Woods seconded. Lubovich clarified that this action will take the fees out of the Kent City Code and place it in resolution form. The motion carried with White voting nay. 6 January 21, 1992 PERMIT (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4C) FEES Building Permit Fees. At the present time, the permit fees are issued under the Uniform Building Code. The adoption of this ordinance would remove the fee schedule from ordinance form and would authorize the Fire Chief to prepare a fee schedule commensurate with the cost of administration and inspection involved in the processing, issuance and renewal of building permits, which schedule would be approved by Council resolution. This matter was considered at the December 3 Council meeting and sent back to Committee for further consideration. The fee schedule shall govern the amount of fees for Building Permits authorized under the Uniform Building Code. ORR MOVED for the adoption of Ordinance No. 3022 related to Kent City Code Section 14 . 04 . 010. Woods seconded. The motion carried with White opposed. (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4D) Mechanical Permit Fees. At the present time, the permit fees are issued under the Uniform Mechani- cal Code. The adoption of this ordinance would remove the fee schedule from ordinance form and would authorize the Fire Chief to prepare a fee schedule commensurate with the cost of administra- tion and inspection involved in the processing, issuance and renewal of mechanical permits, which schedule would be approved by Council resolution. This matter was considered at the December 3 Council meeting and sent back to Committee for further consideration. The fee schedule shall govern the amount of fees for Mechanical Permits authorized under the Uni- form Mechanical Code. ORR MOVED for the adoption of Ordinance No. 3023 related to the Kent City Code Section 14 . 14 . 020. Woods seconded and the motion carried with White opposed. +3' 7 January 21, 1992 PERMIT (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4E) FEES Fees for Permits under the Fire, Plumbing, Building and Mechanical Codes. This resolution will enable the City of Kent' s administrative authority in charge of enforcing the codes to prepare a schedule of fees applicable to the various types of permits. The schedules adopted by this resolution shall govern the amount of the fee. ORR MOVED for the adoption of Resolution No. 1308 adopting a schedule of fees for permits under the Kent City Code Section 14 . 04 . 010 . Woods seconded. White noted that comparing fees and salaries with other cities causes fees and salaries to become excessive. He agreed with the comments from busi- ness owners that the fees should not be raised as high as proposed. HE MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION by changing the resolution to show a 20% increase over existing fees. Bennett seconded. Lubovich clarified that only the fees on fire and plumbing permits are being changed, not on building or mechanical permits. Orr pointed out that the Chamber indicated they are comfortable with this resolution and questioned whether reducing the fees would produce a negative effect. Angelo responded that the total budget impact for all permit fee changes as proposed would have been $49, 000. Woods suggested that fees be considered more systematically and Orr noted that the commit- tee had discussed reviewing fees periodically. Stringham stated that he supports the amendment and noted that not all businesses are members of the Chamber of Commerce. Upon a question from Dowell, Angelo explained that the budget was balanced with the proposed fee increases. The amendment to change the fees in the resolution to 20% over the existing fees (in cases where fee increases are called for) carried. The motion to adopt Resolution No. 1308 as amended then carried. 8 January 21, 1992 POLICE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3F) 1992 Public Defender Contract. AUTHORIZATION for Administration to execute the public defender con- tract with Sampson & Combs. The City of Kent annually contracts for public defense services for Aukeen Court. Submitted for Council consideration and approval is the public defender contract for 1992 with the law firm of Sampson & Combs. This is a professional services contract providing for two full-time dedicated attorneys, one backup attorney, one paralegal, one clerk, and one secre- tary to handle the City' s caseload at Aukeen. Sampson & Combs had the City ' s contract during 1991. The fee negotiated is $11, 500 per month for these services, for a total expenditure of $138 , 000 annually. This year's contract adds one additional public defense attorney to meet the demands of the caseload at Aukeen District Court. HUMAN (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3D) SERVICES Human Services Commission. Confirmation of the COMMISSION Mayor' s reappointment of Father Peter Duggan to the Kent Human Services Commission. Father Duggan, whose term of office recently expired, will begin his new term immediately and continue through 1/1/95. FINANCE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3B) Approval of Bills. Approval of payment of the bills received through January 21, 1992 after au- diting by the Operations Committee at its meeting at 5: 30 p.m. on January 28 , 1992 . Approval of checks issued for vouchers: Date Check Numbers Amount 1/1-1/15/92 113584-114137 $2 , 443 , 260. 31 Approval of checks issued for payroll : Date Check Numbers Amount 1/17/92 01166803-01167477 $ 661, 934 . 18 9 January 21, 1992 COUNCIL (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4I) Council President Selection. City of Kent Resolution No. 1094 requires that the President of the Council be selected by the Council in January of even numbered years. Orr nominated Woods as Council President for the next two years. There were no further nominations and ORR MOVED for approval of Woods as Council President. Houser seconded and the motion car- ried. REPORTS Council President. Council President Woods announced Council Committee assignments for 1992- 94 , noting that the assignments include one speci- fic committee request per councilmember, made in reverse order of seniority, as agreed to at the last retreat. The Committees are as follows: OPERATIONS PUBLIC SAFETY Christi Houser, Chair Paul Mann, Chair Leona Orr Leona Orr Jim White Jon Johnson PARKS PUBLIC WORKS Jon Johnson, Chair Jim White, Chair Jim Bennett Jim Bennett Christi Houser Paul Mann PLANNING Leona Orr, Chair Jim Bennett Jon Johnson Woods asked that meeting times be determined and made known to the City Clerk and Administration. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8 : 30 p.m. Brenda Jacobe,, MC City Clerk 10 STATE OF THE CITY SPEECH ALMOST EVERY GOAL THAT WE SET FOR OUR COMMUNITY IS RELATED DIRECTLY OR MAYOR DAN KELLEHER INDIRECTLY TO GROWTH.INDEED,MANY OFTHE EFFORTS WEIVILL MAKE TO IMPROVE OUR JANUARY 21,1992 COMMUNITY DURING THE NEXT FEW YEARS WILL ONE WAY OR ANOTHER BE AFFECTED BY THE STATE GROWTH bA.NAGEMENTACT. THE GROWTH MANAGEMENTAC7,OF COURSE, REQUIRES LOCAL OFFICIALS TO DEVELOP PLANS FOR THE DELIVERYOF CRITICAL MUNICIPAL GOOD EVENING,1 AM HAPPY TO ONCE AGAIN COME BEFORE YOU TO DISCUSS THE SERVICES SUCH AS ROADS,SCHOOLS,PARRS AND WATER AND SEWER;AND T REQUIRES PROGRESS WHICH WE HAVE BEEN MAKING TOWARD THE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF OUR THAT}VE DEVELOP THESE PLANS,AND PROVIDE FUNDING FOR THESE PLANS,IN A MANNER MUTUAL GOALS FOR IMPROVING OUR CITY,AND TO DISCUSS THE SUGGESTIONS AND WHICH WILL BE SUFFICIENT TO SERVE THE DEMAND FOR SERVICE WHICH WILL BE PROPOSALS I WOULD OFFER FOR THE CONTINUATION OF OUR SUCCESSFUL EFFORTS TO GENERATED BYTHE DEVELOPMENTWHICHWE ALLOWUNDER OUR LOCAL LAND USE PLANS- ACHIEVE THESE COMMUNITY OBJECTIVES. A SIMPLE CONCEPT. YOU WOULD THINK THAT NO ONE WOULD NEED TO BE TOAD TO IX7 THIS. YOU WOULD THINK THAT PLANNING FOR AND FUNDING ADEQUATE SERVICES TO MUCH HAS BEEN MADE OF THE FACT THAT KENT FACED A DIFFICULT YEAR IN 1991. MEETTHE DEMANDS OF THE COMMUNITYGROWTH WHICH WE CHOOSETO ALLOW WOULD EVEN Q1JF}THRIVING COMMUNITY HAS FINALLY BEEN AFFECTED BY AMERICA'S SLUGGISH BE SUCH AN OBVIOUS NECESSITY THAT EVERY COMMUNITY WOULD DO IT. ECONOMY;AND UST YEAR OUR 1992 FINANCIAL FORECAST WAS OAT OF BALANCE BY - ALMOST 36 MILLION. UNFORTUN.ITELYTHE OPPOSITE IS TRUE LIKE THE SHORTSIGHTED CONGRESSMAN WHO VO TES'YES'TO SUPPORT EVERY NEW GOVERNMENT PROGRAM,AND'NO'TO OPPOSE 1 THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO KEEP SUCH A SHORTFALL IN PERSPECTIVE HOWEVER EVERY NEW TAX TO FUND THESE PROGRAMS; SHORTSIGHTED LOCAL OFFICIALS HAVE YOU KNOW EVENTHOUGH OUR 1991 REVENUE PROJECTIONS WERE GREATERTHAN ACTUAL VOTED-t`S'TO ALLOW TOO MANY NEWDEVELOPMENTS,AND'NO'TO OPPOSE TAXES AND REVENUES,KEN'STILL ENJOYED AN INCREASE OF S700,000 OVER 1990. IF YOU HAVE TO HE'S 7C1 PAY FOR THE SELVAGE NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATE THESE DEVELOPMEYIS. HAVE A BAD YEAR,ONE LIKE THIS IS THE KIND WE WANT TO HAVE. CONGRESS'SHCRTSIGHTEDNESS HAS CREATEDA HUGE FEDERAL DEFICIT.YOUCAY ALSO,1 AM AMUSEDTO READ NEWSPAPER ACCOUNTS EVEN NOW OF SOME OF OUR SEE OUR 'LOCAL DEFICIT EVERY TIME YOU 51T IN A TRAFFIC JAM AT ONE OF OUR NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY LEADERS STILL COMMENTING ON THE TROUBLESOME $6 INTERSECTIONS WHICH ARE RATED AT LEVEL OF SERVICE'F-GRIDLOCK-SYSTEM MILLION SHORTFALL NOW BEING FACED BY KENT. OF COURSE,STATE LAW WILL NOT FAILURE, YOU CAN SEE OUR 'LOCAL DEFICIT EVERY TIME YOUR CHILDREN SIT IN ALLOW A CITY TO PASS THROUGH A BUDGET CYCLE WITH A DEFICIT,50 KENT HAS NO CVERCROWDED CLASSROOMS OR PORTABLE CLASSROOMS USED NOW EXTENSIVELY BUDGET SHORTFALL TODAY. IN FACT,i AM PLEASED TO INFORM YOU THAT BECAUSE OF BEUUSE NYE JUST CA.YT BUILD ENOUGH SCHOOLS TO MEET THE DEMAND WHICH WE OUR DECISION LATE LAST YEAR TO REVISE OUR FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS IN THE DIRECTION OURSEIVES HAVE GENE--k=THROUGH OUR LOCAL LAND USE DECISICNS. OF CAUTION AND CONSERVATISM,OUR ACTUAL CASH CARRY FORWARD FOR 1991 IS EXPECTED NOW TO EXCEED PROJECTIONS BY APPROXIMATELY$1.3 MILLION. THIS CASH SOME PEOPLE HANK ITS TERRIBLE THATTHE STATE GOVER.NME!tl'SHOULD USURP CARRY FORWARD WILL FUNCTION AS A NEEDED CUSHION FOR OUR BUDGET IF THE LCCAL AUTHORITY BY DTCTATINO TO CITIES HOW THEY MUST PLAN. IFORONETHINKITS ECONOMY SLOWS EVEN FURTHER, OR IT WILL PROVIDE A WINDFALL CF FUNDS TO TERRIFIC:-ONE OF THE BEST MOVES EVER MADE BY OUR STATE GOVERNMENT. REPLENISH OUR CONTINGENCIES OR FUND OTHER COUNCIL PRIORITIES IF OUR ECONOMY MAINTAINS AT ITS CURRENT LEVEL ASIDE FROM THE OBVIOUS BENEFIT OF FORCING CITIES TO PLAN PROPEFLY,THE PF-SSURS WHICH ARE BEING BROUGHT ON BY THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE GRCWTH ALSO IN AN EFFORT TO KEEP OUR BUDGET'NOES IN PERSPECIIVE,I THINK T IS MANAGEMENT ACT ARE CAUSING POLITICIANS,ARCHITECTS AND URBAN PLANTERS TO IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT IN OTHER COMMUNITIES,WHEN TIMES GET TOUGH, PZ HINT. SOME CE THE ASSUMPTIONS THAT WE HAVE HEIR ABOUT THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT PROGRAM ACTIVITY GRINDS TO A HALT. IN KENT,OUR LOCAL ECONOMY IS DEVELOPMENT PATTERN FOUND IN THE WESTERN PRAT OF THE L'NIIT_D STATES,AND TO SO STRONG,THAT EVEN IN TOUGH TIMES LIKE THE5E,WE ARE ABLE TO KEEP GOOD RECCUSIDERWHEIHERTY_AT'SUBURBAN"AUTO-ORIENTED','SINGL.FAFIILYSUBDNISIO1r GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS RUNNING,AND WE ARE ABLE TO CONTINUE TO TAKE GLINT A:D'S'.`Rr IP-COMMEP.CL>1'BASED DEVELOPMENT PATTERN WILL SERVE US WELL AS NYE STEPS TOWARD ACHIEVING OUR GOALS OF BUILDING NEW ROADS TO IMPROVE OUR MIOVE!NTO THE NEXTCENTURY.TWO AIONTHSAGO I WAS INVITED TO ATTEND A SEMINAR TRANSPORTATION NETWORK, AND BUILDING A HEALTHIER, PREi,ER, REVITALIZED _E>J.!NG V.iT'ri THESE ISSUES CO-SPONSORED BY THE COLLEGE OF ARCHf17UU_AND DOWNTOWN,AND DOINGr,4E MANYOTHER THINGS 7-dAT VIE THINK.ARE IMPORTANTFOR L'RB.VI FLtNNING OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT BERKELEY,AND THE NATIONAL KENT. E.`;DOK'•.fE]T FOR T?E,L T5. AS I DISCUSS SOME OF THE GOOD THINGS WE HAVE TOGETHER DONE FOR KENT THIS I',VAS A LITTLE SURPRISED TO HEAR SOME OF THE PROMINENT URBAN PL>NNFRS LAST YEAR,AND AS I DISCUSS SOME OF THE THINGS I THINK W E REALISTICALLY CAN EXPECT IN ATT[:NGANCE SUGGEST THAT THEY THEMSELVES, AND THEIR COLLEAGUES WHO TO DO IN THE COMING YEAR; I WANT YOU TO REMEMBER THAT TOGETHER WE ARE PRECEDED THEM AND WHO HELPED ESTABLISH OUR WEST COAST DEVELOPMENTPA'-'Fi.RN ACCOMPLISHING GREAT THINGS FOR KENT DURING ONE OF THE MOST DISMAL ECONOMIC 30 TO 40 YEARS AGO,WERE AT LEAST PARTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE FACT THAT LY SOME PERIODS OF RECENT MEMORY. AJD 1 WOULD ASK YOU TO REMEMBER WITH PRIDE THAT VE?5'IhIPOR'ANT'NAYS,'.t SAME NOW FINDING THAT THIS SUBURBAN-SPAA'.VL AND AUTO. IN SPITE OF THE FACTS THAT TIMES HAVE BEEN TOUGH,AND THAT WE ARE DETERMINED OR:E:'IF.O GO:AMEACTA!STRIP DEVELOPMENT PATTERN DOESN7 WOR.K'•VELL OF COURSE ENACIOUS ABOUT ACI IIEVING ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY GOALS;WE NEVERTHELESS THERE ARE SCh1E CCGD T?:TUGS ABOUT OUR WEST-COAST-STARE OF LIVING,BUT SCARE OF HAVE RESISTED THE OBVIOUS TEMPTATION TO RASE TAXES-AND YET STILL--OUR THE PHC 9LSi1S WHICH TH5 GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT I5 DESIGNED TO ADDRESS ARE EFFORTS TO ACHIEVE OUR GOALS HAVE CLEARLY BEEN SUCCESSFUL DiRH=Y ATTRIBUTABLE TO OUR WEST-COOS(DEVELOPMENT POTTERY. IF I MAY THEN,1 WOULD LIKE TO TALK A BIT ABOUT THESE GOATS-WHAT THEY ARE T11E BASIC PROBLEM IS THAT UNLIKE FURORE AND JAPAN,WHICH;O YEARS AGO --WILY WE CARE ABOUT TI IEM-AND TL IE CONCRETE STEPS WE ARE TAKING lO ACHIEVE CHOSE FOR ECONOMIC REASONS TO CLUSTER THEIR CITIES AND TOWNS AROUND THEM. AV.>IL•.i'N.E INFIASIRVCIL'RE; AMERICAN CCFIMUNITIES HAVE FOR THE MOST PART AVOIDED C3.USTERINC IN FAVOR OF LOW DENSITY,AUTO-ORIENTED,SUBURBAN SPRAWL COMMUNITIES TO CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT AROUND NARROWLY DRAWN NOW THERE ARE SOME GREATTHINGS ABOUTTHIS SORT OF NON-CLUSTERED APPROACH; INFRASTRUCTURE SERVICE AREAS ]HITS LEAVING VAST AREAS OPEN AND BUM'TIICRE ARE 4 DYSFUNCTIONAL.ASPECTS TO OUR PRESENT DEVELOPMENT PATTERN. UNDEVELOPED. J.'n 115 SU3UrtDAN SPRAWL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN IS INEFFICIENT THISPATTERN WE CAN APPLY THIS SAME PRINCIPAL BY CONTINUING OUR EFFORTS TO IS AN INEFFICIENT USE OF THE LIMITED RESOURCES AVARABLE TO PROVIDE THE STATUTORILY RESTRICT APARTMENT DEVELCPMENT OUTSIDE CF OUR DOWNTOWN ROADS,PARKS AND OTHER SERVICES NEEDED BY RESIDENTS. THIS IS THE MOST REDEVELOPMEM ZONE,AND TO DISCOURAGE KING COUNTY FROM APPROVING NEW - OBVIOUS PROBLEM WITH THIS PATTERN. THE CONCEPT IS EXTREMELY SIMPLE IF DEVELOPMENT EAST OF OUR BORDERS. - YOU PUT ONE HOUSE ON 1.000 FEET OF ROAD WITH 1.000 FEET OF WATER AND SLAYER LINES AND WHIZ ONE PMU(THEN TIDE COST PER FAMILY(BE IT PUBLIC OR 3. THIS SUBURBAN SPRAWL PATTERN HURTS SUBURBAN DOWNTOWN AREAS PRIVATE)TO PROVIDE THESE SERVICES IS WHATEVER IT COSTTO BUILDTHE ENTIRE THROUGHOUT THE WESTERN U.S.A COMMON PROBLEM AMONG SUBURBAN CITIES ROAD WITH UTILITIES AND THE PARR IF YOU PUT IN FAMILIES ON THE SAME IS DOWNTOWN DECAY. IN KENT. AUBURN AND PUYALLUP FOR EKAMPLE, STREET,THEN THE COST PER FAMILY IS REDUCED TO ONLY THE COST OF 10 FEET OF DOWNTOWN AREAS GREW UP AROUND RAIL DEPOTS.WHEN AUTO-ORIENTED STRIP ROAD AND UTILITIES,AND 1/10O OF THE PARK DEVELOPMENT OCCURRED IT BECAME INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT FOR SUBURBAN DOWNTOWN ARE ASTO COMPETE WITH THESE STRIP DEVELOPMENTS AND SHOPPING NOW,YOU MIGHT RIGHTLY OBJECT THAT IF WE CARRIED THIS PRINCIPLE TO ITS MALLS. LOGICAL CONCLUSION THEN WE WOULD PUT ALL OF OUR RESIDENTS IN HIGHRISE FLATS. THAT IS OF COURSE NOT THE CORRECT COURSE BUT WE DO NEED TO WE IN KENT ARE IN THE PROCESS OF PROVING THAT BY ENCOURAGING DENSER ACCEPT THE FACTTHAT OUR REGIONAL POPULATION WILL GROW IN COMING YEARS, DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS DOWNTOWN,AND THROUGH BEAUTIFICATION EFFORTS, ANDWE NEEDTO UNDERSTAND THAT SOME TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTRI-LBEMORE AND BY FOCUSING PUBLIC DEVELOPMENT AND BY ENCOURAGING PRIVATE EXPENSIVE TO SERVE THAN OTHERS. DEVELOPMENT IN OUR DOWNTOWN,A REAL TURN-AROUND IN A DCW'NTC',VN DIST'dICT CAN BE ACHIEVED. NATURALLY WE CAN PAY FOR THE HIGH COSTS OF SERVING OUR SUBDIVISIONS BY CHARGING FEES TO DEVELOPERS AND HOMEBUYERS,BUTTHAT SOLUTION WILL NOT WORK FOR ALL SEGMENTS OF OUR COMMUNITY.DURING THE SEMINAR 1 ATTENDED OVER THE LAST 2 YEARS OVER S20 MILLION WORTH OF DO WNTOVJN PUBLIC AND AT BERKEI.EY,I HEARD ONE MAYOR OFFER AN OMINOUS PREDICTION ABOUT HOW PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT HAS OCCURRED DIRECTLYAS A RESULT OF YOUR VOTP.S AS HIGH THESE FEES MIGHT ULTIMATELY RISE. SHE SAID IN HER CALIFORNIA CITY- CCUNCILMEMBERS. Tl IS SB MILLION CENTENNIAL BUILDING IS ALMOST FULL NOW WHERE THEY HAVE ALREADY COMPLETED A GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROCESS AND ITS OWNER- SOUND VENTURES INC. IS CONSIDERING BUILDING A T'NIN SIMILAR TO THE ONE NOW BEING FACED BY US,THE AVERAGE TOTAL OF ALL FEES 5'MUCYURE ON TI IS SCAT OF 11 IE OLD PUBLIC WORKS BUILDING IF TIIEY FILL THE ASSESSED ON A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE IS 528,00O. THAT SEEMS LINE A VERY CENTENNIAL BUILDING COMPLETELY. HIGH FIGURE BUT IF YOU SR DOWN AND TALK TO OFFICIALS RESPONSIBLE FOR DEVELOPING OUR ROADS AND PARKS AND SCHOOLS CAPITAL PLANS FORTHE NEXT LAST OCTOBER WE OPENED OUR NEW 37 MILLION PUBLIC LIBRARY WHICH YCU 30 YEARS;AND IFYOU CONSIDER THAT IN THE SEATTLE AREA ALONE WE MAY NEED CHOSE TO LOCATE IN THE HEART OF KENTS DOWNTC'.VN. THE EQUIVALENT OF A NEW INTERSTATE 5 AND A$10 BILLION RAIL SYSTEM TO ACCOMMODATE PROJECTED GROWTH BY THE YEAR 2020; THEN YOU WILL LAST'NEEK SEVERAL OF US PARTICIPATED IN A GROUND BREA;i.NG CEREMONY FCR UNDERSTAND HOW SUCH EXORBITANT FEES COULD BE REQUIRED. OUR NEW S7 MILLION SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT WHICH WILL PROVIDE LCW COST HOUSING,MEALS AND HUMAN SERVICES TO APPROXIMATELY 100 KENT SENIORS;IT THERE MAY BE NO WAY TO AVOID ASSESSING HIGH FEES IN FUTURE SUBURBAN WILL BE LOCATED IN THE HEART OF DOWNTC'.VN AND WILL OPEN FOR BUSINESS BY DEVELOPMENTS BUT WE MUST ALSO ACCOMMODATE AND ENCOURAGE COST- THE END OF THIS YEAJL EFFICIENT DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS CCNSISTENT"TH OUR CCMMUNTIY GOALS AND WHICH WILL BE BENEFICIAL TO OUR COMMUNITY. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT DENSE ALSO.A$1.3 MILLION REMODELING PROJECT IS NOW UNDERWAY TO PR::?A.RE THE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN A NARROWLY DRAWN URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY 4 TO 6 OLD KENT LIBRARY TO RECEIVE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFF. BLOCKS FROM THE CENTER OF KENTS DOWNTOWN WOULD BE BENEFICIAL AND SUCH EFFICIENTAND BENEFICIAL DEVELOPMENT COULD BEACCOMMODATED BYTHE IN AUDITION,COUNCILMEMBERS AND ADMINISTRATION HAVE PROVIDED QUALIFIED COUNCIL-BY APPROVING THE LIBERALIZED ZONING RULES FOR DOWNTOWN NOW SUPPORT FOR THE SIDNG CF A NEW REGIONAL COURT CENTER IN DOWNTOWN PENDING BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION;AND COULD BE ENCOURAGED BYTHE KEN!'. TONG COUNTY IS NOW CCNSIDERING 4 FINALIST STIES FOR THIS PROJECT. COUNCIL--BY FUNDING INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS WHICH COULD REDUCE TWO OF THESE STIES ARE IN KENTS DOWNTOWN. THE NEED FOR EXORBITANT FEES IN THE SAME DOWNTOWN DISTRICTI WOULD SUGGEST THAT IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE FOR US TO REWARD DEVELOPERS WHO IF A DOWNTOWN SIT-.IS SELECTED,THE PROJECT WILI BRING A MULTIMILLION BUILD EFFICIENTLY WITHIN AN ESTABLISHED URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY,AND TO DOLLAR PAYROLL AND BOO NEW EMPLOYEES INTO KENTSDOWNTOWN-EMPLOYEES CHARGE HIGHER FEESTO DEVELOPERS WHO BUILD LESS EFFICIENT DEVELOPMENTS WILD WILL SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE THE DEMAND FOR KENT DOW'NTO*A N OUTSIDE OF OUR TARGET REDEVELOPMENT AREA RESTAURANTS AND SHOPS.ALSO THE COURT PROJECT WOULD ALMOST CERTAINLY INCREASE THE DEMAND FOR DOWNTOWN OFFICE SPACE SINCE LAWYERS !_NO 2.THIS SUBURBAN SPRAWL DEVELOPMENT PATTERN CONSUMES TOO MUCH OPEN OTHERS WHO USE THE COURTS WOULD FIND DOWNTOWN KENT A CCNS E NIEN; SPACE. VISITORS TO EUROPE AND JAPAN ARE OFTEN STRUCK BY THE FACT THAT OFFICE LOCATION. THIS INCREASE IN DEMAND WOULD DEFINITELY ATTRACT THESE DENSELY POPULATED LANDS SEEM TO HAVE MORE OPEN SPACES THAN WE DO ADDITIONAL PRIVATE INVESTMENTS INTO KENTS DOWNTOWN. HERE IN THE U.S.AGAIN,THE REASON IS THAT ECONOMIC FACTORS HAVE FORCED - ALSO, I THINK WE ALL REMAIN CONSTANT IN OUR SUPPORT FOR THE AS WE MOVE INTO THE NEXT CENTURY,YOU AMC OTHER LOCAL OFFICIALS WILL BE COMMENCEMENT OF COMMUTER RAIL TRANSIT SERVICE TO KENT AND THE OTHER FACED WITH SOME HARD CHOICES.THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS AND SERVICE SOLUTIONS VALLEY CITIES.SENATOR BROCKADAMS HAS COMMITTED S2S MILLION IN FEDERAL WHICH SERVED THE LAST 2 GENERATIONS OF WEST COAST AMERICANS WILL JUST NOT FUNDS AND A FAVORABLE VOTE ON AN UPCOMING BALLOT MEASURE COULD WORK VCR COMING GENERATIONS. IN 10 OR 200R 30 YEARS KENT AND RENTON,AUBURN PROVIDE THE MATCHING FUNDING NEEDED TO PROCEED WITH THIS IMPORTANT AND OTHER SUBURBAN CTES WILL GROW FROM 40.OW TO]00,000,TO 150,000.THE DAY TRANSIT PROJECT, WHICH WILL, INCIDENTALLY, HAVE SOME SIGNIFICANT OF THE SUBURB IS COMING TORN END;THE DAYOF THE'MINI-URB'CR SMALL URBAN CITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SIDE EFFECTS. IS DAWNING. WE MAY LIKE IT OR NOT BUT ECONOMIC FACTORS ARE NOW RESTRICTING THE UNTVERSALAVAILABILTTY OF SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION TYPE HOMES.70%OF KEPIS IN ADDITION, SEVERAL NEW DOWNTOWN MURALS HAVE BEEN PLACED AND RESIDENTS WILL TELL YOU-THEY DON'T LIVE W SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. THEY MIGHT DEDICATED THIS YEAR INCLUDING THE MURAL TREE ROOT BRIDGE' BY A WANT TO-PERHAPS THEY CANT AFFORD TO. WE CANT JUST BLOCK THIS SORT OF WONDERFUL YOUNG JAPANESE ARTIST WHO WON A MURAL CONTESTTO EARN THE CHANGING LIFES Y E BUT WE CAN MANAGE IT SO THAT LYE MAXIMIZE THE QUALITY OF RIGHT TO DISPLAY HER WORK IN KENT;AND THE MURAL PROJECT TRANSTONS-, LIFE FOR THE PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY WHOSE FAMILIES ARE GROWING UP IN AN A BEAUTIFUL MURAL LOCATED NEAR SECOND AND MEEKER STREETS,BY DANNY EVOLVING LIVING ENVIRONMENT. I ASK YOU TO JOIN ME IN THIS EFFORT. PIERCE. WATCH FOR SEVERAL MORE DOWNTOWN MURALS TO BE COMPLETED IN THE COMING YEAR. IN ADDTO,N TO THESE REMARKS,I AM SUBMITTING TO YOU A WRITTEN OUTLINE OF MANY OF OUR OTHER ACCCMPLISHMENTS OF T-:'E PAST YEAR,AND GOALS FOR NEXT ALL OF THESE EFFORTS ARE DESIGNED TO CREATE AN ENVIRONMENT WHICH IS YEAR THAT I DID NOT INCLUDE IN MY REMARKS. ATTRACTIVE TO PRIVATE INVESTORS AND PRIVATE DEVELOPERS WHO,WE HOPE, WILL HELP US BUILD THE KIND OF DOWNTOWN DISTRICT THAT WILL GENERATE SUFFICIENT DEMAND TO SUPPORT OUR DOWNTOWN RETAILERS,AND HELP US BUILD THE KIND OF CLUSTERED DEVELOPMENT WHICH EFFICIENTLY USES OUR SCARCE INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES, 4.THIS LOW DENSITY SUBURBAN SPRAWL DEVELOPMENT PA RN GENERATES N.SI tfTiC 'f ANSI I SIIII'TO JUSTIFYTII KIND F HIGH CAPACITYTRANSI SYSTEMS THAT WE NEED FOR OUR COMMUNITY THE MOSTCCMNIONCRMCISNIOF THE PROPOSED COMMUTER RAIL PROJECT FOR EXAMPLE 15 THAT SUBURBAN DENSTES GENERATE INSUFFICIENT RIDERSHIP. AGAIN, CLUSTERING DENSE DEVELOPMENT IN OUR DOWNTOWN WILL ENABLE US TO AFFORD AND JUSTIFY HIGHER QUALITY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES THAN COULD OTHERWISE BE AFFORDED OR JUSTIFIED UNDER A LOW DENSITY, SPRAWL PATTERN. METRO OFFICIALS HAVE CALLED ON COMMUNITIES ALONG THE COMMUTER RUC ALIGNMENT TO ACCEPT HIGHER DENSITY DEVELOPMENT AROUND STATION LOCATIONS. I HOPE YOU WILL AGREE WITH ME THAT WE NAVE SEVERAL COMPELLING REASONS TO SUPPORT THAT REQUEST. CLEARLY THEN,COOPERATION WITH THE INTENT OF THE GROWN{MANAGEMENT ACT AND PROMOTING CLUSTERED DEVELOPMENT WTHIN URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARIES,WILL HAVE 4 DISTINCT ADVANTAGES: I.IT WILL RESULT IN A MORE EFFICIENT USE OF SCARCE INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT FUNDS. 2.IT WILL RESULT IN INCREASED OPPORTUNITIES TO PRESERVE OPEN SPACE. 3.IT WILL RESULT IN DENSTES SUFFICIENT TO ACHIEVE A*CRITICAL MASS' OF ACTIVITY IN OUR DOWNTOWN SO THAT THE MARKET DEMAND WILL SUPPORT OUR PRESENT RETAILERS,AND EVEN SUPPORT AN EXPANSION OF OUR DOWNTOWN RETAIL ACTIVITIES. 4.IT WILL RESULT IN DENSITIES SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT HIGH CAPACITY TRANSIT SERVICE IN KENT. Kent, Washington February 4 , 1992 Regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order by Mayor Pro Tem Woods. Present: Councilmembers Bennett, Houser, Johnson, Mann, Orr and White, City Administrator Chow, City Attorney Lubovich, City Engineer Gill , Planning Director Harris, Police Captain Byerly, Fire Chief Angelo, Finance Director McCarthy, Parks Director Wilson, Information Services Director Spang and Human Resources Director Olson. Mayor Kelleher and Assistant City Administrator Hansen were not in attendance. Approximately 90 people were at the meeting. PUBLIC Volunteer Income Tax Assistance Month. Mayor Pro COMMUNICATION Tem Woods read a proclamation declaring the month of February, 1992 as Volunteer Income Tax Assis- tance Month in the City of Kent and encouraged citizens to recognize and appreciate the service provided by the many volunteers who give so many hours to help others prepare their tax returns. Juliana Hernandez , Seattle and South King County VITA Coordinator accepted the proclamation. Employee of the Month. Mayor Pro Tem Woods announced that Frank Olson has been selected as the Employee of the Month for February. She noted that Mr. Olson works in the Public Works Opera- tions Division as a Warehouse Purchasing Techni- cian. She commended him for his willingness to help others and his extra efforts to see that schedules are met. City Engineer Gill said that Olson is a very valued employee and the City appreciates his efforts. 1992 City of Kent Arts Commission Regrant Awards Woods noted that these awards are given annually and in a competitive fashion. She and Patrice Thorell of the Parks Department then presented the awards to the following local community groups : Northwest Renaissance Rainier Symphony Kent Saturday Market Women in Music International Washington State Music Teachers Association Kent-Meridian High School Big Band Jazz Reading Workshop Kent Caribbean Steel. Drum Band Rainier Chorale Kent Parks Resource Center 1 February 4 , 1992 PUBLIC Woods thanked the groups for all their efforts in COMMUNICATION making this community a better place to live. CONSENT ORR MOVED for the adoption of Consent Calendar CALENDAR Items B through H. White seconded. Motion carried. MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3A) (REMOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER WHITE AT THE REQUEST OF STEVE DOWELL) Approval of Minutes. Dowell asked that approval of the minutes be withheld until the next meeting so that he has an opportunity to go over the tapes with the City Clerk and make some potential adjustments. WHITE SO MOVED. Johnson seconded and the motion carried. STREETS (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3H) 112th Avenue Widening. ACCEPTANCE as complete of the contract with Action Construction, Inc. for the 112th Avenue widening project and release of retainage after receipt of the releases from the State. (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4B) TIB Grant - 272nd/277th Corridor. The Transporta- tion Improvement Board has authorized a grant of $225, 000 for the pre-design phase of the 272nd/ 277th corridor and has submitted a project agree- ment for the City ' s signature. The Public Works Director recommends that the Mayor be authorized to sign the agreement and the budget be estab- lished for said funding. Because of the Board' s time frame constraints per acceptance of the agreement, this item will also be discussed with the Public Works Committee at their February 4 meeting. Gill explained that this is not an endorsement of constructing the corridor, but will allow the Public Works Department to analyze the feasibility of the project, look at alternatives as part of the EIS process, and come up with more accurate cost estimates. 2 February 4, 1992 STREETS WHITE MOVED that the Mayor be authorized to sign the project agreement with the Transportation Im- provement Board for grant funding in the amount of $225, 000 for the 272nd/277th corridor and that a budget be established for same. Johnson seconded and the motion carried. (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4C) TIB Grant-192nd/196th Corridor (WVH to EVH) . The Transportation Improvement Board has authorized a grant of $3 , 044,950 for the design and right-of- way acquisition phase of the 192nd/196th corridor (WVH to EVH) and has submitted a project agree- ment for the City' s signature. The Public Works Director recommends that the Mayor be authorized to sign the agreement and budget be established for said funding. Because of the Board' s time frame constraints per acceptance of the agreement, this item will also be discussed with the Public Works Committee at their February 4 meeting. Gill stated that the status of the project will depend on the future actions of the Council in regard to the formation of the street utility. He noted that if that process does not move forward, the City can return the grant money to the TIB, and that accepting it gives the City the opportun- ity to move forward if Council chooses to do so in the future. WHITE MOVED that the Mayor be authorized to sign the project agreement with the Transportation Improvement Board for grant funding in the amount of $3 , 044 , 950 for the 192nd/196th corridor (WVH to EVH) and that a budget be established for same. Johnson seconded. White said that he has asked Public Works and Finance staff to explore all the options that might be available in relation to funding these projects. He pointed out that a voted bond issue, and a street utility have been looked at briefly. Charlie Kieffer asked whether an impact statement has been prepared for this corridor and Gill indi- cated that they are presently working on the 3 February 4, 1992 STREETS environmental checklist. White clarified for John Kieffer that the grant is coming from the State of Washington Transportation Improvement Board. Kieffer pointed out that 277th has been worked on for 25 years and has only received $250, 000 for a study. White explained that 192nd/196th will potentially cost more than 272nd/277th. Gill pointed out that there has been no opposition to this project by the businesses and community. Kieffer asked that he be notified of related issues when they come to the Public Works Commit- tee, and when they appear on the Council agenda. Gill agreed to see that he is notified. The motion then carried. STREET (PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 2A) VACATION Street Vacation - Saar Street. This public hearing will consider an application by Kent Lutheran Church No. STV-92-1 to vacate at least 2/3 of the property abutting a portion of Saar Street, which portion lies between So. 2nd Avenue and So. 1st Avenue and between Blocks one and two as delineated on the face of the Plat of Yesler' s First Edition to the Town of Kent, Washington, Vol. 5 of Plats page 64 , records of King County, Washington. Mayor Pro Tem Woods declared the public hearing open. Jim Wilson of Kent Lutheran Church, explained that it is their desire to build a new multi-purpose building to serve the increasing needs of their congregation and the City. He showed the present location and facilities on the overhead, as well as their plans for the future. He said that traffic would not be impacted, since most of the traffic in the area is going to and from the church. He added that they are prepared to make whatever arrangements are necessary to accommodate water and sewer lines. He listed the many agencies currently using their facility and noted that with a new facility they could address the need for good low-cost daycare and latchkey programs. He urged the Council to authorize the vacation. 4 February 4 , 1992 STREET Bill Doolittle, 412 N. Washington, said he feels VACATION the vacation would be a giant step forward on the downtown revitalization. He added that streets had been vacated for such city-sponsored projects as the Centennial Building, the Library and Senior Center. He agreed that there would not be a lot of traffic in the area and said the City has a lot to lose by denying the vacation. Ted Nixon, 911 E. Temperance, urged the Council to look at both sides of the issue and not just follow staff' s recommendation. WHITE MOVED to continue the public hearing until such time as the Downtown Infrastructure Study is complete. Johnson seconded for discussion. White noted that the initial part of the Infrastructure Study is to be completed in June of 1992 and that part of the study is to assess the infrastructure needs such as water, sewer, fire flow and parking regarding downtown. He commended the church for all their activities and said he hopes that a way to accommodate the church would come out of the study. He noted that it was staff who suggested continuing the hearing until the study is com- plete, and urged the Council to do so. He clari- fied for Johnson that the utility reference plans on sewer, water, storm and parking are due by June, 1992 , and the total study should be complete by September. Wilson noted for Johnson that the church must still go through fund-raising and other processes and that their target is to have a new building within three to five years. He added that continuing the hearing would not delay them significantly. The motion to continue the hearing then carried. Woods reiterated that the Council is not opposing the project. Lubovich noted that since the date of the continued hearing is uncer- tain, the City will publish the hearing as a con- tinuation of this existing hearing with proper notices, mailing and posting so that the public will have knowledge of the hearing. He added that the applicant will be notified of the date of the hearing. 5 February 4, 1992 STREET (PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 2B) VACATION Street Vacation - Helen Street. This public hearing will consider an application by M. K. Yanagawa to vacate a portion of Helen Street lying between Washington Avenue and the Valley freeway, of STV-92-2 . Woods declared the public hearing open. Bill Doolittle asked whether the City owns this prop- erty, since no compensation is required, and Harris explained that it is a City right-of-way. Doolittle noted that the City is paying $10. 50 sq. ft. for senior housing, and asked how many sq. ft. are involved in this project. Gill clarified that this particular portion of right-of-way was dedi- cated as part of a previous subdivision and is unimproved, vacant land, and that since the City has not expended any public funds in improving it, they are not requesting reimbursement from the property owners. Doolittle noted that the size and condition of the property is approximately the same as a piece of property the Parks Department just committed $55, 000 for. Gill explained that this property belonged to someone else, was turned over to the City, and now the owners are request- ing that it be returned to them, since it was deeded for potential future street improvements and now the owners don 't wish to develop it as originally expected. Lubovich stated that Kent' s ordinance has different categories for compensa- tion, based on the acquisition process, and on dedications the City is reimbursed for costs, which is what is being proposed tonight. Upon a question from Ted Nixon, Gill stated that once the property is returned to the private property owners, the Assessor' s Office will assess it appropriately. Lubovich noted that the Council must find that there is no public need for the street and that it is in the public interest to vacate the piece of land. There were no further comments and WHITE MOVED to close the public hearing. Orr seconded and the motion carried. JOHNSON MOVED to approve the Planning Department' s recommendation of approval of STV-92-2 , an appli- cation to vacate a portion of Helen Street lying between Washington Avenue and the Valley Freeway, and to direct the City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance, since the Council has found 6 February 4 , 1992 STREET that there is no public need for said right-of-way VACATION and there is public benefit by turning it back to become taxable property to be developed as the Zoning Code allows. White seconded and the motion carried. FINAL (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4A) PLAT Canterbury Place Final Plat No SU-89-4 This meeting will consider an application for the Canterbury Place Final Plat No. SU-89-4 . The property is approximately 4 . 5 acres in size and is located north of S.E. 248th Street between 98th Avenue South and proposed 100th Avenue South (extended) . All conditions of the preliminary plat have been met. Planning Director Harris noted that this plat contains 15 single-family residen- tial lots and that construction will begin in the spring. JOHNSON MOVED to approve the staff's recommended approval for Canterbury Place Final Plat No. SU- 89-4 . Orr seconded and the motion carried. PUBLIC (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3G) WORKS Emkay Development - Release of Reservations AUTHORIZATION for the Property Manager to prepare the necessary documents releasing the reservation to acquire or obtain easements on a portion of South 181st as previously vacated, as approved by the Public Works Committee upon receipt of half the appraised value ($50, 000) . GROWTH (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3C) MANAGEMENT Growth Management Service Agreement ADOPTION of Resolution No. 1309 relating to the Growth Manage- ment Service Agreement. The Growth Management Act (GMA) provides funding to cities and counties that are required to plan under the Act, such as Kent. GMA funds are distributed to the City of Kent through King County. This resolution constitutes the agreement between the City of Kent and King County for the distribution of 1991-92 funds, and represents an up-date of the original 1990-91 service agreement. The Planning Committee approved the proposed service agreement with minor modifications on January 21., 1992 . 7 February 4 , 1992 COMMUNITY (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4D) DEVELOPMENT Reallocation of 1991 Community Development Block BLOCK GRANT Grant Program (CDBG) Funds. The City Council Planning Committee has recommended approval of the reallocation of 1991 CDBG Funds. This would reallocate $421. 17 from the Housing Repair Ser- vices Program Project, No. C91526 to the Special Populations Resource Center Rehabilitation Project No. C90123 . JOHNSON MOVED to approve the reallocation of $421. 17 from the Housing Repair Services Program Project, C91526 to the Special Populations Resource Center Rehabilitation Project, C90123 . Orr seconded and the motion carried. CAPITAL (OTHER BUSINESS - ADDED ITEM 4E) IMPROVEMENT Capital Improvement Program Charlie Kieffer pointed out that there is an item on the Impound- ment Reservoir in the Capital Improvement Program 1990-94 to fence the property, establish the wet- land area therein in correlation to the Corps 404 permit regulation, construct some minor drainage improvement and place a limited amount of fill in the anticipated levee areas. He asked whether the City will have to apply for a permit from the Corp to do the minor drainage improvements and whether that permit has been applied for. Gill said that the City has not yet initiated any work on the impoundment reservoir project and that this was to allow the City to do initial studies to see what the impacts would be so they would have a better idea as to permit requirements. He also noted for Kieffer that the City is looking at fencing for security. Woods requested that Gill meet with Kieffer about this, and both agreed. Gill also explained for Kieffer that no checklist has yet been drawn up on the line from Wax Road to Kent Springs. Kieffer asked to be notified when that checklist is ready, and Woods indicated that every effort would be made to keep him informed. 8 February 4 , 1992 COUNCIL (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3E) Excused Absence for Councilmember Paul Mann. Because of a recent knee injury and pending sur- gery, approval of Councilmember Mann' s request for an excused absence from the City Council meetings of February 18, and March 3 , 1992, as well as January 21, the day of the injury. POLICE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3D) Municipal Jail Services Contracts. AUTHORIZATION for the Mayor to execute Municipal Jail Services Contracts with the following municipalities: Tukwila Federal Way Port of Seattle Algona SeaTac Pacific Des Moines Auburn Normandy Park Black Diamond (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3F) Working Together-Drug Reduction Grant. ACCEPTANCE of a Housing Authority Grant, ADOPTION of the $30, 000 budget and APPROVAL for the Mayor to sign a contract with King County Housing Authority to target drug reduction in Valli Kee Apartments. King County has obtained a Housing Authority Grant to focus on drug reduction in King County Housing units. The contract will be for reimbursement of up to $30, 000 of additional services that will focus on crime prevention, block watch, DARE func- tions, and community security and crime reduction by officers assigned to bicycle patrol of the com- plex. $5, 000 will provide two bicycles and equip- ment and $25, 000 will cover salaries and benefits, primarily overtime for existing staff. No addi- tional staff will be added. This will focus addi- tional funds in the City ' s drug reduction program without adding staff in an economically depressed budget year. FINANCE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3B) Approval of Bills. Approval of payment of the bills received through February 4 , 1992 after auditing by the Operations Committee at its meeting on February 11, ].992 . 9 February 4, 1992 FINANCE Approval of checks issued for vouchers: Date Check Numbers Amount 1/16-1/31/92 114138-114863 $2 , 243 , 987 .48 Approval of checks issued for payroll : Date Check Numbers Amount 2/5/92 01167478-01168209 $ 658 , 763 . 50 REPORTS Council President. Woods announced that Suburban Cities will meet in Kirkland on February 12 and asked that Councilmembers who will be attending contact Christi Ryan at 859-3359 . She also announced that the date of the Council Retreat has been changed to March 13 and 14 , 1992 . Public Safety. Mann noted that he has previously voiced his feeling that Kent should have a full time mayor and stated that he has asked the City Attorney to draft such an ordinance. He read the draft ordinance and asked that it be forwarded to the Operations Committee for their consideration. There was no objection and it was so ordered. Parks Committee. Johnson noted that the next Parks Committee meeting is scheduled for February 18th at 5: 30 p.m. Administrative Reports. Regarding the Council retreat, Chow noted that Administration has set up a procedure for department heads to provide input to the Council regarding target issues, and that the general consensus is that department heads would like to have a workshop with the Council to explain their goals and objectives for use in establishing 1993 priorities. White stated that this procedure has not been used in the past and that he is not comfortable with it. Woods stated that Council would take the recommendation under advisement and make a decision prior to the retreat. 10 February 4, 1992 REPORTS 272nd/277th Project. John Kieffer announced that his neighborhood group is having an EIS comment meeting at Kent-Meridian High School on Wednesday at 7: 00 p.m. He noted that Tim LaPorte of the Public Works Department has been invited, and invited Councilmembers to attend. White stated that although he appreciates the offer, he will be out of town. Lubovich then advised Councilmembers against attending such meetings. EXECUTIVE At 8 : 10 p.m. , City Attorney Lubovich requested a SESSION 10-minute executive session regarding RUGG vs City of Kent. Woods noted that Councilmember Orr would not be in attendance during the executive session. The meeting reconvened at 8 : 25 p.m. City Attorney Lubovich noted that the second trial regarding RUGG vs. City of Kent is scheduled for February 10 regarding damages with 1983 Federal civil rights violations as well as alleged violations of the Open Meetings Act. He noted that the injunctive relief dealt with an ordinance amending the rezone, and that the court found that the ordinance for the rezone and all action taken on the ordinance was invalid. He explained that the City has had discussions with RUGG' s attorneys regarding potential settlement and has reached a tentative proposal which was discussed in executive session. He explained that the pro- posal is that W.C. I .A. will pay $35, 000 to RUGG's attorneys and the City of Kent will pay $5, 000 as total monetary payment to RUGG, and that in return the City agrees that it will take a neutral position should the issue of the violation and lawsuit be appealed and remanded for trial . He noted that this will not settle any claim with SDM, the co-defendant in this action, but that the City would not be precluded from taking a neutral position on remand. He recommended that the Council approve the proposal as outlined, on the condition that W. C. I .A. contribute $35, 000 and that the City enter into a satisfactory stipula- tion regarding disposal of the case with RUGG. 11 February 4 , 1992 EXECUTIVE Lubovich noted for Dowell that RUGG' s attorneys SESSION have alleged $90, 000 in attorneys fees. He noted that he does not have a total tabulation of the City' s expenses but there is a risk of a judgment against the City in the second part of the trial. He said it is his belief the City's $5, 000 contribution is insignificant compared to the cost of monitoring the trial . He also clarified for Dowell that the payment would go to RUGG as damages and they would disburse as they see fit. Dowell asked what the figure would be for outside attorneys and staff time and Lubovich said it would be at least $40, 000 but less than $80, 000. JOHNSON MOVED to direct the City Attorney to settle with RUGG in the amount of $5, 000 provided that WCIA agrees to pay $35, 000 with the condition that satisfactory stipulation is entered into. Houser seconded. Johnson pointed out that he had made the original motion to zone the area single- family and he felt that it was appropriate at the time and the Court now has confirmed that in rela- tionship to the Appearance of Fairness Doctrine. White said that while this may be the proper legal thing to do and the expedient thing to do, he can- not support it because he does not feel the action that was taken at that time was wrong, that the action was taken to correct a mistake that was made and he cannot change his position now. The motion then failed with only Johnson and Mann in favor, and White, Houser and Bennett opposed. Lubovich noted that the trial begins Monday, so this item will not be coming back to Council unless the trial is put off to another date. Dowell said this is an example of one of the more expensive executive sessions held in the City, and that he objects to executive sessions because he feels the public's business should be conducted in public. He said if that had been done before, the City could be $80, 000+ ahead. ADJOURNMENT The meeting then adjourned at 8 : 35 p.m. Zt'� i a_ Brenda Jacober, MC City Clerk 12 -LL Kent City Council Meeting Date February 18 , 1992 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: AMUSEMENT ENTERTAINMENT DEVICES 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: nPL� of Ordinance �� amending licensing code to change fees charged for pool tables and amusement devices distinguishing between taverns and pool halls. 3 . EXHIBITS: Ordinance 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety (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: 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3C �I I� I ORDINANCE NO. i AN ORDINANCE of the city of Kent, Washington relating to business licenses for pool and billiard table establishments and for establishments with amusement devices amending Kent City Code Subsections 5. 04 . 030, 5. 19 . 010 and 5. 19 .030 and 5 . 19. 040 to change the amount and type of the amusement device license fee. j THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES t HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 5. 04 . 030 is amended as follows: ! I 5. 04 . 030. POOL AND BILLIARD TABLES. The license fee for any public place or resort operating a business wherein pool or billiard tables are operated shall be fifty dollars ($50. 00) per year for the first two billiard or pool tables '� ' than iltije billiard el tables -are epe ate and ten dollars ($10 . 00) per year for each additional pool or billiard table. i, 5. 19 . 010. DEFINITIONS . A. "Amusement device" means any machine or device which (, provides recreation or recreation or entertainment for which a !' charge is made for use or play, and includes but is not limited to, pool and billiard tables, shuffleboards, music machines, video games, pinball games, mechanical bulls and other riding devices, and devices for display of pictures or views on films; ^ provided that it does not mean or include any machine or device I used exclusively for the vending of merchandise. i I li I 5. 19 . 030. LICENSE FEES. The fee for any amusement device shall be fifty ($50. 00) per year per device. The fee for pool or billiard tables shall be consistent with 5. 04 .030. 5 . 19 . 040. MASTER ARCADE LICENSE. A. In addition to the license and fees required in KCC 5. 19. 030, there is hereby established a master license, to be known as a "master arcade license. " The fee for a master arcade license shall be five hundred dollars ($500. 00) per year. I B. Any person who operates a business where income is 1derived solely from the operation and use of more than ten amusement devices at one location shall be required to obtain a master arcade license or will be found in violation of the law. i it C. It unlawficil €ems it j a Master arcade lieense this -r - j i D. Master arcade license shall be publicly displayed on II I !' the premises during the time of arcade operations. i I I E. Master arcade licenses expire annually on Ii � December 31. Section 2 . Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section 2 i I ' I I %I I jor portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstances shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Section 3 . Effective Date. This ordinance shall take i effect and be in force thirty (30) days from the time of its final I approval and passage as provided by law. DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR �I I� ATTEST Ili ,I i � BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK it jt 'I !! APPROVED AS TO FORM: II i I � ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY II PASSED the day of , 1992 • l it APPROVED the day of , 1992 • i 11 PUBLISHED the day of 1992 • I, I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of Ordinance No. , passed by the City Council of the City of I �I I 3 I �I I� Kent City Council Meeting Date February 18 , 1992 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: HELEN STREET VACATION - JQPAM4fA*GE 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Ad"k4ea of Ordinance vacating an unopened street where it abuts Washington Street without compensation to the City from the abutting property owners. 3 . EXHIBITS: Ordinance 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Committee and 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: 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION: Council Age da Item No. 3D i 1 � l ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington, relating to the vacation of streets, vacating that portion of Helen Street, a dedicated, unopened street, that directly abuts Washington Street in the City of Kent. i i WHEREAS, application was filed with the City of Kent by labutting property owners for the vacation of a portion of a ( dedicated but unopened portion of Helen Street, which portion of Helen Street is dedicated in the plat of Kenthurst Addition in Volume 57 of Plats, pages 58 and 59 in the records of King 1 County, Washington and which portion of Helen Street directly abuts Washington Street in the City of Kent; and WHEREAS, the Kent City Council , by Resolution 1305 fixed a time when said petition would be heard and the hearing was held with proper notice on February 4 , 1992 , at the hour of 7 p.m. in the City Council Chambers of the Kent City Hall ; and �1 WHEREAS, the Kent Planning Director processed said petition Land secured technical facts pertinent to the question of said ( vacation, which includes a sketch of the proposed vacation, and f! also, a recommendation as to approval or rejection thereof by the Public Works Department; and i WHEREAS, the Public Works Department and Planning Director recommended that the City Council approve the vacation without 1 I I I I I conditions or cost to the City, since the City has had no expenses associated with this unopened street, and could therefor be vacated without compensation to the City by the owners as a Class "C" right of way under ordinance 2333 ; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the street sought to be vacated is: (1) an unopened dedicated street and not presently being used as a street; (2) not suitable for any of Ilthe following purposes: port, beach or water access, boat moorage, launching sites, park, public view, recreation or i education; (3) a Class "C" right of way under Ordinance 2333 ; and (4) a vacation which is in the public interest; and WHEREAS, the City Council by resolution directed the preparation of an ordinance vacating the portion of said street; NOW, THEREFORE, i THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The street described as: That street dedicated and known as Helen St. as dedicated in the plat of Kenthurst Addition in Vol. 57 of Plats, pages 58 and 59 in the records of King County, Washington. and as mentioned in the petition for vacation by abutting property owners is hereby vacated. Section 2 . No vested rights shall be affected by the I provisions of this ordinance. I I i 1 li i I � II 2 I I I I' ill Section 3 . This ordinance shall be in effect and be in force thirty (30) days from the time of its final passage as provided by law. DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR ATTEST: BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY ! PASSED the day of , 1992 . APPROVED the day of 1992 . PUBLISHED the day of , 1992 . I I I I I I I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of jOrdinance No. passed by the City Council of the City ; Ilof Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of I Kent as hereon indicated. I i (SEAL) BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK j I iI it I I � i I i I I i 3 Ott- Kent City Council Meeting 1 � I Date_ February 18 , 1992 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION APPOINTMENT OCA: 1/)JP 7 r__, 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: d6nfirmation of the Mayor's appointment of Rosemarie Clemente to the Kent Human Services Commission. Ms. Clemente will fill the position designated by ordinance for a representative of a Human Service provider organization/ agency formerly held by Peter Mourer whose term of office recently expired. Her appointment will begin immediately and continue to 1/1/94 . 3 . EXHIBITS: Memo from Mayor 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Mayor Kelleher (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ N/A SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Ageada Item No. 3EVl MEMORANDUM TO: JUDY WOODS, CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS \' FROM: DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR � rw...t...� �--`.--•—. DATE: FEBRUARY 11, 1992 SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF ROSEMARIE CLEMENTE TO KENT HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION I have recently appointed Rosemarie Clemente to the Kent Human Services Commission. Ms. Clemente will fill the position designated by ordinance for a representative of a Human Service provider organization/agency formerly held by Mr. Peter Mourer whose term expired 1/1/92. This is a non-voting, two year position and does not permit consecutive terms. Ms. Clemente currently serves as a member of the Board of Directors of The Children's Alliance. She is a resident of the City of Kent and has a long history of community involvement through various groups and organizations. She is especially interested in the needs of children and families. Her term will begin immediately and continue to 1/1/94. I submit this for your confirmation. DK:jb Kent City Council Meeting Date February 18 , 1992 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION APPOINTMENT 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Confirmation of the Mayor's appointment of Raul Ramos to the Civil Service Commission. Mr. Ramos will replace Bob Jarvis who resigned. His term will begin immediately and continue through 4/94. t i 3 . EXHIBITS: Memo from Mayor 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Mayor Kelleher (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ N/A SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION: - Council Agenda Item No. 3F JC MEMORANDUM TO: JUDY WOODS, CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR DATE: FEBRUARY 11, 1992 SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF RAUL RAMOS TO CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION I have recently appointed Mr. Raul Ramos to the Kent Civil Service Commission. Mr. Ramos will replace Robert Jarvis who resigned effective February 1, 1992. Mr. Ramos is a Kent resident and owns his own consulting business where he is active as a planning and development consultant. Mr. Ramos' term will become effective immediately and continue through 4/94. I submit this for your confirmation. DK:jb f . Kent City Council Meeting Date February 18 , 1992 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: INTERLOCAL MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT, DISTRICT II, KING COUNTY /�t4-rPf iz_Fri:� 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: for the Mayor to sign Interlocal Mutual Aid Agreement with King County. This agreement is designed to allow one or more agencies to provide additional resources to another agency when there is a breach of the peace or public disturbance and to clarify and define working relationships for law enforcement agencies participating in mutual aid activities within District II. 3. EXHIBITS: Letter of Agreement, Resource Inventory, Agreement 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Staff and Public Safety Committee 2/10/92 (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ N/A SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Ager�da Item No. 3G CITY OF � �V Dan Kelleher. Mayor Ed Crawford, Chief of Police R February 18, 1992 JAMES E. MONTGOMERY, Sheriff-Director King County Department of Public Safety W166 - King County Courthouse 516 3rd Avenue . Seattle, WA 98104-2312 RE: Letter of Agreement: Law Enforcement Mutual Aid District II Dear Sheriff Montgomery: This city has examined the Interlocal Cooperation Agreement for Law Enforcement Mutual Aid dated September 41 1991. Our governing body has authorized the City to enter into and be bound by that agreement. We hereby certify our assent thereto effective the date above written, subject to all its terms and conditions. We attach our current inventory of resources and command list. Should any other informational or operational documentation be necessary please advise. We look forward to working together with all other signatory agencies party to this agreement. Respectfully, 6 60M" Ed Crawford, Chief of Police Kent Police Department For the City of Kent Washington: Dan Kelleher, Mayor Approved as to form: Roger Lubovich, City Attorney I 22n ah AVE.SO. /KENT,WASHINGTON 98032-58951 TELEPHONE (206)859 3315 1 FAX#859-6572 CITY OF RENT POLICE DEPARTMENT February 18 , 1992 Resource Inventory for Mutual Aid Documentation: A. Number of Personnel . . . . . Commissioned: 85 (* 9 Positions currently Civilian: 49 vacant. ) Reserve: -0- ------------------------------ TOTAL: 134 B. Tactical Specialties. . . . . ERT Leader 1 ERT Team Members 12 K-9 Drug 1 K-9 Generalist 2 Hostage Negotiators 4 Traffic 4 Photographer/Crime Scene 1 Pro-Act 4 Bicycle Patrol 4 Narcotics 4 C. Mainstream Vehicles . . . . . Patrol Marked 14 Patrol Unmarked 1 Detective 9 Traffic 2 Motorcycles 5 Administrative 2 K-9 3 D. Communications Devices. . . . 800 Mhz Portables 35 (* VHF Radios currently VHF Portables 32 being phased out. ) Cellulars 22 Mobile Data Terminals 18 Hostage Phone System 1 E. Other Specialized Resources . 2 small police substations, training center facilities, indoor firing range Current Command List: Chief Ed Crawford 859-4167 Captain Jim Miller, Patrol 859-4173 Captain Chuck Miller, Support Services 859-4179 Captain Dennis Byerly, Corrections 859-3436 Lieutenant Bill Mitchell, Patrol 859-3315 Lieutenant Bob Cline, Patrol 859-3315 Lieutenant Dave Everett, Detectives 859-6834 Lieutenant Lorna Rufener, Internals/Personnel 859-3498 Lieutenant Mike Sweeney, Administrative/Training 859-4175 INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT MUTUAL AID 4 September 1991 This is an agreement ( 'the Agreement' ) between King County, a Charter County government under the Constitution and laws of the State of Washington ( 'the County) ' and those cities and other governmental entities having law enforcement jurisdiction within King County which sign this Agreement ( 'Cities' ) . It is entered into under the Interlocal Cooperation Act (Chapter 39 . 34 Revised Code of Washington (RCW) I to implement the Mutual Aid Police officers' Powers Act (Chapter 10.93 RCW) as further implemented by the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs (WASPC) Law Enforcement Mutual Aid Plan (1987) ( 'the Plan' ) . It is not intended to affect any other agreements relating to overall Emergency Preparedness (Chapter 38 . 52 RCW) , but specifically supersedes prior agreements relating to 'Civil Disturbances or Riots - Police Services' dated 1973 . Under the Plan, King County constitutes District 2 within the Western Region of the State, and its Department of Public Safety ( 'DPS' ) and the police agencies of the Cities are the eligible participants. The Sheriff of King County is designated as the mutual aid coordinator ( 'Coordinator' ) for District 2 in accordance with the Plan. This Agreement under the Plan is designed to allow DPS and one or more other agencies to provide additional resources to another agency when there is a breach of the peace or public disturbance beyond the latter agency's resources to control, and to clarify and define working relationships for law enforcement agencies participating in mutual aid activities within District 2 . In order to effect the purposes stated, the County and Cities hereby agree that: 1. DEFINITIONS: The following terms shall have the following meanings, unless the context indicates otherwise: Assisting Agency: DPS and any or all other police agencies contacted for mutual aid by a primary agency. Major Disorder: A large scale breach of the peace or public disturbance, as determined by a Primary Agency. Mobilization: Organizing or putting into readiness for active law enforcement service. Mutual Aid: Aid or assistance in which DPS and one or more other agencies agree to perform in common. Primary Jurisdiction: The geographical area of jurisdiction of the primary agency. Primary Agency: The law enforcement agency within whose local geographical jurisdiction a major disorder or law enforcement problem first occurs. Upon the request of a Primary Agency, or in the event such disorder or problem occurs simultaneously in two or more Primary Jurisdictions, DPS shall become the Primary Agency. 2 . REQUESTS FOR ASSISTANCE. In the event of major disorder, the first law enforcement resources to be used shall be those of LEGAL UNIT, KING COUNTY POLICE W11�7� U 6 516ThirdtAvenue Seattle WA 98104-2312 Original i of 3 Originals (206) 296-5292/SCAN 667-5292 LAW ENFORCEMENT MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT - 4 September 1991 Page 2 the Primary Agency. In the event that such resources are inadequate to control the situation by the Primary Agency, or there is a need for a specialized unit, a request for mutual aid under this plan will be made either directly to an assisting Agency or to DPS. To enable DPS to maintain an accurate inventory, notice of deployment of resources by an Assisting Agency should be reported immediately to DPS. Requests for assistance shall, if possible, specify 1) the number and types of resources required, 2) where and to whom personnel resources are to report, and 3) where and to whom equipment resources should be delivered. No Agency shall be first required to deplete its own resources beyond the point which it requires to meet its own contingent situations or impair its routine operation before seeking mutual aid. 3 . COMMAND LIST. The parties to this Agreement shall provide DPS and each other with the names, addresses and phone numbers of its staff who have the authority to commit manpower and/or equipment to any mobilization effort; otherwise it will be assumed to be the chief officer of each agency. 4 . PRESS RELATIONS. DPS and all other agencies participating in this mutual aid Agreement will make all press releases relating to the provision of mutual aid through the Primary Agency, or jointly, if agencies have concurrent jurisdiction. 5. COMMAND POST AND STAGING AREA. The Primary Agency shall have the responsibility of establishing a command post, designating an incident commander and notifying DPS and all assisting agencies at the earliest possible time of the command post location. The Primary Agency shall establish a command post in such a manner as to provide an area suitable for the staging and directing of resources. 6. PRISONER TRANSPORTATION. Transportation of prisoners to the appropriate detention facilities will be coordinated by the incident commander. 7 . LOGISTICS. The Primary Agency will to the extent possible be responsible for supplying and/or replacing supplies needed and/or used by officers from assisting jurisdictions. These supplies shall include food, gas for police vehicles, or any other supplies that are reasonably needed to sustain the officers in enforcing the law and maintaining order. Each agency will be responsible for any repairs and/or damages done to their own vehicles as a result of participation in mutual aid. 8 . RESOURCE RECALL. After reasonable notice, an Assisting Agency may withdraw personnel or equipment resources previously committed to assist a Primary Agency, when in the discretion of that Assisting Agency those resources are necessary to meet its own contingent situations or perform routine operations. 9. THIRD PARTY LIABILITY. Liability for actions of each agency's personnel will be determined under State law (RCW 10. 93 . 040) . Every agency will maintain adequate resources to individually defray any liability arising from such actions. LEGAL UNIT, RING COUNTY POLICE 0ri`r W116 Courthouse vL� 516 Third Avenue Seattle WA 98104-2312 (206) 296-5292/SCAN 667-5292 LAW ENFORCEMENT MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT - 4 September 1991 Page 3 10. AGENCY LIABILITY FOR PERSONNEL. The Primary Agency will not be responsible for salaries or overtime pay for officers from assisting agencies. Whenever any person acting pursuant to this Agreement is injured and thus unable to perform his/her duties by reason of engaging in mutual aid, but is not at the time acting under the immediate direction of his/her employer, the person or his/her dependents, shall still be accorded by his/her employer the same benefits which he/she or they would have received had that officer been acting under the immediate direction of his/her employer in his/her own jurisdiction. No signatory party other than the employer of such injured person shall be liable for any such benefits. 11. RESERVE/SPECIAL OFFICERS. Reserve officers or part-time officers, as opposed to general authority peace officers, shall normally be exempt from use as mutual aid police resources outside their own jurisdictions, except those reserve officers certified by the Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission while working under the immediate supervision of a full-time officer. 12 . RESOURCE INVENTORY AND REPORTING. Every signatory agency will develop and maintain a current inventory of its resources potentially available for mutual aid, and a plan for mobilization of those resources to effectively provide mutual aid to the other signatory agencies. The inventory, in form substantially as set forth in Attachment A (to be provided) , will be filed with the District Coordinator and updated not less often than every three years. As resources are deployed in a major disorder, the Coordinator will maintain a current inventory consistent with the operational situation. 13 . TERMINATION. Any signatory agency may terminate its participation in this Agreement when a period of twenty (20) days has elapsed after notification is made by registered letter to DPS and the other agencies' normal business address. Termination of participation or non-execution of this Agreement by any one agency shall not affect the validity of this Agreement with regard to other agencies . 14 . VENUE. This Agreement has been and shall be construed as having been made and delivered in the State of Washington, and it is mutually understood and agreed by each party hereto that this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Washington, both as to interpretation and performance. Any action arising out of or in connection with this Agreement shall be instituted only in the courts of King County, Washington. 15. MODIFICATION. No changes or modification to this Agreement shall be valid or binding upon parties hereto unless such changes or modifications are in writing and executed by all the signatory parties. 16. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this Agreement is deemed unenforceable, the validity of the remaining provisions shall not be affected and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be LEGAL UNIT, RING COUNTY POLICE r� p W116 Courthouse Ul^`; � 516 Third Avenue Seattle WA 98104-2312 (206) 296-5292/SCAN 667-5292 LAW ENFORCEMENT MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT - 4 September 1991 Page 4 construed as if the Agreement did not contain the provision deemed unenforceable. If it should appear that any provision herein is in conflict with any statutory -provision of the State of Washington, said provision shall be deemed inoperative and null and void insofar as it may be in conflict therewith, and may be modified by the parties to conform to such statutory provisions. 17 . ENTIRE CONTRACT. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. The parties agree that there are no other understandings, oral or written, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement; provided, however, nothing herein precludes the adoption of other more specific mutual aid agreements between the Cities, the County, and other Districts mentioned in the Plan. 18 . RELATION OF AGREEMENT TO STATEWIDE MUTUAL AID PLAN. All of the provisions of this Agreement are designed to be in accordance with the Plan as instituted and adopted through WASPC. This document serves to clarify and define the working relationship for law enforcement agencies potentially needing mutual aid within District 2. 19 . NON-DISCRIMINATION. The Cities and the County shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The agencies shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are considered for employment and treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to the following: upgrading, demotions or transfers, recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoffs of terminations; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; selection for training including apprenticeship; and participation in recreational and educational activities. In all solicitations of advertisements for employees placed by them or on their behalf, the agencies shall state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex or national origin. AS EVIDENCE of their having read and understood this Agreement, their intent to be bound thereby, and their having obtained the approval by appropriate action of their respective governing bodies in accord with RCW 39 . 34 . 030 (2) , the County and the Cities have executed this Agreement by appending er to h it written assent on the date(s) indicated: DATE: !S COUNTY OF KING: by my ecuti e APQ FOR FORM: Fh4gCo RECOMMENDED FOR SIGNATURE: (De y) Prosecuting Attorney RIFF- R LEGAL UNIT, RING COUNTY POLICE n nggq��R W116 Courthouse In, \•/ 516 Third Avenue � J if Seattle WA 98104-2312 (206) 296-5292/SCAN 667-5292 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 18 , 1992 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: INDECENT EXPOSURE 71G�/v 2 . SIIMMARY STATEMENT: of Ordinance adopting a new section to the Kent City Code defining the crime of indecent exposure. The City's current lewd conduct ordinance has been declared unconstitutional. The City adopts State law as it has not faced this challenge. 3 . EXHIBITS: Ordinance 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety Committee City Attorney (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* 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION: Council Age da Item No. 3H i i I II ORDINANCE NO. i AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington, deleting the existing section on the subject of lewd conduct in Kent City Code Section 9 . 02 . 34 , (repealing Section 1 of Ordinance 2545, and Ordinance 2926) ; adopting a new section to the Kent City Code defining the crime of indecent exposure. j� THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES !THEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: i Section 1. Section 1 of City of Kent Ordinance No. �I I ,, 2545 relating to lewd conduct entitled: AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington, relating to crimes and offenses against the public order; adding a new Section 9 . 02 . 34 Kent City Code, prohibiting lewd conduct; adding a new Section 9 . 02 . 35 Kent City Code prohibiting urinating in j public; providing for penalties; repealing �i KCC 9 . 02 . 120 (17) , concerning public indecency. II '; and subsequent ordinance amending Section 1 of Ordinance 2545 , d Ordinance 2926 is hereby repealed. �i i Section 2 . A new section is added to the Kent City ', Code which shall read as follows: i j INDECENT EXPOSURE II A person is guilty of indecent exposure if he intentionally makes any open and obscene j exposure of his person or the person of another knowing that such conduct is likely to cause reasonable affront or alarm. i 'I Section 3 . Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the I application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, or the I validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Section 4 . Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty (30) days from the time of its final approval and passage as provided by law. DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR ATTEST: i ii i IIBRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK I,iAPPROVED AS TO FORM: ;I JROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY i i 'IPASSED the day of 1992 • I IAPPROVED the day of 1992 • PUBLISHED the day of 1992 . I � i �I i� 2 II II• l/. Kent City Council Meeting Date February 18 , 1992 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: POSSESSION OF MARIJUANA f1DC C i` 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Ade on of Ordinance regarding the penalty for violations for possession of marijuana. The ordinance as presently written was not in compliance with State penalty laws and the new ordinance makes the correction. 3 . EXHIBITS: Ordinance 4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety Committee City Attorney (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: 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION: Council Agenda Item No. 3I x f ORDINANCE NO. I AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington, relating to narcotics, amending KCC 9 . 12 . 68, the existing section on the subject of penalty for violations for possession of marijuana (Ordinance 2894) . WHEREAS, the Kent City Code must penalize the crime of possession of marijuana as set out by the State Legislature in RCW 69.50.425 in the same manner; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: � I Section 1. Kent City Code 9 . 12 . 68 is amended as follows: I j' 9. 12 . 68 PENALTY FOR VIOLATIONS with any ef the previsions o f this e t shall be d ed guilty e-i—a- nisdeneaner, and upen eenvietien theree€ shall be ,.1,••a 19Y twe hundred fifty ($25 n,r a , , f I �Ti�re—ef net����T� -first effense, and a ; , } e 1 less than twenty heurs '' er subsequent eenv-ietren, the fine shall net be less than five hundred /ccnnt dellarsThesefines shall be in additien te any ether fine er penalty impesed. the fine and Jail term shall net emeeed ninety / dellars. I A person who is convicted of a misdemeanor violation of any provision of this chapter shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than twenty-four consecutive hours and by a fine of not less than two hundred fifty dollars On a second or subsequent iconviction the fine shall not be less than five hundred dollars. These fines shall be in addition to any other fine or penalty imposed Unless the court finds that the imposition of the minimum imprisonment will lose a substantial risk to the defendant' s Physical or mental well-being or that local -fail facilities are in an overcrowded condition the minimum term of imprisonment shall not be suspended or deferred If the court finds such risk or overcrowding exists it shall sentence the defendant to a minimum of forty hours of community service. If a minimum term of imprisonment is suspended or deferred the court shall _state in writing the reason for granting the suspension or deferral and the facts upon which the suspension or deferral is based. Unless the ' court finds the person to be indigent the minimum fine shall not i be suspended or deferred. i i i Section 2 . Severability. The provisions of this •:+ ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The I "I invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity I jof the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its japplication to other persons or circumstances. , I I I 2 I , I i I I I I �i Section 3 . Effective date. This ordinance shall take ; effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its passage i (land approval. I I' DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR ATTEST: i li BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK I i APPROVED AS TO FORM: ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY i I I ! PASSED the day of , 1992 . 1 1992 . !, APPROVED the day of , ' I !IPUBLISHED the day of 1992 - I. I it !� I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of jlOrdinance No. passed by the City Council of the City of .! Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as I� hereon indicated. (SEAL) BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK merij.ord I 3 Kent City Council Meeting Date February 18. 1992 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: 1991 ASPHALT OVERLAY f}CcEPi 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Aesop t as complete the contract with M.A. Segale, Inc. for the 1991 Asphalt Overlay project and release of the retainage after receipt of State releases. 3 . EXHIBITS: Memorandum from Public Works Director 4. RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Age da Item No. 3J DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS February 13, 1992 TO: MAYOR KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DON WICKSTROMp w RE: 1991 ASPHALT OVERLAYS This project placed asphalt overlay on streets in several areas in Kent: Cambridge, S. 260th Street and S. 261st west of 42nd Avenue S. , 38th Avenue S. between Reith and S . 253rd Place, 39th Avenue S. between S. 243rd Street and the City limits, Kennebeck between Smith and Meeker, Wynwood Drive, Tilden Avenue and S. 212th between 68th Avenue and UPRR tracks. The contract was awarded to M.A. Segale, Inc. in August, 1991 for the bid amount of $186, 086 . 35. The final contract cost is $194 , 302 . 28 . It is recommended the project be accepted as complete and the retainage released after receipt of the releases from the State. j Kent City Council Meeting , ) Date February 18 , 1992 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: SOLID WASTE 8RD1?WiGE- 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT• s recommended by the Public Works ,> Committee adopts,n°Po �Ordinance re stin to solid waste an ing and regulation, regulating yard waste-and authorizing liens for failure to pay charges of solid waste services, �-- 3 . EXHIBITS: Ordinance and excerpt from Public Works Committee minutes 4. RECOMMENDED BY: (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO__ _ YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION: ACTION: Council Agen_ ,ia Item No. 3K PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 4, 1992 PRESENT: JIM WHITE ED CHOW PAUL MANN ED WHITE JIM BENNETT MR. & MRS. RUST GARY GILL CARLITA DREBLOW ROGER LUBOVICH STEVE DIJULIO In addition there were approximately twenty others in attendance. Jim White introduced the two new members of the Committee. Solid Waste Ordinance Gary Gill commented this updated our existing solid waste ordinance. Steve DiJulio stated the ordinance deals with three principal elements. King County requires all participants in the King County program to implement yard waste programs. In the event they are not, an additional rate increase for solid waste could go into effect September 1, 1992 . Whenever the City adopts a yard waste program, this ordinance deletes yard waste from the permissible waste stream. A yard waste program will be coming before you in the next three to six months . The second issue addressed by this ordinance is waste stream control - mandatory service element. It has long been the practice of the City to require and mandate service for solid waste. There have been questions and enforcement difficulties that are clarified by this ordinance. The third aspect is to authorize liens on property for which there is delinquent payment for utility services. This is already in place for the other utilities but had not been implemented for solid waste utility to date. The City' s two contractors have had difficulty in collecting for services provided and have requested that the City make provisions to allow the private garbage companies to place liens upon private properties for non-payment. DiJulio also pointed out a change that should be made on page 6 of the ordinance deleting the words "and includes refuse" in the definition of Solid Waste. Additionally, a clause will be added which makes violations of this ordinance a civil penalty. Jim White asked who would collect or enforce a lien. DiJulio explained the City Attorney' s office would authorize the contractor to pursue the lien. The contractor would bear the expense and responsibility of the lien. Jim White asked if this were consistent with the water and sewer utility. DiJulio responded that it is with even tighter controls . II I I I! i I i I i I ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington relating to solid waste handling and regulation; ratifying and confirming ! the City' s commitment to waste reduction, recycling and waste I� stream control ; regulating yard waste consistent with the King County Solid Waste Management Plan; authorizing liens ! under Chapter 35. 21 RCW for failure to pay charges of solid �I waste services ; amending Kent City Code sections 7 . 08 . 010 and 7 . 08 . 040; adding new section 7 . 08 . 220 KCC; providing for criminal and civil enforcement and abatement and providing penalties for violations of Chapter 7 . 08 KCC; adding new sections 7 . 08 . 230 - 7 . 08 . 280 ; and repealing section 7 . 08 . 180. I li THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES 1HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: !I it '! Section 1. Recitals and Findincfs. ii 1. 1 By Ordinance 2870 the City of Kent ("City") reestablished its system of solid waste collection and disposal ("Solid Waste Utility") , and authorized contracts with private i collection companies for collection of solid waste and j recyclables and billing of consumers for such services. I ! i I i I I li 1. 2 Prior to and after Ordinance 2870, the City has required mandatory solid waste services by prohibiting private solid waste handling under Chapter 7 . 08 Kent City Code ("KCC") . 1. 3 The City was one of the first cities in the State I to provide for comprehensive, residential recycling services. I City residents have responded with enthusiasm to the program, resulting in substantial participation and increasing volume of i recyclable materials. I 1. 4 As a participant in the King County Solid Waste lSystem, the City must prohibit yard waste from entering the I'i i municipal solid waste stream or face increased fees for solid IIwaste disposal ("tip fees") . if1. 5 Increased tip fees in the County Cedar Hills � �I I ! IlLandfill has been reflected in increased solid waste fees imposed by collection companies beginning January 1, 1992 . Additional ,I j impact on solid waste rates will result from the implementation of a yard waste program. I j 1 . 6 In order to minimize the rate impact on City !i residents from persons failing to pay rates and charges for solid waste recyclables or yard waste services, it is appropriate to 'i authorize liens against property for which solid waste or I� recyclable material collection service is rendered. 1. 7 This ordinance is in furtherance of the City's constitutional and statutory authority to regulate and police in 2 � I I, I I� I the interests of the public health, safety, morals and general welfare. Section 2 . KCC 7 . 08 . 010 (as last amended by Ordinance i 2870) is amended as follows: 7. 08. 010. DEFINITIONS. As used in this Chapter, the following definitions apply: A. "Collection Company" means the persons, firms i or corporations or combination thereof operating under a contract i ( (e€) ) for solid waste, recyclables or yard waste collection i ( (disposal) ) with, or under the direction of, the City, including an authorized contractor for the collection of recyclable materials under this Chapter. B. "Detachable Container" means any garbage jicontainer compatible with the collection company' s equipment that i is not a garbage can, garbage unit, or mobile toter. I I C. "Director" means the Director of the Public I Works Department. I D. "Garbage" means all accumulations of ( (refuse, swill, and ether) ) solid waste ( (matter net intended—€ems reeyeiinq er reuse and diseharged as e€ ate-further value e+me -r) ) . ( (�-- "Re-fuse" means waste matter disearded as ofnefurther value, ineluding ashes, einders, elinkers, lawn I' 3 I I I III I I eutti33g5, grass and ,—eaves, breken apheuseheld '.' equ_I�nt, diseaiFded het water tanks, betties, barrels, eart s and shrubs, sfaall trees, small tree IiM�hs, paper and seraps_e-f-�eeden erates and -bexesi but shall exelidde large trees,ea th, a, gravel, reek, breken eenerete, plaster briek and ether building t , t b • l bes, largeparts 1. ,.' , a t ISSaL��-1 c� , jfire _ _ - " i=lrl11 faeans all .l -.t. ens e f I �S animal, fruit, er vegetable matter,—kFdid er th � t�...t j jattends the preparatien, use, dealing in er stering I j fish, €ewl, fruit, , a t t , j 3 The ten "garbage"—exeluaesreeyela , I I materials intended €er reeyeling—unde , , l� sewage, dead animals ever fifteen peunds, and eleanings fre :Ipubl:j:e and private eateh basins, wash raeks er sumps. Gelleetien and 1 tt exeluded freift the term " � l' shall, be 7 � as tu, • a a b , E. "Garbage Can" means a watertight, galvanized, i sheet metal, raised-bottom container or suitable plastic I I� container not exceeding four cubic feet or thirty-two gallons in Icapacity, weighing not over twenty-two pounds when empty, fitted �Iwith two study handles, one on each side, and a tight cover I equipped with a handle. I ; ; I 4 F. "Garbage Units" mean secure and tight bundles, g g ilinone of which shall exceed three feet in the longest dimension and shall not exceed seventy-five pounds in weight. Garbage units may also mean small discarded boxes, barrels or bags, or in securely tight cartons or other receptacles not intended for ! recycling under this Chapter and able to be reasonably handled and loaded by one person onto a collection vehicle. i G. "Mobile Toter" means a movable container which i holds at least sixty ( (eight five) ) gallons or ( (ene hundred eiE jhty ) ) of garbage, with a hinged-lid with a tight fit, thick skinned one-piece balanced weight body which sets on tires, which will be picked up at curbside with hydraulic dumpster. The , Director may approve collection company use of alternative sizes of mobile toters. H. "Person" means every person, firm, partnership, business, association, institution, or corporation in the City of Kent accumulating garbage requiring disposal or generating, accumulating, and collecting recyclable materials. The term shall also mean the occupant and/or the owner of any premises for which service herein mentioned is rendered. I . "Recycle Container" means designated 90 gallon mobile toters in which recyclable materials can be stored and j i later placed at curbside, alleyside, or other location designated by the Director or collection company with the concurrence of the i 5 I � j Director. This term also includes but is not limited to designated commercial front load boxes, drop boxes and compactors i at locations as may be specified by the Director. The Director I ! may approve collection company use of alternative sizes of I recycle containers. i' J. "Recyclable Materials" means waste materials ;��� generated in the City of Kent capable of reuse from a waste j iI I I stream as designated by the Director, including but not limited I I to sorted or unsorted newsprint, glass, aluminum, ferrous and j I j non-ferrous cans, plastic materials, mixed paper, and cardboard Ilaccumulated and intended for recycling or reuse and collection by a collection company or authorized contractor. This term I I excludes all dangerous wastes and hazardous wastes defined in RCW I j70. 10 and 70. 105A, and solid wastes intended for disposal in a I'I , ! landfill, incinerator, or solid waste disposal facility under WAC 1� 173-304 . All recyclable materials intended for collection by a City authorized collection company or contractor shall remain the j� 'jresponsibility and ownership of participants until such materials jjas contained in designated recycle containers are placed out for ;; collection for the authorized contractor. Such materials then ! ' become the responsibility and property of the collection company I� hor authorized contractor subject to the right of the participant ito claim lost property of value. i 6 i ' I K. "Solid Waste" shall be as defined by RCW 70.95. 030 and WAC 173-304-100 (73) , ( ( __'__ a _ a - refuse) ) with i the exception of sludge from waste water treatment plants and septage, from septic tanks, extremely hazardous waste, hazardous waste, dangerous waste, and problem wastes as defined in WAC 1i173-303 and 173-204, and RCW 70. 105 and 70. 105A. L. "Solid Waste Utility" shall be the City system of solid waste handling under Chapters 35. 21 and 35. 67 RCW and this Code. M. "Yard Waste" means plant material including leaves grass branches brush flowers, t tree wood waste and _ I i other biodegradable waste that may be designated by the Director. Yard waste includes sod not over four (4) inches in diameter and limbs and branches not over four (4) inches in diameter or four � (4) feet in length Yard waste does not include demolition 11debris such as concrete wallboard lumber or roofing materials. I I I� I it Section 3 . KCC 7 . 08 . 040 (as last amended by Ordinance 12689) is amended as follows: 7 . 08 . 040 . ( (GARBAGE GGT-- FUIT ITT AT ) ) SOLID WASTE l HANDLING-MANDATORY SERVICE A. All persons accumulating garbage in the City of Kent shall place and accumulate same in garbage cans, or i I garbage units, mobile toters, or detachable containers as 7 i I i i required by this Chapter. Except as provided in KCC 7. 08 . 020B i and C, all persons and properties within the City shall use the solid waste, recyclable material and yard waste system and service of the Solid Waste Utility under contract with collection companies. All persons and occupied property shall be subject to i and responsible for the minimum level of service and associated charges whether or not such persons and property use the service. The Director may, upon a showing that a person or Property produces no solid waste determine not to enforce the �i 1 1provisions of this section. j B. It shall be unlawful to deposit, throw, or I place any garbage in any land, alley, street or other public ,, place, or to deposit, throw or place any garbage on any private JIproperty regardless of ownership, unless the garbage is placed in garbage cans, containers, or toters, the covers of which shall �inot be removed except when necessary for the depositing or removingof garbage; provided, that boxes, small barrels, I cartons, ( (shrtdbs, small trees, small tree—nns) ) , yard waste, scraps of wooden crates and boxes, broken up household furniture :land equipment, paper, hollowware and rubbish in general, may be is i broken up or cut up and placed in garbage units, ( (as defined ; KGG ) ) consistent with this Chapter or as approved by —the Director. I� j•.I 8 II I C. Any garbage can when filled shall not weigh imore than seventy-five pounds and shall be so packed that the contents thereof will dump out readily when the can is inverted. All garbage cans and garbage units shall be placed in convenient, I ' jaccessible locations upon the ground level or ground floor and as near as practicable to the approximate rear of the building or near the alley, street or road at which collection trucks are to be loaded; all walks, paths, and driveways to the place of loading shall have a overhead clearance of not less than eight feet. D. Any mobile toter when filled shall not weigh more than one hundred eighty pounds, or as otherwise regulated by the Director, and shall be so packed that the contents thereof will dump out readily. All mobile toters shall be placed at curbside or alley before 7 : 00 a.m. and removed from curb or alley � as soon as possible after collection, but no later than 7 : 00 p.m. i� i E. Any person accumulating garbage in the Iidowntown or suburban business areas whose location requires the placing of cans, containers, or units on a sidewalk or alley for ! collection shall not place same on sidewalk or alley until the close of each business day, and shall remove cans from sidewalk or alley immediately after the opening for business each morning. !, F. Dangerous - Other Waste. 9 I I i1. No hot ashes or other hot material, dirt, sand, rocks, gasoline, solvents, oil, paint or dangerous or hazardous wastes shall be placed in any garbage can, garbage I lunit, detachable container, or mobile toter for collection or 1, removal. All kitchen, table and cooking waste before being deposited in garbage cans, garbage units, detachable container, I Ior mobile toters shall be drained and wrapped in paper or other Ilmaterial in such a manner as to prevent as nearly as possible l, moisture from such garbage from coming in contact with sides or jibottoms of the containers. I 2 . As used in this section, "dangerous or I ' ilhazardous wastes" means any solid waste designated as dangerous �I �lor hazardous waste by the State Department of Ecology, and such 'I wastes shall be disposed of consistent with Department of Ecology !' rules and regulations. I G. When use of garbage cans is allowed or !irequired, sufficient garbage cans must be provided for the i; collection of all garbage cans as defined in this Chapter. Worn out and improper cans shall be discarded. H. Residential units shall use ( (may !� -a-yea) ) mobile toters unless otherwise authorized by the i collection company. Mobile toters shall be provided by the collection company. All mobile toters shall remain the property of collection company and are provided and assigned to residences i 10 I I III fI I' i i for the health, safety, convenience, and general welfare of the occupants. The containers shall not be damaged, destroyed, or removed from the premises by any person; markings and identification devices on the containers, except as placed or i specifically permitted by the collection company are expressly I prohibited and shall be regarded as damage to the containers. i I. It shall be unlawful, except as authorized by ithe owner, collection company or the City to deposit any garbage i or other material in any garbage can, garbage unit, detachable container, or mobile toter, or to remove the covers therefrom; I� said covers shall be securely placed on each can, toter, or unit i i at all times, except when it is necessary to remove same for deposit or at times of collection. J. Following adoption of the City Yard Waste j++lprogram, it shall be unlawful to dispose of yard waste in 1containers provided by collection companies for solid waste or i I Ilrecyclable materials. Yard waste shall be deposited in containers provided by collection companies disposed of under j I I IIKCC 7 . 08 . 020C, or as authorized by the Director. Nothing in this I I �iChapter shall prohibit persons from composting yard waste on i Ilproyerty owned or leased by such persons provided however, that compost facilities shall be o erated and maintained consistent with other applicable law and regulation. II 11 I i i i I Section 4 . A new section 7 . 08. 220 is added to the Kent lCity Code, as follows: 7 . 08 . 220. LIEN FOR UTILITY SERVICES. A. Pursuant to chapter 35. 21 RCW, liens are authorized by this Code against property for which solid waste, recyclable materials, or yard waste collection services have been provided by collection companies operating under contract with i the Solid Waste Utility. i B. Charges for solid waste collection and disposal, recyclable collection and disposal, and yard waste i collection and disposal services are set by collection companies consistent with solid waste utility contracts with the City. i Upon failure to pay the charges within the time provided for in i invoices and/or bills issued by collection companies, the amount thereof shall become a lien against the property for which the Ilsolid waste, recyclable material, or yard waste collection service is rendered. C. A notice of the lien authorized by this ;. Section shall specify the charges, the period covered by the charges, and the legal description of the property sought to be charged. The notice shall be filed with the county auditor within the time required and shall be foreclosed in the manner and within the time prescribed for liens for labor and material. 12 i I j D. Liens authorized by this section shall be prior to all liens and encumbrances filed subsequent to the filing of the notice of lien with the county auditor, except the lien of general taxes and local improvement assessments whether levied prior or subsequent thereto. i E. Collection companies seeking to exercise rights under this Section shall have current, executed contracts I lfor solid waste handling with the City authorizing the rights 11herein and providing for the method of such lien enforcement. Section 5 . New sections 7 . 08 . 240 through 7. 08 . 340 are ,; added to the Kent City Code, as follows: 'I I. ENFORCEMENT i 'i 7 . 08 . 240 VIOLATION-PENALTY. A. Anyone violating or failing to comply with Section 7 . 08 . 020, 7 . 08 . 030, or 7 . 08 . 040 shall , upon conviction, lbe punishable by a fine of not more than Five Thousand Dollars ($5, 000 . 00) or by imprisonment in the City Jail for a period of i not exceeding one (1) year, or by both such fine and it limprisonment. B. Alternatively, anyone failing to comply with I jiany provision of this chapter shall be subject to a civil penalty j Ali 13 I I. III i i li i� I i in the amount of Fifty Dollars ($50. 00) per day for each I violation pursuant to Sections 7 . 08.240 through 7 . 08 . 320. 7. 08 . 260 NOTICE OF VIOLATION. I A. If the Director determines after investigation that this Chapter has been violated, the Director may have a I I notice of violation served upon the owner, tenant or other person believed to be responsible for the condition. The notice shall be served by personal service or by United States mail addressed Ito the last known address of the owner, tenant or other person f responsible for the condition. The notice shall state separately `I each violation of this Chapter and what corrective action is necessary to comply with the Chapter. A reasonable time for I compliance shall be established in the notice. B. The notice of violation shall not be amended � I I by the Director to include additional violations as a result of i any reinspection for compliance or other purposes except upon a j clear showing that the amendment is necessary for the protection of public safety, health and general welfare and that the �ladditional violation did not exist or could not reasonably have lbeen discovered at the time of original inspection. i I� 7 . 08 . 280 TIME TO COMPLY. When calculating a reasonable time for compliance, the Director shall take into consideration: 14 j I i i A. The type and degree of violation cited in the notice; � B. The intent of a responsible party to comply if I an intent has been expressed. I; 7 . 08. 300 EXTENSION OF COMPLIANCE DATE. An extension of I ' time for compliance with a notice of violation may be granted in I writing by the Director upon receipt of a written request therefor. The Director may without a written request grant an extension of time after finding that required actions have been started and that the work is progressing at a satisfactory rate. i i I I I i !i I ' I II jl I I 1 15 I 7 . 08. 320 CIVIL PENALTY. A. In addition to any other sanction or remedial procedure which may be available, any person failing to comply with a notice of violation of this Chapter shall be subject to � I licumulative penalty in the amount of Fifty Dollars ($50. 00) per I day for each violation, from the date set for compliance until the notice of violation is complied with; provided persons failing to comply with a notice of violation in connection with a i venture entered into for profit shall be subject to a cumulative l j1penalty in the amount of One Hundred Dollars ($100. 00) per day; i land provided further that the penalty for failure to comply with j i I a notice of violation where the city has removed the solid waste shall be increased to include the actual cost of such removal plus fifteen percent (15%) . I B. The penalty imposed by this section shall be collected by civil action brought in the name of the City. The j , Director shall notify the City Attorney in writing of the name of any person subject to the penalty and the amount of the penalty i land the City Attorney shall , with the assistance of the Director, j! take appropriate action to collect the penalty. 'i C. Whenever solid waste deposited, thrown or i i placed in violation of this Chapter contains three (3) or more items bearing the name of one (1) individual, or whenever a motor ' i vehicle or trailer used in the activity is identified by its 16 t I I III j I license plate, it shall be presumed that the individual whose I name appears or the items or to whom the vehicle or trailer is registered committed the unlawful act. The defendant shall have i an opportunity to rebut the presumption and may show as full or j { partial mitigation of liability: 1. That the violation giving rise to the I action was caused by the wilful act, neglect, or abuse of another; or 2 . That correction of the violation was commenced promptly upon receipt of the notice thereof, but that j 'I full compliance within the time specified was prevented by inability to obtain necessary labor, inability to gain access to i the subject property, or other condition or circumstances beyond I Ithe control of the defendant. I I I 7 . 08 . 340 SUMMARY ABATEMENT. �I I j A. The City Council may, after a report has been filed by the Director and the property owner, tenant or other i person responsible for the condition has had an opportunity to be heard, by ordinance require such person to abate a nuisance by removal and proper disposal or refuse from the property at such person' s cost and expense within a time specified in the itordinance; and if the removal and disposal is not accomplished jwithin the time specified, the Director may abate the nuisance 17 j i jl I I and recover the cost and expense thereof plus fifteen percent (15%) in a civil action. B. The Director may also seek relief in Superior Court to enjoin any acts or practices and abate any condition which constitutes or will constitute a violation of this Chapter when the civil or criminal remedies provided herein are inadequate to effect compliance. Section 6. Section 7. 08 . 180 is hereby repealed. Section 7 . Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date of this Ordinance is I� hereby ratified and confirmed. Section 8 . Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, I� section or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. I I 18 I i I I Section 9. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take I I effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its i passage, approval and publication as provided by law. j Dan Kelleher, Mayor i ATTEST: I I BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: I i ROGER LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY I jPASSED the day of 1992 . APPROVED the day of 1992 . i ! PUBLISHED the day of 1992 . I i I i I hereby certify that this is a true and correct 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) BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK solidwst.ord I I i 19 r� 1, ri Kent City Council Meeting Date February 18 , 1992 Category Consent Calendar 1. SUBJECT: RIVERWALK PARK GRANT AA)QEPq96Ne r 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: AQcQptaace of a grant from �u� c� Land Enhancement Account for Riverwalk Park, and for the Mayor to sign the grant co_ntract.J s recommended by ,,, C, Parks Commi ee une, 1991) and Council through Resolution 1287, Parks applied for-a-$7�� grant from DNR Aqua lc an Enhancement Account This grant was awarded i December. With the return of the con rac pia, the Parks Department may commence negotiations for the acquisition of the property. 3 . EXHIBITS: Fiscal note, grant resume, announcement letter/map 4 . RECOMMENDED BY:Parks Committee, IBC Grant Notification Letter _ (Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. ) 5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: No YES FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended 6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ SOURCE OF FUNDS: 7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION: Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds DISCUSSION• ACTION• Council Agenda Item No. 3L MCCARTHY,TONY / KENT70/FN - HPDesk print. ----------------------------------------- SL. ject: RIVERWALK PARK - FISCAL NOTE Creator: Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/FN Dated: 06/21/91 at 1709 . THE PARK DEPARTMENT IS ASKING FOR AUTHORIZATION TO APPLY FOR A GRANT TO ACQUIRE A SMALL PARCEL OF LAND ADJACENT TO THE GREEN RIVER. THE PARCEL IS A MISSING LINK BETWEEN CURRENT AND APPLIED FOR PARK PROPERTY. THE GRANT APPLICATION IS FOR $75, 000 WHICH IS PROPOSED TO BE MATCHED WITH ALREADY APPROVED KING COUNTY OPEN SPACE BOND ISSUE PROCEEDS OF $25, 000. SINCE THE REQUEST REQUIRES NO CITY FUNDING, IBC RECOMMENDS THAT A BUDGET FOR $100, 000 BE SET UP FOR THE PROJECT AT THE TIME THE GRANT IS APPROVED. NEIFFER,ALICE / KENT70/PK - HPDesk print. ----------------------------------------- Message. Dated: 06/21/91 at 1726. Su act: RIVERWALK PARK - FISCAL NOTE Contents: 3 . Sender: Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/FN TO: Alice NEIFFER / KENT70/PK Part 1. TO: Alice NEIFFER / KENT70/PK CC: Helen WICKSTROM / KENT70/PK Barney WILSON / KENT70/PK Part 2 . THE FISCAL NOTE AS APPROVED BY IBC AT THEIR JUNE 19TH MEETING. PLEASE PROVIDE TO COUNCIL WHEN DISCUSSING AT THE PARK COMMITTEE AND AS A COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM. SINCE NO CITY FUNDS ARE NEEDED, IT DOES NOT HAVE TO GO TO OPERATION COMMITTEE. Part 3 . THE PARK DEPARTMENT IS ASKING FOR AUTHORIZATION TO APPLY FOR A GRANT TO ACQUIRE A SMALL PARCEL OF LAND ADJACENT TO THE GREEN RIVER. THE PARCEL IS A MISSING LINK BETWEEN CURRENT AND APPLIED FOR PARK PROPERTY. THE GRANT APPLICATION IS FOR $75, 000 WHICH IS PROPOSED TO BE MATCHED WITH ALREADY APPROVED KING COUNTY OPEN SPACE BOND ISSUE PROCEEDS OF $25, 000. S1 E THE REQUEST REQUIRES NO CITY FUNDING, IBC RECOMMENDS THAT A BUDGET FOR $100 , 000 BE SET UP FOR THE PROJECT AT THE TIME THE GRANT IS APPROVED. :.AQUATIC LAND ENHANCEMENT}ACCOUNT ACQUISITION PROJECT RESUME . - - ALEA PROD.! - ACENcr City of Kent Parks and Recreation Department AL -39 PROJECT NAME•„ Riverwaik Park .: LEGIS.DLST. SECTION TOWNSHIP RANGE 4 - _ COUNTY Kmg 31 25 22 Katc�Isonzo" NEAREST STATE HWY ..:- PROJECT ADDRESS/DESCRIPTION - - .<°. SR DIST Hawley Road between the Green River and Hwy 167 xo. 167 AWAY West Border ❑ NEW SITE APPRAISED VALUE: EXISTING PROPERTY INFORMATION ZONING _ GC and MA` - NO.OF PARCELS 1 Cl ADD TO EXIST.SITE LAND $ 40.000 SHORELINE ENV. Zoned Urban - ACRES THIS APPL. 1.63 FEE SIMPLE IMPROVE $ _$p,000_ USE Dike- Recreational TOTAL ACRES 1 6z ❑ LEASE COST: OWNER ASA Properties Hawaii -- WA.WATER BODY Green River ❑ OTHER PER ACRE $ —?A 540-_ Same - OPTION PER FRONT$ 50 61 TIDE/SHORELAND OWNER FEET WETLAND/ACRES Not determined at this time FRONT FEET 7%), ❑ YES NO rBay CT DESCRIPTION ent of this project is to acquire L63 acres of riverside property which will allow a needed water access point in the Green River Comri o wetland surveys indicate that the land would need to be tested by a wetland biologist for a classification_ The property is bisected b Road,a heavily used section of the Green River Corridor Trail. This mile regional trail system follows the Green River from Elliot Seattle to the Green River Gorge South of Auburn_ 'rbe nature of the river bank is steep rip-rap with unsafe trails created by fishermen and children trying to get to the water. The immediat ;nefits of this purchase would include public parking for trail and river users,and quick response to a city survey which asked for water acc and additional trail amenities. Pre-development installation of rani-cans and picnic tables would create a needed rest area on the Green Rive Corridor Trail. The Green River has been a main point in Kent's heritage. Early settlers in the area used this navigable river as a trade and travel route. N primarily a recreational area, the river offers fishing, swimming, kayak and canoe waterways, trails and view ints. PROPOSED FUTURE DEVELOPMENT After development,Rivetwalk Park will serve in many capacities. First as a river access area, then as trail-head for the Green River Corridor Trail with shared restroom amenities, and thirdly as a neighborhood park for the 6?A unit Signatur Point apartments located just across the West Valley Highway. As a part of the Green River Trail development a paved pedestrian underpass under the West Valley Highway provides access to the site by the apartment dwellers. There is a very old, dilapidated house on the south end of the property which is currently occupied. The owners have stated that the renter is on a month-to-month lease and will have vacated by the time of the property sale. The house will be removed as part of the development_ Planned amenities include: non-motorized boat launch, stairs for fishing or water access, trail paving, restrooms, picnic areas, open space, children's play area, and parking. REQUIRED PERMITS/COORDINATION FUNDING SOURCE (z I QW' O DNR LEASE (A SHORELINE MGT. O CORPS OF ENG ALEA GRANT_:.REQUEST (75% ) $ ZS ❑ PARKS ❑ FISH/WII.DLIFE H.P.A. MATCH i $ 1. LOCAL Cl HEALTH ❑ OTHER(specify) $ 2. NONLOCAL RELOCATION TOTAL PROJECT FUNDS (100°G) $ 1 '• ❑ YES EX NO EST.COST $ IREVIOUs ALEA GRANTS 'King County Open Space Bond Proceeds •' $90,000 Aquisition NUMBER APPROVED TOTAL VALUE c 10,000 Architect, Engineer,Appraisal, Closing, etc. HAVE PROJECTS BEEN COMPLETED? ElYES ❑NO blue .n.CAI.ICI. �• 41p9 p J o mnNom oowO.omwmm vd � w w JOR• f,III j� ._..J N n Z O IU �•Z �•'-'•J d V (D ➢ O 6 M N Do — m 3 \llli�� D- N W J � N D_R R ID a R ?O C lG �.J N £C •'I1�• O W w TID J w F Dd N dN DR n 'S 80 4. 9 SJC(C r � - Ip O T n-,Q tif"O 3 N n (D m�• C V�J N Z �O !U ryry RO ,-+ -_�-+.R'SN �_ lD d➢n Q•V� ID IU WTJZ N J OU1J F Nn� R� md '1�r � N'n� M WC Rd' O J �•�G R- N R R�.0 N J 2) C w n O R M N'S "O'n '-" .m S� - -•'S< �'R 1DCJJ 0O0 N cTwT �O N- p- .� r,Nm wmJ nnm N SJ < 0o Rw . o w nnlO of �m o mwo •zNRn Rc �•RJ- RJ J RNnn � r a w -•.o J'm + R'$ m >•O.-nn o c m TJN J O C�C ID R R d IO d D 'Z O 3 O N R N n y Oo - �o me J n sm d F rrt rd . ow � F �OJN tinN FmND amw 'n a 3 NmoR - FmN m m m n w _ J N N O _ O Ot0 Y o�M � O. w n N c J m 10 o_ x m O F J o R O < R N J Y1 •< �' c z N m n. cN N o r w R R n w J F m m am A n m ➢'yf m O m J m < m m m R Z J < Vd � n 6J GN 6m 6wnd ` Rm m N � NCOO R+^ dnFtO w ➢Z � n Nan T Jow -S .Ow <� nn w . o'w 0. J'n.3 Rw c 'SmN In '^ m m NO amJ wJr6S OF £ 'ON �C m SR D-Qd SJ T m -•.-s m < m .no n �c R d No o Sim wOmlO d S D m R m m 0 m 9 mn N m D< p�.3 -•.O J o d o F R-t RF d owe n R m O ; OJw OR Sm m O � mJ N .t F -�o wmno � w `�mm ono n a R w N an o - �m 0 o R o r A D 2 O N 0 o J _ � m T I i1= z HwYiv cn KWY 187 -� L tA- ;� Kent City Council Meeting Date February 18 , 1992 Category Other Business 1. SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND KENT ZONING CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES - ORDINANCE (ZCA-91-2) 2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This meeting will consider the recommendation by the Planning Commission to amend the Kent Zoning Code Enforcement Procedures. On January 27, 1992 , the Planning Commission approved amendments to the Kent Zoning Code that would establish new violation enforcement procedures. 3 . EXHIBITS: Memo, ordinance, staff report, memo dated 12/9/91 from Planning Commission to Law Department, Planning Commission Minutes of 1/27/92 4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Planning Commission (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 11 moves, Councilmember �� � "�� seconds to adopt Ordinance -y , -5- -amending the Kent Zoning Code Enforcement Procedures, as recommended by the Planning Commission. DISCUSSION• ACTION. Council Agenda Item No. 4A CITY OF �DE11)Pf"T, CITY OF KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT (206) 859-3390 V77z�M MEMORANDUM February 18 , 1992 MEMO TO: MAYOR DAN KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND KENT ZONING CODE ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES (#ZCA-91-2) On January 27 , 1992 the Planning Commission approved amendments to the Kent Zoning Code that establish new violation and enforcement procedures. These include the elimination of criminal penalties and the establishment of civil penalties. Enclosed for your review is a copy of the Commission' s meeting minutes, the staff report which includes a memo from the Law Department and the proposed amendments. JPH/mp:cp: zca91-2 .mm2 cc: Carol Proud, Senior Planner ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington, relating to land use and zoning, amending the Zoning Code, Kent City Code (K.C.C. ) Title 15, to repeal K.C.C. Section 15. 09. 100 relating to Zoning Code violations and enforcement, eliminating criminal penalties for such violations, adding a new Chapter 15. 10 on the same subject which provides civil penalties for violations. WHEREAS, the Kent Zoning Code presently contains an abbreviated procedure for the enforcement of violations, makes such violations a criminal offense with associated criminal penalties; and WHEREAS, other cities have adopted civil penalties for zoning code violations and have found that imposition of a monetary penalty allows recovery of administrative costs of enforcement and is often an incentive to prompt compliance; and WHEREAS, a change to civil from criminal penalties would also make prosecution of zoning code violations more effective, since "knowing and wilful" commission of a violation is necessary to obtain a criminal conviction; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. KCC Section 15. 09 . 100 of the Kent Zoning Code (Ordinances 2404 and 1827) , is hereby repealed. i i Section 2 . The Kent Zoning Code, K.C.C. Title 15, is Thereby amended to add the following new chapter: �i CHAPTER 15 . 10 ENFORCEMENT OF THE ZONING CODE 15. 10. 002 . VIOLATIONS. A. It is a violation of the Kent Zoning Code, KCC ' Title 15, for any person to initiate or maintain or cause to be initiated or maintained the use of any structure, land or i ,, property within the City of Kent without first obtaining the :; permits or authorizations required for the use by Title 15. I I I B. It is a violation of Title 15 for any person to tiuse, construct, locate, or demolish any structure, land or property within the City of Kent in any manner that is not ; permitted by the terms of any permit or authorization issued it I ,. pursuant to Title 15, provided that the terms or conditions are explicitly stated on the permit or the approved plans. C. It is a violation of Title 15 to remove or deface any sign, notice, complaint or order required by or posted in accordance with Title 15 or Title 12 . 12A of the Kent City Code. ii D. It is a violation of Title 15 to misrepresent any material fact in any application, plans or other information submitted to obtain any land use authorization. E. It is a violation of Title 15 for anyone to fail to comply with the requirements of Title 15. 2 it l i , I 15. 10.004. DUTY TO ENFORCE. A. It shall be the duty of the Director of Planning to i j enforce Title 15. The Director may call upon the police, fire, health or other appropriate City department to assist in enforcement. I B. Upon presentation of proper credentials, the Director or duly authorized representative of the Director may, with the consent of the owner or occupier of a building or premises, or pursuant to a lawfully issued inspection warrant, enter at reasonable times any building or premises subject to the , consent or warrant to perform the duties imposed by the Zoning Code, or, Title 15 of the Kent City Code. j C. The Zoning Code shall be enforced for the benefit of the health, safety and welfare of the general public, and not j i jfor the benefit of any particular person or class of persons. i D. It is the intent of this Zoning Code to place the obligation of complying with its requirements upon the owner, occupier or other person responsible for the condition of the it land and buildings within the scope of this Code. E. No provision of or term used in this Code is intended to impose any duty upon the City or any of its officers or employees which would subject them to damages in a civil action. i 15. 10. 006. INVESTIGATION AND NOTICE OF VIOLATION. A. The Director or his/her representative shall investigate any structure or use which the Director reasonably j i 3 i i i believes does not comply with the standards and requirements of i this Zoning Code. B. If after investigation the Director determines that I j the standards or requirements have been violated, the Director shall serve a notice of violation on the owner, tenant or other jperson responsible for the condition. The notice of violation shall state separately each standard or requirement violated, shall state what corrective action, if any, is necessary to I comply with the standards or requirements; and shall set a reasonable time for compliance. The notice shall state that any subsequent violations may result in criminal prosecution as provided in section 15. 10. 020. I i C. The notice shall be served upon the owner, tenant or other person responsible for the condition by personal li service, registered mail, or certified mail with return receipt j requested, addressed to the last known address of such person. If, after a reasonable search and reasonable efforts are made to obtain service, the whereabouts of the person or persons is unknown or service cannot be accomplished and the Director makes an affidavit to that effect, then service of the notice upon such j person or persons may be made by: 1. Publishing the notice once each week for two (2) consecutive weeks in the city' s Official Newspaper; and 2 . Mailing a copy of the notice to each person I�I named on the notice of violation by first class mail to the last known address if known, or if unknown, to the address of the property involved in the proceedings. j D. A copy of the notice shall be posted at a conspicuous place on the property, unless posting the notice is not physically possible. 4 II 1 I ,i E. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to limit or , I preclude any action or proceeding pursuant to Section 15 . 10.010 i jj or Section 15. 10. 012 . Ii F. The Director may mail, or cause to be delivered to all residential and/or nonresidential rental units in the structure or post at a conspicuous place on the property, a notice which informs each recipient or resident about the notice of violation, stop Work Order or Emergency Order and the applicable requirements and procedures. G. A notice or an Order may be amended at any time in order to: 1. Correct clerical errors, or 2 . Cite additional authority for a stated violation. `I i 15. 10. 008. TIME TO COMPLY. A. When calculating a reasonable time for compliance, 11 the Director shall consider the following criteria: 1. The type and degree of violation cited in the notice; 2 . The stated intent, if any, of a responsible party to take steps to comply; 3 . The procedural requirements for obtaining a permit to carry out corrective action; 4 . The complexity of the correction action, including seasonal considerations, construction requirements and the legal prerogatives of landlords and tenants; and 5. Any other circumstances beyond the control of the responsible party. !I 5 j, B. Unless a request for review before the Director is made in accordance with Section 15 . 10. 014, the notice of violation shall become the final order of the Director. A copy of the notice shall be filed with the Department of Records and Elections of King County. The Director may choose not to file a copy of the notice or Order if the notice or Order is directed only to a responsible person other than the owner of the property. 15. 10. 010. STOP WORK ORDER. Whenever a continuing violation of this Code will materially impair the Director' s ability to secure compliance with this Code, or when the continuing violation threatens the health or safety of the public, the Director may issue a stop Work Order specifying the violation and prohibiting any work or other activity at the site. A failure to comply with a Stop Work Order shall constitute a violation of this Zoning Code. 15. 10. 012 . EMERGENCY ORDER. Whenever any use or activity in violation of this Code threatens the health and safety of the occupants of the premises or any member of the public, the Director may issue an Emergency Order directing that the use or activity be discontinued and the condition causing the threat to the public health and safety be corrected. The Emergency Order shall specify the time for compliance and shall be posted in a conspicuous place on the property, if posting is physically possible. A failure to comply with an Emergency Order shall constitute a violation of this Zoning Code. Any condition described in the Emergency Order which is not corrected within the time specified is hereby declared to be a public nuisance and the Director is authorized to abate such nuisance summarily by such means as may be available. The cost 6 i i, i �j of such abatement shall be recovered from the owner or person responsible or both in the manner provided by law. i I 15. 10. 010. REVIEW BY THE DIRECTOR. j I A. Any person significantly affected by or interested in a notice of violation issued by the Director pursuant to jSection 15. 10.006 may obtain a review of the notice by requesting ! Ii such review within fifteen (15) days after service of the notice. ; When the last day of the period so computed is a Saturday, Sundayi or federal or City holiday, the period shall run until five p.m. (5: 00 p.m. ) on the next business day. The request shall be in 'I writing, and upon receipt of the request, the Director shall notify any persons served the notice of violation and the complainant, if any, of the date, time and place set for the review, which shall be not less than ten (10) nor more than twenty (20) days after the request is received, unless otherwise I agreed by all persons served with the notice of violation. Before the date set for the review, any person significantly affected by or interested in the notice of violation may submit any written material to the Director for consideration at the review. B. The review will consist of an informal review meeting held at the Department. A representative of the Director ! who is familiar with the case and the applicable ordinances will attend. The Director's representative will explain the reasons for the Director' s issuance of the notice and will listen to any additional information presented by the persons attending. At or after the review, the Director may: 1. Sustain the notice of violation; 2 . Withdraw the notice of violation; !I 3 . Continue the review to a date certain for receipt of additional information; or I III i 4. Modify the notice of violation, which may I I� include an extension of the compliance date. C. The Director shall issue a Final Order of the IDirector containing the the decision within seven (7) days of the date of the completion of the review and shall cause the same to , I be mailed by regular first class mail to the person or persons named on the notice of violation, mailed to the complainant, if possible, and filed with the Department of Records and Elections I of King County. 15. 10. 016. EXTENSION OF COMPLIANCE DATE. The Director may grant an extension of time for compliance with any notice or l Order whether pending or final, upon the Director's finding that substantial progress toward compliance has been made and that the public will not be adversely affected by the extension. i I ! An extension of time may be revoked by the Director if it is shown that the conditions at the time the extension was i� granted have changed, the Director determines that a party is not iperforming corrective actions as agreed, or if the extension 'i creates an adverse effect on the public. The date of revocation shall then be considered as the compliance date. I 15. 10. 018. CIVIL PENALTY. i A. In addition to any other sanction or remedial procedure which may be available, any person violating or failing jlto comply with any of the provisions of Title 15 shall be subject : to a cumulative penalty in the amount of Seventy-five Dollars Il' ($75. 00) per day for each violation from the date set for (: compliance until the order is complied with. II I 8 .I i 1� I B. The penalty imposed by this section shall be collected by civil action brought in the name of the City. The ' Director shall notify the City Attorney in writing of the name of '; any person subject to the penalty, and the City Attorney shall, ( with the assistance of the Director, take appropriate action to ; collect the penalty. C. The violator may show as full or partial mitigation of liability: 1. That the violation giving rise to the action !,, was caused by the willful act, or neglect, or abuse of another; , or I I 2 . That correction of the violation was commenced i promptly upon receipt of the notice thereof, but that full compliance within the time specified was prevented by inability ' to obtain necessary materials or labor, inability to gain access ! to the subject structure, or other condition or circumstance beyond the control of the defendant. 15. 10. 020. CRIMINAL PENALTIES. A. Any person violating or failing to comply with any , of the provisions of this Zoning Code and who has had a judgment entered against him or her pursuant to Section 15. 10. 018 or its ipredecessors within the past five (5) years shall be subject to ' criminal prosecution and upon conviction of a subsequent violation shall be fined in a sum not exceeding Five Thousand Dollars ($5, 000. 00) or be imprisoned in the City Jail for a term not exceeding one (1) year or be both fined and imprisoned. Each ; day of noncompliance with any of the provisions of this Zoning Code shall constitute a separate offense. 9 i i I i I B. A Criminal penalty, not to exceed Five Thousand H Dollars ($5, 000. 00) per occurrence, may be imposed: 'I! 1. For violations of Section 15. 10.002D; j j 2 . For any other violation of this Code for which i { corrective action is not possible; j 3 . For any willful, intentional, or bad faith ! failure or refusal to comply with the standards or requirements of this Code. ,i 15. 10.022 . ADDITIONAL RELIEF. The Director may seek ,Regal or equitable relief to enjoin any acts or practices and irestore or abate any condition which constitutes or will ( constitute a violation of this Zoning Code when civil or criminal I li ,; penalties are inadequate to effect compliance. j Section 3 . Severability. The provisions of this ! Ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The ;! invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, ;] section or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the !1application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Ordinance, or the i validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. Section 4 . 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. I DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR ; ATTEST: I BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK •I i 10 j !I i l I j I, t� JAPPROVED AS TO FORM: I I jROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY i IjPASSED the day of , 1992 i jAPPROVED the day of , 1992 ,'; PUBLISHED the day of , 1992 I i I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance !I No. , passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as i hereon indicated. (SEAL) BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK i i �i i ,i ZONE.OPD j !� 11 i ji KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JANUARY 27 , 1992 FILE NO: Zoning Code Enforcement Procedures - #ZCA-91-2 REOUEST: Amend the Zoning Code, Kent City Code (K. C.C. ) Title 15, and repeal all sections relating to Zoning Code violations and enforcement, eliminate criminal penalties for such violations, add a new Chapter 15 . 10 on the same subject and provide for civil penalties for violations; repeal K. C. C. Section 15 . 09 . 100 . I . GENERAL INFORMATION The Kent Zoning Code, Section 15 . 09 . 100, presently contains an • abbreviated procedure for the enforcement of violations. such violations are a criminal offense and the section provides for criminal penalties. Other cities have adopted civil penalties for Zoning Code violations and have found that imposition of a monetary penalty allows recovery of administrative costs of enforcement and is often an incentive to prompt compliance. A change to civil from criminal penalties would also make prosecution of Zoning Code violations more effective, since "knowing and wilful" commission of a violation is necessary to obtain a criminal conviction. This matter is brought forward at the request of the Kent Law Department. II. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS The proposed code amendment is considered a non-project action and is subject to review in light of the State Environmental Policy Act. An environmental review is currently in process (file: #ENV-92-4) . The final threshold determination will be completed prior to the public hearing conducted by the City Council. It is not anticipated that the proposal will have significant environmental impacts . III . CONSULTED DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES The following departments and agencies were advised of this proposal: City Administrator Building Official City Attorney Public Works Director Fire Chief Chief of Police In addition, notice of the application and the date of this public hearing was published in the local newspaper. Staff Report Zoning Code Enforcement Procedures - ZCA-91-2 IV. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW At the December 13 , 1991 Planning Commission workshop, Carol Morris, Assistant City Attorney, reviewed current zoning violation procedures and addressed the necessity for revised procedures. Please refer to the attached memo from the Law Department for a complete discussion of the proposal. V. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Planning Department staff recommends APPROVAL of the amendments to the Kent Zoning Code as proposed. CP/ljh: zca912 .rpt Enclosures 2 M E M O R A N D U M TO: CITY Or KENT PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Carol Morris, Assistant City Attorney DATE: December 9 , 1991 RE: Zoning Code Amendment re: criminal/civil penalties In December of 1990, the City Attorneys ' Office recommended that the penalty section in the Kent Zoning Code be amended. There were many reasons for this, but most prominent were the additional time, work and expense involved in proving a criminal violation of the zoning code before the courts. In a criminal case, a prosecutor must show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that a person knowingly and wilfully committed the particular violation. In a civil case, it must be shown, through a preponderance of the evidence, that a person committed the violation. Recently, our prosecutors have experienced an additional problem -- at least one judge in Aukeen District court, either because he is unsympathetic or unfamiliar with local land use regulation, expressed his ,'disinclination' to uphold criminal penalties for zoning code violations. This view may be more frequently held by judges as the judicial system becomes more overburdened. Other jurisdictions (Seattle, Bellevue, Edmonds, for example) have enacted ordinances which provide for civil fines for zoning, land use and building code regulations, with separate abatement processes for nuisance offenses such as overgrown vegetation and litter. A stiffer monetary penalty is sometimes imposed for life, safety regulations such as fire codes. Misdemeanor penalties are included to supplement the civil penalties ' (often imposed for repeat offenders within a certain time period) . The proposed zoning code amendment is modeled after the code enforcement section of the Seattle Land Use Code. The differences you will note from the existing Kent Zoning Code provisions are: 1. It contains a comprehensive description of what exactly constitutes a Zoning Code violation. (Section 15 . 10. 004 . ) 2 . It follows due process procedures in the notification of a violator of the particular violation, describing what is needed to correct, the time set for compliance and the penalties for non- compliance after that date. (15. 10. 006. ) Also, see the attached proposed form Notice of Violation, which can streamline the process through the insertion of a few bits of information. Memo to the Kent Planning Commission December 91 1991 Page two 3 . The amendment allows the Planning Department to consider certain factors in its calculation of the date set for compliance. (15. 10. 008 . ) (This date is significant, since penalties will accrue on a per day basis afterwards. ) 4 . The Notice of violation sent to the violator(s) is filed with the King County Department of Records and Elections, so that any property transfer will be with notice of the pending Zoning Code violation and enforcement action. 5. The present Zoning Code provisions allow posting of Stop Work Orders, but the proposed ordinance allows the Planning Department to issue Emergency Orders to require immediate compliance and provides for abatement by (and reimbursement to) the City if such compliance is not achieved. (15. 10 . 012 . ) 6 . It allows the Planning Department to hold informal hearings on any contested Notice of Violation, and specifies what action may be taken on the Notice by the hearing officer (a representative of the Planning Department) . After such hearing, an Order of the Director shall issue, informing the violator of such decision and the final date for compliance. (15. 10. 014 . ) 7 . It allows the Planning Department to extend a date set for compliance. (15 . 10. 016. ) 8 . As currently drafted, the amendment provides for a fine of $75. 00 per day after the date set for compliance. (This is the fine for a land use code violation in Seattle. ) The fine can be administratively collected by the Planning Department after compliance has been achieved. Other cities have found that a stiff monetary penalty is often a quick incentive to compliance, and their fines are designed to have a significant economic impact on the violator. (The City of San Diego imposes a fine of $2 , 500 per day per violation, except that the maximum civil penalty cannot exceed $l00, 000 for any related series of violations. ) 9 . If the Planning Department is unable to either collect the fine, achieve compliance or both, it can refer the case to the City Attorneys ' Office for further action. In the proposed ordinance, the City may request civil or criminal penalties. Abatement actions may also be pursued, and the cost of such abatement will be reimbursed to the City. Memo to the Kent Planning commission December 9 , 1991 Page three The proposed ordinance outlines procedures by which the Department can informally and administratively enforce and collect penalties, which penalties can be used to reimburse the City for the costs of its code enforcement efforts. The notice procedures afford a violator his/her due process rights, and additionally, inform any purchaser of property of any pending code enforcement actions. one final benefit of the proposed ordinance is discussed in the first paragraph of this memo -- the efficiency of enforcing civil fines as opposed to criminal, and the preference of this remedy by the courts. Attachment cc: Paul Mann, City Council Jim Harris, Planning Roger Lubovich, Law THE CITY OF RENT FIRE DEPARTMENT 400 WEST GOWE KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 (206) 859-3360 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Date: Fire Dept. File No. Addressee: Address: SUBJECT: Premises known as (insert street address here) which location is described as follows: (insert legal description here) As a result of a recent inspection by _(insert inspector' s name) on _(date)_, notice is hereby given that the subject property and/or persons) responsible for that property are in violation of the Kent Fire Code, Kent City Code Title 13 , and the Uniform Fire Code (UFC) (as adopted by Ordinance 2663 and codified at KCC 13 . 02 . 010) Section (insert section number relating to violation) Corrective action by the responsible person(s) is required no later than _(insert date set for compliance) The specific violation and necessary corrections are as follows: (insert detailed description of code violation and what needs to be done to correct . ) ' Any person, firm or corporation failing to comply with a Notice of Violation within the time specified shall be deemed guilty. of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be punished by a fine not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500 . 00) or by imprisonment in the City Jail for not more than one hundred eighty (180) days, or by both fine and imprisonment. Each separate day or any portion thereof during which any violation continues shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense. Any communications should be addressed to the inspector whose signature appears below. The inspector may be reached by phone at 859-3360. Please call the inspector for an inspection as soon as the corrections are complete. Sincerely, N A Fire Chief By � �' , rv: �D¢3c��a�tsnu�s Rz €1,.6ar ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington, relating to land use and zoning, amending the Zoning Code, Kent City Code (K.C.C. ) Title 15, to repeal all sections relating to Zoning Code violations and enforcement, eliminating criminal penalties for such violations, adding a new Chapter 15.10 on the same subject and providing for civil penalties for violations; repealing K.C.C. Section 15.09.100. WHEREAS, the Kent Zoning Code presently contains an abbreviated procedure for the enforcement of violations, makes such violations a criminal offense and provides for criminal penalties; and WHEREAS, other cities have adopted civil penalties for zoning code violations and have found that imposition of a monetary penalty allows recovery of administrative costs of enforcement and is often an incentive to prompt compliance; and WHEREAS, a change to civil from criminal penalties would also make prosecution of zoning code violations more effective, since "knowing and wilful" commission of a violation is necessary to obtain a criminal conviction; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Kent Zoning Code (Ordinances 2404 and 1827) , Section 15.09.100 of the Kent City Code is hereby repealed. Section 2. The Kent Zoning Code is hereby amended to add the following new chapter: CHAPTER 15. 10 ENFORCEMENT OF THE ZONING CODE 15.10.002. VIOLATIONS. A. It is a violation of the Kent Zoning Code, KCC Title 15, for any person to initiate or maintain or cause to be initiated or maintained the use of any structure, land or property within the City of Kent without first obtaining the permits or authorizations required for the use by Title 15. B. It is a violation of Title 15 for any person to use, construct, locate, or demolish any structure, land or property within the City of Kent in any manner that is not permitted by the terms of any permit or authorization issued pursuant to Title 15, provided that the terms or conditions are explicitly stated on the permit or the approved plans. C. It is a violation of Title 15 to remove or deface any sign, notice, complaint or order required by or posted in accordance with Title 15 or Title 12. 12A of the Kent City Code. D. It is a violation of Title 15 to misrepresent any material fact in any application, plans or other information submitted to obtain any land use authorization. E. It is a violation of Title 15 for anyone to fail to comply with the requirements of Title 15. 15.10.004. DUTY TO ENFORCE. A. It shall be the duty of the Director of Planning to enforce Title 15. The Director may call upon the police, fire, health or other appropriate City department to assist in enforcement. B. Upon presentation of proper credentials, the Director or duly authorized representative of the Director may, with the consent of the owner or occupier of a building or premises, or pursuant to a lawfully issued inspection warrant, enter at reasonable times any building or premises subject to the consent or warrant to perform the duties imposed by the Zoning Code, or, Title 15 of the Kent City Code. C. The Zoning Code shall be enforced for the benefit of the health, safety and welfare of the general public, and not for the benefit of any particular person or class of persons. D. It is the intent of this Zoning Code to place the obligatic of complying with its requirements upon the owner, occupier or other person responsible for the condition of the land and buildings within the scope of this Code. 2 E. No provision of or term used in this Code is intended to impose any duty upon the City or any of its officers or employees which would subject them to damages in a civil action. 15.10.006. INVESTIGATION AND NOTICE OF VIOLATION. A. The Director .or his/her representative shall investigate any structure or use which the Director reasonably believes does not comply with the standards and requirements of this Zoning Code. B. If after investigation the Director determines that the standards or requirements have been violated, the Director shall serve a notice of violation on the owner, tenant or other person responsible for the condition. The notice of violation shall. state separately each standard or requirement violated, shall state what corrective action, if any, is necessary to comply with the standards or requirements; and shall set a reasonable time for compliance. The notice shall state that any subsequent violations may result in criminal prosecution as provided in Section 15. 10.020. In the event of violations of the standards or requirements of the Kent Shoreline I-taster Program, Chapter , the required corrective action shall include, if appropriate, but shall not be limited to, mitigating measures such as restoration of the area and replacement of damaged or destroyed trees. C. The notice shall be served upon the owner, tenant or other person responsible for the condition by personal service, registered mail, or certified mail with return receipt requested, addressed to the last known address of such person. If, after a reasonable search and reasonable efforts are made to obtain service, the whereabouts of the person or persons is unknown or service cannot be accomplisho%i and the Director makes an affidavit to that effect, then service of the notice upon such person or persons may be made by: 1. Publishing the notice once each week for two (2) consecutive weeks in the city' s Official Newspaper; and 2. Mailing a copy of the notice to each person named on the notice of violation by first class mail to the last known address if known, or if unknown, to the address of the property involved in the proceedings. D. A copy of the notice shall be posted at a conspicuous place on the property, unless posting the notice is not physically possible. 3 E. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to limit or preclude any action or proceeding pursuant to Section 15.10.010 or Section 15. 10.012 . F. The Director may mail, or cause to be delivered to all residential and/or nonresidential rental units in the structure or post at a conspicuous place on the property, a notice which informs each recipient or resident about the notice of violation, stop Work Order or Emergency Order and the applicable requirements and procedure�i. G. A notice or an Order may be amended at any time in order to: 1. Correct clerical errors, or 2. Cite additional authority for a stated violation. 15.10.008. TIME TO COMPLY. A. When calculating a reasonable time for compliance, the Director shall consider the following criteria: 1. The type and degree of violation cited in the notice; 2. The stated intent, if any, of a responsible party to take steps to comply; 3. The procedural requirements for obtaining a permit to carry out corrective action; 4. The complexity of the correction action, including seasonal considerations, construction requirements and the legal prerogatives of landlords and tenants; and 5. Any other circumstances beyond the control of the responsible party. B. Unless a request for review before the Director is made in accordance with Section 15.10.014, the notice of violation shall become the final order of the Director. A copy of the notice shall be filed with the Department of Records and Elections of King County. The Director may choose not to file a copy of the notice or Order if the notice or Order is directed only to a responsible person other than the owner of the property. 15 .10.010. STOP WORK ORDER. Whenever a continuing violation of this Code will materially impair the Director' s ability to secure compliance with this Code, or when the continuing violation threatens the health or safety of the public, the Director may issue a Stop Work Order specifying the violation and prohibiting any work or other activity at the site. A failure 4 to comply with a Stop Work Order shall constitute a violation of this Zoning Code. 15 .10.012. E24ERGENCY ORDER. Whenever any use or activity in violation of this Code threatens the health and safety of the occupants of the premises or any member of the public, the Director may issue an Emergency Order directing that the use or activity be discontinued and the condition causing the threat to the public health and safety be corrected. The Emergency order shall specify the time for compliance and shall be posted in a conspicuous place on the property, if posting is physically possible. A failure to comply with an Emergency Order shall constitute a violation of this Zoning Code. Any condition described in the Emergency Order which is not corrected within the time specified is hereby declared to be a public nuisance and the Director is authorized to abate such nuisance summarily by such means as may be available. The cost of such abatement shall be recovered from the owner or person responsible or both in the manner provided by law. 15.10.010. REVIEW BY THE DIRECTOR. A. Any person significantly affected by or interested in a notice of violation issued by the Director pursuant to Section 15. 10.006 may obtain a review of the notice by requesting such review within fifteen (15) days after service of the notice. When the last day of the period so computed is a Saturday, Sunday or federal or Citv holiday, the period shall run until five p.m. (5:00 p.m. ) on the next business day. The request shall be in writing, and upon receipt of the request, the Director shall notify any persons served the notice of violation and the complainant, if any, of the date, time and place set for the revic%,, �,,hich shall be not less than ten (10) nor more than twenty (20) days after the request is received, unless otherwise agreed by all persons served with the notice of violation. Before the date set for the review, any person significantly affected by or interested in the notice of violation may submit any written material to the Director for consideration at the review. B. The review will consist of an informal review meeting held at the Department. The Director and/or a designated Planning Department representative who is familiar with the case and the applicable ordinances will attend. The Director or Director' s representative will explain the reasons for the issuance of the notice acid will listen to any additional 5 information presented by the persons attending. At or after the review, the Director may: 1. Sustain the notice of violation; 2. Withdraw the notice of violation; 3. Continue the review to a date certain for receipt of additional information; or 4. Modify the notice of violation, which may include an extension of the compliance date. C. The Director shall issue an order of the Director containing the the decision within seven (7) days of the date of the completion of the review and shall cause the same to be mailed by regular first class mail to the person or persons named on the notice of violation, mailed to the complainant, if possible, and filed with the Department of Records and Elections of King County. 15.10.016. EXTENSION OF COMPLIANCE DATE. The Director may grant an extension of time for compliance with any notice or Order whether pending or final, upon the Director' s finding that substantial progress toward compliance has been made and that the public will not be adversely affected by the extension. An extension of time may be revoked by the Director if it is shown that the conditions at the time the extension was granted have changed, the Director determines that a party is not performing corrective actions as agreed, or if the extension creates an adverse effect on the public. The date of revocation shall then be considered as the compliance date. 15 .10.018. CIVIL PENALTY. A. In addition to any other sanction or remedial procedure which may be available, any person violating or failing to comply with any of the provisions of Title 15 shall be subject to a cumulative penalty in the amount of Seventy-five Dollars ($75.00) per day for each violation from the date set for compliance until the order is complied with. B. The penalty imposed by this section shall be collected by civil action brought in the name of the City. The Director shall notify the City Attorney in writing of the name of any person subject to the penalty, anL the City Attorney shall, with the assistance of the Director, take appropriate action to collect the penalty. 6 C. The violator may show as full or partial mitigation of liability: 1. That the violation giving rise to the action was caused by the willful act, or neglect, or abuse of another; or 2. That correction of the violation was commenced promptly upon receipt of the notice thereof, but that full compliance within the time specified was prevented by inability to obtain necessary materials or labor, inability to gain access to the subject structure, or other condition or circumstance beyond the control of the defendant. 15.10.020. CRIMINAL PENALTIES. A. Any person violating or failing to comply with any of the provisions of this Zoning Code and who has had a judgment entered against him or her pursuant to Section 15.10.018 or its predecessors within the past five (5) years shall be subject to criminal prosecution and upon conviction of a subsequent violation shall be fined in a sum not exceeding Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000.00) or be imprisoned in the City Jail for a term not exceeding one (1) year or be both fined and imprisoned. Each day of noncompliance with any of the provisions of this Zoning Code shall constitute a separate offense. B. A Criminal penalty, no,. to exceed Five Thousand Dollars ($5,oO0.00) per occurrence, may be imposed: 1. For violations of Section 15.10.0O2D; 2. For any other violation of this Code for which corrective action is not possible; 3. For any willful, intentional, or bad faith failure or refusal to comply with the standards or requirements of this Code. 15.10.022. ADDITIONAL RELIEF. The Director may seek legal or equitable relief to enjoin any acts or practices and abate any condition which constitutes or will constitute a violation of this Zoning Code when civil or criminal penalties are inadequate to effect compliance. Section 3 Severability. The provisions of this Ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances. 7 KENT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES January 27 , 1992 The meeting of the Kent Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Antley at 7: 00 P.M. January 27 , 1992 in the Kent City Hall, City Council Chambers. PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Traa\�,ntley, Chair Linda Martinez, Vice Chair Gwen Dahie Christophe\Grant Albert Haylor\,\ Edward Heineman, Jr. Kent Morrill \ Raymond Ward PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Greg Greenstreet PLANNING STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: \ James P. Harris, Planning Director\ Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager Carol Proud, Senior Planner Anne Watanabe, Planner Leslie Herbst, Recording Secretary KENT CITY STAFF PRESENT: Carol Morris, Law Department APPROVAL OF NOVEMBER 25 1992 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES Commissioner Martinez MOVED that the minutes of the November 25, 199i meeting be approved as presented. Commissioner Ward SECOND�D the motion. Motion carried. ZONING CODE ENFORCEMENT - ZCA-91-2 Carol Proud of the Planning Department presented the staff report. The Zoning Code currently has abbreviated procedures for enforcement of violations. At present the violations are a criminal offense and the section provides for criminal penalties. Other cities who have adopted civil penalties for Zoning Code violations have found that the imposition of monetary fees allows recovery of administration . costs for enforcement and is an incentive to prompt compliance. A change to civil penalties from criminal penalties would make prosecution of Zoning Code violations more effective. Kent Planning Commission January 27 , 1992 The proposal is in the process of going through environmental review which should be complete before the public hearing with the City Council. Planning Department staff is recommending approval. Carol Morris of the Law Department stated they have had problems getting judges in district court to be serious . about code enforcement. In her opinion, this is because we have criminal penalties. The best way to counter this problem is to have civil penalties which are more amenable to the type of problem. The proposed amendment is modeled after the code enforcement section of the Seattle Land Use Code. An inspector would visit a piece of property, determine if there was a violation and, if so, write a Notice of Violation. The information is then entered into a computer and the inspector sets a date for compliance which would be a reasonable length of time in which the violation could be rectified. After the date for compliance has passed, penalties start to accrue per day. The violation could also be recorded against the property with the Department of Records and Elections. This would prevent the property from being transferred without notice of the violation and enforcement action. After someone receives a Notice of Violation, they can bring the property into compliance, work with the Planning Department or ask for an informal appeal hearing. After a hearing is held, the Planning Director or his representative can extend the date for compliance, affirm the order or take other appropriate action. If no hearing is requested, the Notice of Violation would be final. Once the date for compliance is reached, the Planning Department can notify the owner that they must comply or can turn it over to the City Attorney's office which would start a civil action to collect the penalties. We would also retain the option of imposing criminal penalties for more malicious violations. Commissioner Martinez asked for clarification of the section which says the Director may choose not to file a copy of the notice. Ms. Morris said there are circumstances which would take less time to bring into compliance than it would take for the process of recording. Commissioner Ward MOVED to close the public hearing. Commissioner Martinez SECONDED the motion. 2 Kent Planning Commission January 27 , 1992 Commissioner Martinez MOVED to approve the ordinance for forwarding to City Council. Commissioner Ward SECONDED the motion. Motion carried. CERTIFICATES OF REAPPOINTMENT Chair Antley presented Certificates of Reappointment to Commissioners Martinez and Grant./ CRITICAL AREAS - ZCA-91-3 AND CPA-91-1 Fred Satterstrom explained that the State of Washington Growth Management \Act requires that all cities and counties adopt development regulations for critical areas which include wetlands, aquifer recharge areas, f/looded areas and geologically hazardous areas that preclude land/uses or development that is incompatible with their cons eryat ion ior preservation. The following are some of the goals spelled\out;by the Act: 1. Encourage eco d 1c development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of the state and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth all within the capacities of the state' s natural resources, public services and public facklities. 2 . Private'/property shall no be taken for public use without just compensation having bee made. Property rights of land owners shall be protected f' arbitrary and discriminatory action. 3 . Encourage the retention of open space and development of recreational opportunities. Conserve fish and wildlife habitat, increase access to natural r source lands and water and develop parks. i 4 . % Protect the environment and enhance the s ate' s high quality of life including air and water quality and\the availability % of water. A lot of the planning mandated by this Act will have to conform to 4nd further the goals specified in the Act itself. That',includes �he development of critical area regulations and the proposed J etland ordinance. Balancing economic development goals with '" ose of private property rights and the environmental issues is t going to be an easy task. 3 h r ti ,.� .r i _., , � 7 2 1 i `../' .. �..._l ; a y: i q _�� CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS A. R E P O R T S i A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT / B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE D. PLANNING COMMITTEE E. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE YF. PARKS COMMITTEE l G. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE FEBRUARY 4, 1992 PRESENT: JIM WHITE ED CHOW PAUL MANN ED WHITE JIM BENNETT MR. & MRS. RUST GARY GILL CARLITA DREBLOW ROGER LUBOVICH STEVE DIJULIO In addition there were approximately twenty others in attendance. Jim White introduced the two new members of the Committee. Solid Waste Ordinance Gary Gill commented this updated our existing solid waste ordinance. Steve DiJulio stated the ordinance deals with three principal elements. King County requires all participants in the King County program to implement yard waste programs. In the event they are not, an additional rate increase for solid waste could go into effect September 1, 1992 . Whenever the City adopts a yard waste program, this ordinance deletes yard waste from the permissible waste stream. A yard waste program will be coming before you in the next three to six months. The second issue addressed by this ordinance is waste stream control - mandatory service element. It has long been the practice of the City to require and mandate service for solid waste. There have been questions and enforcement difficulties that are clarified by this ordinance. The third aspect is to authorize liens on property for which there is delinquent payment for utility services. This is already in place for the other utilities but had not been implemented for solid waste utility to date. The City Is two contractors have had difficulty in collecting for services provided and have requested that the City make provisions to allow the private garbage companies to place liens upon private properties for non-payment. DiJulio also pointed out a change that should be made on page 6 of the ordinance deleting the words "and includes refuse" in the definition of Solid Waste. Additionally, a clause will be added which makes violations of this ordinance a civil penalty. Jim White asked who would collect or enforce a lien. DiJulio explained the City Attorney' s office would authorize the contractor to pursue the lien. The contractor would bear the expense and responsibility of the lien. Jim White asked if this were consistent with the water and sewer utility. DiJulio responded that it is with even tighter controls. Public Works Committee February 4 , 1992 Page 2 Addressing the yard waste issue, Jim White asked what happens in the interim since this ordinance mandates the separation of yard waste from solid waste but we do not have a yard waste program in place. DiJulio responded that the citizens can continue to put yard waste into the solid waste containers until we implement the program. Don Rust asked if there would be a fee to every resident of Kent and would every resident be required to participate and will there be exceptions for those who compost. Gill explained that the program is not developed and those are issues that must be determined. Paul Mann moved that the ordinance be approved with the changes in the definition on page 6 of the ordinance and the addition of the civil penalty clause. The Committee unanimously recommended approval. Jim White urged staff to develop the yard waste program as quickly as possible as well as the rules by which the program will be administered. DiJulio noted for the Committee that within the next couple of weeks we should be completing the contracts with the haulers. Transportation Improvement Board Grants - 272nd/277th Corridor - 192nd/196th Corridor Gary Gill explained that we had recently received notification from WSDOT that they have approved $225, 000 for predesign of the 272nd/277th Corridor project. Gill added that we have already budgeted the matching funds for this grant. The predesign phase includes completion of the Environmental Impact Statement, preliminary engineering design and development of more accurate cost estimates of the preferred alternative. WSDOT has also approved $3 , 044 , 950 for the preliminary design and right of way acquisition of the 192nd/196th Corridor from WVH to EVH. Gill explained that the matching funds for the 192nd/196th Corridor would be generated by the street utility. Matching funds are already budgeted for the 272nd/277th Corridor design phase. Should the street utility not be approved, we would have to return the grant. White asked that staff explore all possibilities of funding and not just the street utility. Jim White asked about the alignments. Gill explained the alignment for the 192nd/196th Corridor is pretty much determined, following the existing 196th right of way. The alignment of the 272nd/277th corridor will come about as part of the final EIS. The comment period on the EIS is over February 15. Once the comments are all in, we will respond to the comments, develop the Final EIS, and bring a recommendation to the Council. Paul Mann asked about any consideration for connecting to Highway 18 . Gill explained that is part of the long range plan that the County is looking at. The Public Works Committee February 4 , 1992 Page 3 County also participated on the Technical Advisory Committee for our project. Jim White asked the attorney when Council could review the proposed alignments of the Corridor. Roger Lubovich responded that Council could look at it once the final EIS is published. Jim White asked if before that time could Council hear input from concerned citizens and unofficially review the material. Roger Lubovich commented he would recommend that at this point Council should not be making contact regarding the project since it appears likely they will be having to rule on it in a quasi-judicial process. Jim White alluded to a citizen' s meeting that is scheduled for Wednesday evening. Gary Gill stated that staff will be in attendance. The Committee unanimously recommended approval for the mayor to sign the grant agreements and for the budgets to be established. Left Turn Lane - Smith and Second - Kent Library Jim White stated this item was placed on the agenda as a result of a letter from Ms. Dreblow who is secretary for the Kent Library Board. Gary Gill explained that when the new Library was going through the SEPA process a left turn off Smith Street onto Second was discussed. It was determined that we would wait to allow time for the circulation patterns to develop after construction was completed. At that time we could address specific issues. As a condition of approval of the Library, King County Library Board executed an agreement to pay for the left turn at such time as the warrants were there to substantiate the need. The left turn lane was originally tied to the City Is planned intersection improvements at 4th and Smith that we have included in the 1994 TIP. If the Library Board wishes to move the left turn at 2nd and Smith ahead, we could try to incorporate it into our Central Avenue Improvement project that is currently in design. Ed White will determine if the intersection meets the warrants for a left turn lane. Responding to Jim White 's question, Gill stated that the County would fund the improvements per their agreement. Jim White asked if we could consider straightening out the "dog- leg" on Smith at the same time by possibly taking the right of way to the north and what that would do to the project from a cost standpoint. Ed White stated that we had reviewed that at the time the library project was being reviewed. It involves relocating three businesses and acquisition of additional right of way. Jim White asked for a financial analysis. This item will be brought back to the Committee at their March 3rd meeting. Public Works Committee February 4 , 1992 Page 4 Parking Jim White commented about the number of cars parked on 3rd Avenue in front of the church and those businesses on 3rd. He surmised they were mostly City employees. He' s concerned about the impact that has on the businesses. He requested Ed White to look at what can be done, determine if the City needs to acquire property for a parking lot or what other measures can be taken. Gary Gill added there were other issues that had to be included in such a review such as the requests we have had for vacation of Saar and 3rd and the Mayor' s program for downtown revitalization. Ed White stated that two larger issues - the Growth Management and Transportation Demand Management legislation - dictate that the City develop parking policies not only for downtown but for the entire City. He suggested that we look at the entire problem rather than just piecemealing. Bill Doolittle suggested the City use the empty parking stalls in the Centennial Building parking garage or open it to the public. Jim White reminded Mr. Doolittle that the Centennial Building and its garage are privately owned and the City would have to rent any parking in that structure. At Bill Doolittle' s request, Jim White asked that Ed Chow contact the owner of the Centennial Building and inquire about the possibility of using additional parking in the Centennial Building garage. Staff will present interim solutions to the Public Works Committee at their March 3rd meeting. (NOTE: This was later changed at the City Council meeting to allow staff to study the entire downtown parking problem in conjunction with the Downtown Revitalization program which will be ready for Council review in the early summer of 1992 . ) Russ Stringham suggested that City employees use the lot at 4th and Smith. Street Occupation Ordinance Ed White indicated that the decals for the signs have not been received to date. (NOTE: the decals were delivered in the afternoon mail on 2/4/92) . A letter has been drafted that will be sent to the businesses in the City informing them of the process to follow to obtain a permit. That draft is in the Mayor ' s office for approval. Jim White reiterated that we should not be enforcing the ordinance until we are able to issue permits. Mike Spence addressed the Committee regarding the process as it relates to real estate signs. He presented a suggested modification of the ordinance to define real estate signs as on or off premise signs and allowing one on premise sign per street frontage and up to four off premise signs. Gary Gill clarified that there were some misunderstandings on part of staff on interpretation of the ordinance but it has always been the intent to administer the Public Works Committee February 4, 1992 Page 5 program as presented to the Committee. Off-premise directional real estate signs will be allowed as long as they are placed in a safe location and do not obstruct site distance. Gill continued that some of the signs that were recently confiscated were in landscaped medians or islands in the middle of the street thus affecting site distances. Steve Dowell suggested the existing ordinance be eliminated and an attempt be made to develop something new. After much further discussion on the issue, it was determined that Jim White, the City Attorney, Mr. Spence, Public Works Director, City Engineer, and Transportation Engineer would meet on Tuesday, February it to discuss the issue further, consider the modification presented by Mr. Spence, further define "apartment for rent" signs and bring back the recommendations to the Committee on February 18 . Jim White clarified for Ed White that staff is not to implement the ordinance until these items are determined.