HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 04/07/1992 . ..........
X:
iM
City of Kent
X.
City Council Meeting
f� Agenda
r$�E
�g }� w
CITY OF
Rye
RR
ff
Mayor Dan Kelleher
Council Members
X,
Judy Woods, President
Jim Bennett Paul Mann
Oi r
X.
Christi Houser Leona Orr
Jon Johnson Jim White
X:
April 7, 1992
Office of the City Clerk
SUMMARY AGENDA
KENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING
y April 7 , 1992
uT Council Chambers
f= - � �� 7 : 00 p.m.
MAYOR: Dan Kelleher COUNCILMEMBERS: Judy Woods, President
Jim Bennett Christi Houser Jon Johnson
Paul Mann Leona Orr Jim White
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
1. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
4k. Employee of the Month
2 . PUBLIC HEARINGS
JA. 1993 Local Community Development Block Grant Program
Policies
3 . CONSENT CALENDAR
�A. Minutes
,/B. Bills
JC. Human Services Commission Appointment
JD. LID 335 - 77th Avenue Improvements - Release Retainage
J Garrison Creek Short Plat - Bill of Sale
7. WSDOT Agreement for SR 181
4 . OTHER BUSINESS
Street Utility - Ordinance V �L�,�
B. ' Youth at Risk Program Coordinator Position
Business License Ordinance J- `-
Business License Fee Schedule Resolution 1 i
Hearing Examiner Ordinance 1
Office of Housing and Commu ity Services - Ordinance
1992 CDBG Entitlement
5. BIDS
None
6. CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
7 . REPORTS
8. ADJOURNMENT
NOTE: A copy of the full agenda packet is available in the City
Clerk's Office and the Kent Library.
An explanation of the agenda format is given on the back of
this page.
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
Citizens wishing to address the Council will, at this time,
make known the subject of interest, so all may be properly
heard.
A) Employee of the Month
c �
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 7. 1992
Category Public Hearings
1. SUBJECT: 1993 LOCAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
PROGRAM POLICIES
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This public hearing will consider the
adoption of the proposed 1993 Local Community Development Block
Grant Program Policies as recommended by the City Council
Planning Committee.
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo and proposed CDBG 1993 Local Program Policies
and City Council Planning Committee minutes 3/17/92
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Planning Committee (unanimous)
(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 (�" )1i'ti moves, Councilmember �C Eti-r� seconds
adopt the proposed 1993 Local CDBG Program Policies as
recommended by the City Council Planning Committee.
DISCUSSION• ff
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 201
CITY Of
CITY OF KENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
MEMORANDUM
April 7 , 1992
MEMO TO: MAYOR DAN KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: PALICE
SHOBE, PLANNER
SUBJECT: 1993 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
PROGRAM POLICIES
The development of Local Program Policies is an annual federal
requirement for the receipt of Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) funds. It is necessary to readopt Kent' s CDBG Program
Policies each year. The attached draft of Kent' s 1993 CDBG Local
Program Policies is a description of our local strategies for the
use of CDBG funds. These draft policies form the basis for
decisions pertaining to allocation of CDBG funds in the City of
Kent.
The Human Services Commission reviewed the Public (Human) Services
Policy at their February meeting and recommends adoption of the
policy as proposed in the draft document.
The proposed 1993 policies are virtually identical to those adopted
for the 1992 program year. The City of Kent participated in the
Consortium-wide Emergency Shelter System for the first time in
1992 . Adoption of the proposed 1993 program policies will
demonstrate continued commitment by the City to this regional
funding program.
The City Council Planning Committee reviewed and approved these
policies at their March 17 , 1992 meeting.
Recommended Action
1. Adopt the proposed CDBG 1993 City of Kent Local Program
Policies as presented.
ALS/mp:als: c:\users\doc\cdbg\93polic.cc
cc: James P. Harris, Planning Director
Enclosure
PROPOSED
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
1993 LOCAL PROGRAM POLICIES
CITY OF KENT
I. INTRODUCTION
The City of Kent's 1993, Local Program Policies summarize the
City' s housing and community development needs and outlines
policies and priorities for use of Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) funds. The City of Kent receives federal CDBG
funds through a county-wide consortium, therefore these Local
Polices are also part of the 1993 King County CDBG Consortium
Policy Plan.
II. BACKGROUND
The City of Kent, incorporated in 1890, was predominately an
agricultural area for many years. Today Kent has adopted a
suburban character as a result of the rapid growth in Seattle
and the Puget Sound area. The City' s residential character is
varied and divided greatly by natural topography. The
residential areas in the valley, clustered mostly around the
downtown, consist primarily of single family homes built in
the early to mid 1900s. Large multifamily dwellings have
developed on the outskirts of the downtown surrounding these
older established neighborhoods.
The east and west hills of Kent have seen significant growth
of single family and multifamily dwelling residential in the
later half of this decade. The east hill continues to develop
rapidly as more land is annexed into the City. The valley
floor, outside of the downtown has developed with primarily
industrial , commercial, and retail uses.
The City of Kent occupies roughly nineteen square miles, with
a population of approximately 39 , 650. According to the most
recent census estimates (1990) , approximately 27 percent of
the city' s population are 19 years or younger, and 13 percent
are seniors (55 years or older) . According to 1980 Census
data, over 40 percent of the city' s residents are estimated to
be of low and moderate income (1990 income data unavailable) .
In the past, low and moderate income households were
concentrated in and around the original townsite, which
includes the Central Business District. According to recent
studies, pockets of low and moderate income families in both
owner occupied and rental dwellings are scattered on the east
and west hills as well .
1
III. NEEDS ASSESSMENT
A. Local Needs
The primary purpose of Kent' s CDBG program is to address the
needs of the City's low and moderate income residents and to
follow the related goals, objectives and policies of the Kent
comprehensive Plan. In most cases, project eligibility will
be determined by the clients served. In order to determine
eligibility for area wide projects, the most recent census
data available will be evaluated by census block.
B. Regional Needs
The City of Kent realizes that there are regional needs that
cut across all jurisdictions within the Consortium.
Currently, the City is addressing some of these needs by
funding two regional agencies which provide emergency housing
and services to low and moderate income residents and a sub-
regional health care facility. Theses programs. . currently
receive money from the City of Kent, the County, and
neighboring cities.
In the 1992 program year, new federal guidelines for
calculating the CDBG public service ceiling were adopted.
Program income is now added to the annual entitlement prior to
calculating the fifteen percent public (human) services
ceiling. This created additional public service capability
for the Consortium but did not increase total CDBG
entitlement.
In 1992 , the Consortium Cities decided to dedicate a portion
of the additional public services ceiling to a Consortiumwide
emergency shelter system. Funds previously allocated to
Consortium cities for capital projects may be allocated to
this regional public services pot designated for emergency
shelter programs. The funds will be distributed to shelter
programs throughout the county. Emergency shelter programs
have been targeted because homeless individuals do not often
have strong associations with one jurisdiction.
Program income will vary significantly from year; therefore,
the public services entitlement will vary. In order to create
stable funding for emergency shelters only a predictable level
will be allocated each year for shelter programs. The
remaining funding will be designated to regional "one-time
only" projects. Allocations will be balanced between south
county and east county. Examples of one-time-only regional
projects include: a new van for a regional multi-service
center or TTD phones for the hearing impaired. In the past,
one time projects had difficulty obtaining local funding
because on-going programs are preferred. The one-time-only
2
program alleviates some of this burden.
The City of Kent supported this new regional funding program
designed to fund emergency shelter and one-time-only projects
in 1992 and will continue its support in 1993 . The City
acknowledges that this new funding pot can not fund the entire
regional shelter system. However, the Consortiumwide emergency
shelter system is a step toward regional thinking in the
provision of public services. In the event that future
mechanisms are developed to address regional/Consort iumwide
needs, the City will consider further contributing its fair
share for programs which demonstrate a benefit for the
citizens of Kent.
IV. PROJECT CATEGORIES AND POLICIES
The seven categories listed below are priorities the City of
Kent has identified for their 1993 Community Development Block
Grant program. Project applications which address one or more
of the following goals are encouraged.
Housing
Projects will be encouraged which lead toward preservation or
expansion of housing occupied by low and moderate income
residents of Kent. The City of Kent ' s Housing Repair Services
Program should be continued, for it addresses the needs of low
and moderate income home owners. Emergency and transitional
housing projects which currently serve homeless or special
needs persons are emphasized, however new programs which
provide shelter or permanent housing shall be considered.
Public (Human) Services
Projects should provide essential public services to low and
moderate income persons. This may include programs which
provide health care, counseling and therapy, child care,
family support, support to seniors and persons with
disabilities, job training, transportation, emergency &
transitional housing and support services, and other services
that meet demonstrated needs.
Streets Walkways and Architectural Barriers
Pedestrian walkways, free of impediments to access are
important in neighborhoods where a large number of children,
elderly, and persons with disabilities reside. The following
types of physical improvements are encouraged in eligible
neighborhoods throughout Kent: projects that improve
pedestrian circulation and safety; projects that link
residential areas to the downtown or to community facilities
and services; projects that help implement or complement the
3
Downtown Improvement Plan; projects that improve storm
drainage conditions where there exists a threat to the health
or safety of the residents.
Many existing publicly or privately owned housing units and
commercial buildings and other non-residential structures do
not currently meet federal barrier free standards. Any
project which removes architectural barriers which restrict
mobility of persons with disabilities or the elderly are also
encouraged.
Community Facilities
Past CDBG funding has contributed to a number of community
facilities used by the city' s low and moderate income
population. Past projects include design of the Kent Senior
Center; acquisition of a youth services facility; acquisition
of a facility to house an agency providing low income and
elderly persons emergency services; and construction of the
South King County Community Health Center. Funding requests
may be considered to assist in design, acquisition, and/or
construction or other facilities benefiting Kent' s low and
moderate income, elderly, or disabled residents.
Parks
Park projects to be encouraged are those which serve low and
moderate income neighborhoods and/or other target populations,
i. e. , handicapped residents. Parks projects may include
rehabilitation of existing park facilities and establishment
of new facilities, for which funds are not elsewhere
available.
Historic Preservation
Kent' s inventory of historic structures locates a number of
potentially significant buildings within Kent. Rehabilitation
of publicly or privately owned structures is an eligible use
of CDBG funds, provided that the project meets one of the
national objectives. Projects which serve low and moderate
income residents will be favored.
Planning and Administration
Funds will be used for staff support to plan and manage Kent' s
CDBG program and to identify and assess the needs in the
community. This will ensure adequate project implementation,
fiscal control , planning, and contract compliance to ensure
CDBG funds provide maximal benefit to low and moderate income
residents in Kent.
4
Additional Evaluation Criteria
The following criteria may be considered in addition to the
categorical priorities listed above:
1. Feasibility, timeliness, urgency.
2 . Compliance with the policies outlined in the Kent
Comprehensive Plan. These policies include needs for
housing and other physical improvements, as well as needs
for critical human services.
3 . Compliance with the federal objective to reduce slum and
blight.
4 . The extent to which the needs of very low income citizens
or special populations, including abused children,
battered spouses, elderly persons, handicapped persons,
homeless persons, illiterate persons, or migrant farm
workers, are addressed.
5 . The extent to which regional needs are addressed.
City of Kent Planning Department
March 9 , 1992
5
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MARCH 17, 1992
PAGE 5
the sign regulations section of the zoning code. Mr. Satterstrom
talked with Mr. Rust and agreed that Mr. Rust and Russ Stringham,
owner of the Hungry Bear, will look at the applicable City
ordinances. Mr. Rust and Mr. Stringham will then meet with Jim
Harris and Fred Satterstrom to discuss the issues. The process for
resolution and airing those issues will be also be discussed. Mr.
Satterstrom will report back to the Planning Committee on this
issue in two weeks.
ADDED ITEMS
PROPOSED 1993 LOCAL CDBG PROGRAM POLICIES (A. SHOBE)
Planner Alice Shobe explained that each year the City receives
federal money managed through the King County Consortium. The City
is required by the federal government to adopt local program
policies stating our intent and guidelines on how the money will be
spent. The City uses the policy for determining which applications
will be funded for 1993 . The CDBG policies identify both local and
regional `needs. Although the policies stress local over regional
needs, in the last two years there has become more emphasis on
regional programming especially for issues such as homelessness.
Staff recommends continued support of the consortium-wide housing
pot which was created in 1991. The City of Kent allocated
approximately $9 , 000 in 1992 to the King County CDBG Consortium for
housing programs. This regional pot of money addresses the fact
that it is difficult to determine where homeless people are from.
Ms. Shobe stated that the , project categories and additional
evaluation criteria are unchanged from the policy adopted for 1992 .
She explained that it is unknown at this time how much block grant
money the City will receive or the specific breakdowns. Hopefully
this information will be available from the County in two weeks.
Staff recommends approval of the policies as presented and forward
to the City Council on April 7 , 1992 .
Planning Director Harris added that this item will need to be
placed on the March 17 Council agenda as an added item to set the
hearing for April 7 and he has handouts for the Council.
Lin Ball stressed that the Council needs to be aware that this
recommendation includes the approval of continued participation in
the Corsortium-wide pot for the emergency shelter.
Jon Johnson MOVED and Jim Bennett SECONDED a motion to approve the
recommended proposed 1993 local CDBG program policies. Motion
carried.
CONSENT CALENDAR
Y3 . city council Action: l
Councilmember moves, Councilmember
seconds that Conse Calendar Items A through F be approved.
Discussion
Action ' �A
x
3A. Approval of Minutes.
Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of
1. March 17, 1992 .
3B. Approval of Bills.
Approval of payment of the bills received through March 31,
U 1992 after auditing by the Operations Committee at its meeting
at 5: 30 p.m. on April 6, 1992 .
Approval of checks issued for vouchers:
Date Check Numbers Amount
Approval of checks issued for payroll:
Date Check Numbers Amount
Council Agenda
x
Item No. 3 A B
Kent, Washington
March 17, 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, Planning Director Harris, Public Works
Director Wickstrom, Fire Chief Angelo, Police Chief Crawford,
Assistant City Administrator Hansen, Finance Director McCarthy,
Parks Director Wilson, Human Resources Director Olson and Infor-
mation Services Director Spang. Councilmember Mann was excused
from the meeting. Approximately 50 people were at the meeting.
PUBLIC Kent P. Ainsworth Day. Mayor Kelleher read a
COMMUNICATIONS proclamation noting that in 1946 a Seattle woman
was so taken with Kent' s beauty that she named her
son after Kent, and that Kent P. Ainsworth was
born on March 17 , 1946 . He proclaimed March 17 ,
1992 , as Kent P. Ainsworth Day in the City of
Kent, and invited all to join him in wishing Mr.
Ainsworth a happy birthday. The proclamation was
presented to Jan Wiesner of the Chamber of
Commerce Foundation.
St. Patrick's Day. The Mayor read a proclamation
noting that St. Patrick has been an inspiration to
Americans of Irish descent for many generations.
He proclaimed March 17 , 1992 as St. Patrick' s Day
in the City of Kent, and urged all Kent residents
to learn more about St. Patrick and the rich
cultural heritage of all Irish Americans .
Kentridge Boys Basketball Championship Week. The
Mayor noted that the Kentridge Boys Basketball
Team, under the guidance of Coach Brian Pendleton,
won the State Boys Basketball AAA Championship
last Saturday evening and declared the week of
March 18-24 , 1992 as Kentridge Boys Basketball
Championship Week in the City of Kent. He urged
all Kent residents to recognize and appreciate the
hard work, dedication and team spirit displayed by
these young men in their quest for the champion-
ship. The proclamation was presented to Coach
Brian Pendleton and Co-Captains Warren King and
Mark Stewart.
CONSENT WHITE MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A through
CALENDAR F be approved. Woods seconded and the motion car-
ried.
1
March 17, 1992
MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3A)
Approval of Minutes. Approval of the minutes of
the regular Council meeting of March 3 , 1992 .
TRAFFIC (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3C)
CONTROL West Valley Highway Signal Improvements. ACCEPT
as complete the contract with Signal Electric for
the West Valley Highway Signal Improvements at S .
212th and S. 190th Streets and release of retain-
age after receipt of the releases from the State,
as recommended by the Public Works Committee.
(CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3D)
SR 515 from S.E. 235th-220th. AUTHORIZATION for
the Mayor to sign the agreement with WSDOT for
relocation of water and sewer lines within the
limits of the State SR 515 project (SE 235th-
220th) , as recommended by the Public Works Com-
mittee.
COMMUNITY (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3F)
DEVELOPMENT 1993 Local Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program
BLOCK GRANT Policies. AUTHORIZATION to set April 7 , 1992 as
the date for a public hearing on the 1993 Local
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Policies.
SHORT PLAT (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4A)
APPEAL Hicks Short Plat Appeal. This meeting will con-
sider an appeal by Gregg W. Ward and Ellen Royal
Ward of the Hicks Short Plat No. SP-92-2 . The
Short Subdivision Committee recommended approval
with six conditions of a request to create two
lots from one existing lot located at 96XX S.
243rd Lane (west of 98th Avenue South) . Planning
Director Harris pointed out the location and noted
that each lot is 9600 sq. ft. in a 7200 sq. ft.
zoning district. He noted that the Short Plat
Committee had discussed this on February 13 , 1992
and that they recommended approval with the
following conditions:
A. Prior to the recordation of the short plat:
1 . Execute a traffic mitigation agreement to
participate in the 272nd/277th Street Corri-
dor project.
2
March 17, 1992
SHORT PLAT 2 . Provide approved engineering drawings for
APPEAL the extension of public water and sanitary
sewer systems to serve the property.
3 . Provide private roadway and storm plans to
service the property. South 243rd Street
(private) shall be improved to provide mini-
mum 20 foot all-weather surface roadway,
approved by the Public Works Director.
4 . Provide all public and private easements
for the roadway and utility improvements des-
cribed above.
5. Execute a no protest LID for the future
widening and improvement of 98th Avenue S . to
City standards.
B. Prior to or in conjunction with the issuance
of a development permit on any lot:
1 . Construct roadway, water, sanitary sewer,
and storm drainage systems required under
section A above.
Harris explained that before an issue goes to the
Short Plat Committee, the Planning Department pre-
pares a staff report which contains Findings of
Facts, Conclusions, and a decision. He said that
this will be part of the recording.
Gregg Ward, 9619 S. 243rd Street, said his proper-
ty is next to the lot in question. He pointed out
that both the applicant and the Planning Depart-
ment have been pleasant to work with, but that he
feels there is an intent to squelch public input.
He noted that there has not been an appeal other
than by the applicant in 20 years, and that the
fact that the vote was called for and approved
before Ellen Royal Ward had a chance to speak was
simply an oversight. He clarified that Ms. Ward
did participate in some of the discussion during
the process, and that Paulette Hicks did speak
with Ms. Ward after the meeting and went over some
of the concerns. He explained that one of the
issues they are appealing is the fact that their
concerns were not addressed in an official setting
as part of the official records. He said that
3
March 17 , 1992
SHORT PLAT another issue of their appeal is that the decision
APPEAL to create this short plat involves some aspect of
their property to facilitate a money-making ven-
ture on the applicant's part and that there is no
advantage to them. He pointed out that even small
issues such as this have an impact on property
owners in the neighborhood and that those impacts
should be considered. He asked whether the public
use and interest will be served by the platting of
such subdivision and dedication, as mentioned in
RCW 58 . 17/110 (b) . He pointed out that before a
large development was built north of them, they
received public notice, but that the short plat
process does not require a public hearing for nine
lots or less. He said he feels that the short
plat process inhibits public input on land use de-
cisions. He also noted that they have always
referred to the street as 243rd Street, and just
learned it is 243rd Lane. There were no other
comments from the audience.
Orr noted that the Council can deal with the
process in the future, but probably not in this
instance since this is the process which is pre-
sently in place. Mr. Ward noted for her that his
concern is that the applicant be allowed to
address some of the issues for the record. He
also clarified for her that each property owner
owns the frontage on the road. Upon a question
from Bennett, Fire Chief Angelo explained that at
the time the road was built, the code allowed 15 '
streets. He added that fire apparatus can use the
road, but it would be very tight. He explained
that widening the road to 20 ' would allow adequate
access to get the apparatus in, open doors and get
to needed equipment. He said 20 ' is a minimum
under today' s code. Lubovich noted for Orr that
if the issue is related to the short plat process,
rather than the short plat itself, it should not
be considered as a part of this appeal, but in a
different form. Orr suggested that the process be
brought back to the Planning Committee for review
in the near future. She then MOVED to deny the
appeal made by Gregg W. Ward and Ellen Royal Ward
of the Short Subdivision Committee' s recommenda-
tion of approval on the Hicks Short Plat No. SP-
92-2 with six conditions . Woods seconded.
Lubovich clarified for White that this is
4
March 17 , 1992
SHORT PLAT quasi-judicial, and White said he must therefore
APPEAL abstain from voting since he has had a conversa-
tion with Ellen Ward on this subject. The motion
to deny then carried with White abstaining.
DOWNTOWN (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4B)
ZONING Downtown Zoning No. ZCA-90-6. This meeting will
consider the Planning Commission's recommended
approval of the Downtown Zoning No. ZCA-90-6. The
proposal recommends establishing three new zoning
districts, outlines new development standards for
the downtown area, recommends a design review pro-
cess for new downtown development, modifies
parking requirements, design of sidewalks, and
lighting of pedestrian corridors. The Planning
Commission approved the proposal February 24 ,
1992 .
The Mayor pointed out that at the Council retreat
held last weekend, the Council agreed that they do
not wish to rush a decision on this issue. He
noted that it had been suggested that a workshop
be set in order to have a more thorough discussion
of the issue. Upon his question, Orr said she
would like to hear the presentations from people
in attendance tonight. All Councilmembers agreed.
Fred Satterstrom of the Planning Department, noted
that this issue began in 1986 when Mayor Kelleher
appointed a Downtown Revitalization Task Force.
He said the Downtown Plan was undertaken in 1987
and was adopted in 1989 . He noted that in 1990
the Mayor' s Enterprise Zone Committee took up the
issue, and the Planning Department produced a
zoning recommendation which was brought to the
Planning Commission on March 25, 1991. He summar-
ized that this represents 6 1/2 years of the City
and these various parties focusing their attention
on downtown. He noted that the Planning Commis-
sion recommendation is aimed directly at imple-
menting the goals in the Downtown Plan concerning
land use and economic development. He also noted
that the Planning Commission ' s basic approach is
one of encouraging a variety of land use types in
the downtown area including retail, service, com-
mercial , public facilities, etc. , all in a people-
oriented downtown, which would be ensured through
a Design Review process . He noted that the
5
March 17, 1992
DOWNTOWN Planning Commission has recommended that the
ZONING Design Review be conducted by Administration and
Planning Department staff. He concluded that this
has been an eleven-month process which has under-
gone a lot of review and public scrutiny.
Ray Ward of the Planning Commission noted that the
Commission held seven hearings, and worked long
and hard on this issue. He stated that their re-
view was thorough and that this is the best possi-
ble recommendation. He also said they would be
glad to make further presentations and answer
questions at the workshop. He then urged the
Council to approve the Planning Commission' s rec-
ommendation.
Bennett noted that a petition has been received
from property owners who object to the continued
MRH designation on property along Titus and
Kenebeck Streets. He MOVED that this petition be
made a part of the record. White seconded and the
motion carried. After discussion regarding the
date of the workshop, it was determined that
interested parties would be notified when a time
is set. A sign-up sheet was provided for that
purpose.
PARKS & (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3E)
RECREATION King County Open Space Bond Budget Revisions._
AUTHORIZATION to adjust the three King County Open
Space Bond budgets as follows to reflect the
actual King County bond allocations and distribu-
tion of 1990 interest earnings in the amount of
$149 , 851.
Current Revised
Protect Budget Adjustments Budget
Green River $ 964 , 115 ($66, 839) $ 897 , 276
Trail
Interurban $1, 082 , 096 $78, 785 $1, 160, 881
Trail
Lake Fenwick $1, 466, 484 ($11, 642) $1, 454 , 842
Trail
Total $3 , 512 , 695 $304 $3 , 512 , 999
6
March 17 , 1992
BIDS (BIDS - ITEM 5A)
Photocopier Service & Equipment. Bid opening was
held on February 26, 1992 , with nine bids re-
ceived. Of these nine, two were disqualified, one
did not complete the bid document as instructed
and staff was unable to evaluate their bid based
on insufficient information. The other did not
bid all categories as specified. The bids were
evaluated based on current equipment and projected
volumes. Staff recommends award of the bid to the
current vendor, Cascade Office Systems, for an
estimated annual cost of $84 , 060.
HOUSER MOVED that the bid submitted by Cascade
Office Systems in the amount of $84 , 060 be accep-
ted. White seconded and the motion carried.
FINANCE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3B)
Approval of Bills. Approval of payment of the
bills received through March 16, 1992 after
auditing by the Operations Committee at its
meeting at 5: 30 p.m. on March 16, 1992 .
Approval of checks issued for vouchers:
Date Check Numbers Amount
3/1-3/16/92 115595-116365 $2 , 623 , 020 . 48
Approval of checks issued for payroll :
Date Check Numbers Amount
3/20/92 01169655-01170354 $ 663 , 650. 06
REPORTS Council President. Woods MOVED that Councilmember
Mann be excused from tonight' s meeting. Orr
seconded and the motion carried.
Public Works Committee. White reported that the
Public Works Committee passed the street utility
unanimously today and that it will be on the
agenda for the next Council meeting. He also
noted that he has asked staff to look into whether
funds from the street utility could be used to
fund a bus which would run from East Hill to West
Hill through the downtown area, alleviating
traffic on the streets.
7
March 17 , 1992
REPORTS Parks Committee. Johnson reported that the golf
course audit will be brought back to the Parks
Committee on April 7th, if a recommendation is
ready by then. He also noted that the Parks Com-
mittee today voted 2-1 to bring the Youth-at-Risk
issue to the full council on April 7th for final
determination and that the recommendation from the
Parks Committee is to continue funding that posi-
tion as a 3/4 position until such time as funds
are available to make it full-time.
ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8 : 00 p.m.
Brenda Jacober, CMC
City Clerk
8
N� �w Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 7 . 1992
Ir C, Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION APPOINTMENT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Confirmation of the Mayor's appointment
of Marijean Heutmaker as a member of the Kent Human Services
Commission. She will represent the Business category and will
replace Jean Archer, whose term expired. Her term will begin
immediately and continue to 1/1/95.
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: $ None
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3C
MEMORANDUM
TO: JUDY WOODS, CITY OUNCIL PRESIDENT
CITY COUNCIL MEMB S
FROM: DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR wr—�
DATE: MARCH 18, 1992
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF MARIJEAN HEUTMAKER TO KENT HUMAN SERVICES
COMMISSION
I have recently appointed Marijean Heutmaker to the Kent Human Services Commission. Mrs.
Heutmaker will fill the position designated by ordinance for a representative of the business
community. This position was formerly held by Ms. Jean Archer whose term expired 1/1/92.
Mrs. Heutmaker currently serves on the Board of Directors of TNX America. She also serves as a
Member of the Advisory Board of Catholic Community Services in both Kent and Seattle. She has
continuing community involvement through her music where she performs vocally and
instrumentally. She also enjoys composing music.
Ms. Heutmaker's term will begin immediately and continue to 1/1/95.
I submit this for your confirmation.
DK.jb
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 7 . 1992
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: LID 335 - 77TH AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Committee, accept as complete the contract with Active
Construction for LID 335 - 77th Avenue Improvements, and
release of retainage after receipt of the state releases.
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo from the Public Works Director and excerpt from
Public Works Committee minutes
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Unanimous motion of Public Works Committee
(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. 3D�C
Public Works Committee
March 17, 1992
Page 5
some concerns they have over the hold harmless clause of the
agreement. The Committee unanimously recommended approval for the
Mayor to sign the agreement subject to resolution of the City
Attorney's concerns.
Wickstrom stated the second agreement is between Kent, the County
and Auburn for the Mullen Slough, South Auburn Mill Creek area.
This is a one year agreement for design studies to determine what
controls are needed and the benefits of same. The cost to the City
would be approximately $61, 666 which we have budgeted. Wickstrom
added that the City Attorney' s office has the same concerns on the
hold harmless clause of this agreement. The Committee recommended
approval for the Mayor to sign the agreement subject to resolution
of the City Attorney's concerns.
Garrison Creek Short Plat
Wickstrom detailed this is a 9-lot short plat on 218th Street and
95th Place South. The developer has completed the utility
improvements and we are recommending acceptance of the bill of sale
for same. The Committee unanimously recommended approval to accept
the bill of sale.
L I D. 335 - 77th Avenue South Street Improvements
Wickstrom explained this was an LID for the improvement of 77th
north of S. 212th Street. The contractor has completed the work
and we are recommending the project be accepted as complete. Jim
White questioned that the final contract price was over the bid
amount. Wickstrom explained there were very poor soil conditions
in the project area necessitating change orders. The Committee
unanimously recommended approval to accept the contract as
complete.
WSDOT Letter of Understanding SR 181 Route Jurisdiction Transfer
Wickstrom stated that several years ago, the State legislature
authorized a Road Jurisdiction Study to determine what State roads
could be turned back to the responsibility of the respective
cities. At that time, they were trying to turn over SR 515 and
West Valley (SR 181) up to I-405 . We pointed out that the Valley
Freeway can't carry all the traffic and both SR 515 and SR 181 were
needed to do so. However we had no problem with taking over West
Valley (SR 181) between 272nd and the bridge. The State has
recently rebuilt that portion of West Valley and now wants to turn
it over to the City for continued responsibility. They are
proposing to grant the City $27, 914 over a four-year period for
this added maintenance. The State will do the 1992 mandated bridge
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
March 12, 1992
TO: PUBLIC WORKS CO M ITTEE
FROM: DON WICKSTROM ,��
RE: LID 335 - 77TH AVENUE S. STREET IMPROVEMENTS
This project constructed a new three lane roadway on 77th Avenue
between S. 212th Street to S. 202nd Street along with sidewalk,
curb, gutter, storm, sanitary sewer stubs and a water main
extension.
The project was awarded to Active Construction on October 2 , 1990
for the bid amount of $1, 057, 084 . 44 . The final construction cost
is $1, 197,462 . 05. It is recommended the project be accepted as
complete.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 7 , 1992
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: GARRISON CREEK SHORT PLAT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Committee, acceptance of the bill of sale and warranty
agreement submitted by TNX America Corporation for continuous
operation and maintenance of approximately 820 feet of water
main extension, 1200 feet of sanitary sewer extension, 750 feet
of street improvements and 1200 feet of storm sewer
improvements constructed in the vicinity of 95th Place So. and
So. 218th Street for the Garrison Creek Short Plat Development
and release of cash bond after expiration of the one-year
maintenance period.
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo from Public Works Director, vicinity map and
excerpt from Public Works Committee minutes
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Unanimous motion of Public Works Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO k_ 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. 3E
Public Works Committee
March 17, 1992
Page 5
some concerns they have over the hold harmless clause of the
agreement. The Committee unanimously recommended approval for the
Mayor to sign the agreement subject to resolution of the City
Attorney's concerns.
Wickstrom stated the second agreement is between Kent, the County
and Auburn for the Mullen Slough, South Auburn Mill Creek area.
This is a one year agreement for design studies to determine what
controls are needed and the benefits of same. The cost to the City
would be approximately $61, 666 which we have budgeted. Wickstrom
added that the City Attorney's office has the same concerns on the
hold harmless clause of this agreement. The Committee recommended
approval for the Mayor to sign the agreement subject to resolution
of the City Attorney' s concerns.
Garrison Creek Short Plat
Wickstrom detailed this is a 9-lot short plat on 218th Street and
95th Place South. The developer has completed the utility
improvements and we are recommending acceptance of the bill of sale
for same. The Committee unanimously recommended approval to accept
the bill of sale.
L I D. 335 - 77th Avenue South Street Improvements
Wickstrom explained this was an LID for the improvement of 77th
north of S. 212th Street. The contractor has completed the work
and we are recommending the project be accepted as complete. Jim
White questioned that the final contract price was over the bid
amount. Wickstrom explained there were very poor soil conditions
in the project area necessitating change orders. The Committee
unanimously recommended approval to accept the contract as
complete.
WSDOT Letter of Understanding SR 181 Route Jurisdiction Transfer
Wickstrom stated that several years ago, the State legislature
authorized a Road Jurisdiction Study to determine what State roads
could be turned back to the responsibility of the respective
cities. At that time, they were trying to turn over SR 515 and
West Valley (SR 181) up to I-405 . We pointed out that the Valley
Freeway can't carry all the traffic and both SR 515 and SR 181 were
needed to do so. However we had no problem with taking over West
Valley (SR 181) between 272nd and the bridge. The State has
recently rebuilt that portion of West Valley and now wants to turn
it over to the City for continued responsibility. They are
proposing to grant the City $27 , 914 over a four-year period for
this added maintenance. The State will do the 1992 mandated bridge
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
March 11, 1992
TO: PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
FROM: DON WICKSTRON
RE: GARRISON CREEK SHORT PLAT - ACCEPTANCE OF BILL OF
SALE
The developer of the Garrison Creek Short Plat has completed the
water, sewer, storm and street improvements in the vicinity of 95th
Place South and S. 218th Street. He has submitted the as-builts
and bill of sale form for acceptance. It is recommended the bill
of sale be accepted and the developer' s cash bond be released after
the one year maintenance period has expired.
~:t
tf
` JJ
S 212TH ST
L
`�7
�y a
rn P
S 218TH ST
,
�t GARRISON CREEK PARK
16
SITE
VICINITY MAP
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 7 . 1992
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING - SR 181 ROUTE JURISDICTION
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Committee, authorization for the Mayor to sign an agreement
with WSDOT for the transfer of jurisdiction of SR 181 (West
Valley Highway) from SR 516 (Willis Street) to So. 277th Street
and to establish a budget for the funding assistance the City
will receive over a four-year period totaling $27, 914 .
3 . EXHIBITS: Memorandum from Public Works Director, excerpt from
Public Works Committee minutes and copy of Letter of
Understanding
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Unanimous motion of Public Works Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES _
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended_/ (i iA_ Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3F
MCCARTHY,TONY / KENT70/FN - HPDesk print.
-----------------------------------------
E, ject: SR 181 ROUTE JURISDICTION TRANSFER - FISCAL NOTE
Creator: Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/FN Dated: 04/03/92 at 0933 .
THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IS DESIRIOUS OF TURNING OVER JURISDICTTION OF SR 181
FROM 272ND TO THE BRIDGE. THEY HAVE RECENTLY COMPLETED AN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
ON THAT SECTION AND ARE OFFERRING THE CITY $27,914 OVER A FOUR YEAR PERIOD FOR
MAINTENANCE. SINCE MAINTENANCE WON'T BE NEEDED IN 1992 , THE FUNDS WILL BE
RECEIPTED IN THE STREET MAINTENANCE BUDGET TO HELP OFFSET THE COST OF THE
ANNUAL STREET OVERLAY PROGRAM. IN SUBSEQUENT YEARS, THE STREET OVERLAY BUDGET
WILL NEED TO BE INCREASED TO COVER STREET MAINTENANCE.
THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS ACCEPTANCE OF THE FUNDS TO HELP OFFSET THE
OVERALL COST OF STREET MAINTENANCE.
Public Works Committee
March 17, 1992
Page 5
some concerns they have over the hold harmless clause of the
agreement. The Committee unanimously recommended approval for the
Mayor to sign the agreement subject to resolution of the City
Attorney's concerns.
Wickstrom stated the second agreement is between Kent, the county
and Auburn for the Mullen Slough, South Auburn Mill Creek area.
This is a one year agreement for design studies to determine what
controls are needed and the benefits of same. The cost to the City
would be approximately $61,666 which we have budgeted. Wickstrom
added that the City Attorney's office has the same concerns on the
hold harmless clause of this agreement. The Committee recommended
approval for the Mayor to sign the agreement subject to resolution
of the City Attorney's concerns.
Garrison Creek Short Plat
Wickstrom detailed this is a 9-lot short plat on 218th Street and
95th Place South. The developer has completed the utility
improvements and we are recommending acceptance of the bill of sale
for same. The Committee unanimously recommended approval to accept
the bill of sale.
L.I. D. 335 - 77th Avenue South Street Improvements
Wickstrom explained this was an LID for the improvement of 77th
north of S. 212th Street. The contractor has completed the work
and we are recommending the project be accepted as complete. Jim
White questioned that the final contract price was over the bid
amount. Wickstrom explained there were very poor soil conditions
in the project area necessitating change orders. The Committee
unanimously recommended approval to accept the contract as
complete.
WSDOT Letter of Understanding SR 181 Route Jurisdiction Transfer
Wickstrom stated that several years ago, the State legislature
authorized a Road Jurisdiction Study to determine what State roads
could be turned back to the responsibility of the respective
cities. At that time, they were trying to turn over SR 515 and
West Valley (SR 181) up to I-405. We pointed out that the Valley
Freeway can't carry all the traffic and both SR 515 and SR 181 were
needed to do so. However we had no problem with taking over West
Valley (SR 181) between 272nd and the bridge. The State has
recently rebuilt that portion of West Valley and now wants to turn
it over to the City for continued responsibility. They are
proposing to grant the City $27,914 over a four-year period for
this added maintenance. The State will do the 1992 mandated bridge
inspection of the three bridges that are within this portion. Jim
Bennett questioned whether $27,000 was adequate for the
maintenance. Wickstrom explained for this small section it
probably is; however, we usually don't get anything. Because there
were so many roads being turned back to the City, the legislature
felt some of the burden should be relieved so allocated funds on a
per mile basis. The Committee unanimously recommended approval for
the Mayor to sign the letter of understanding.
Sale of Property to State
Wickstrom explained that in conjunction with the State's SR 516
road widening project, they need to acquire a portion of a, parcel
owned by the City in the vicinity of Kent Kangley road and 152nd
Avenue S.E. The parcel is approximately 4,000 square feet which we
acquired in 1957 for a pump station for the Kent Springs
Transmission Main. We have since abandoned the pump station. The
State is willing to acquire the whole parcel. Jim White inquired
about the price. Wickstrom responded that we have not come to
terms with the State on the price as yet. The Committee gave
approval for staff to proceed with negotiations for the sale and to
bring the final recommendation back to them once a firm price is
established.
Drainage Utility Rate Modifications
Wickstrom stated since Committee has heard the presentation at the
public hearings, he has summarized in his memo the actions
necessary in order to implement the program. He reviewed these for
the Committee. Jim White commented that he had asked Wickstrom to
look into the possibility of acquiring or somehow taking over that
portion of Drainage District 81 north of James Street because of
the flooding problem in that area. White stated that before we
move ahead with the drainage utility he would like to have a -
resolution on that. Wickstrom added that approximately $950,000
has been earmarked in the Drainage CIP to address that problem.
Wickstrom stated he would not recommend taking over the District
entirely at this point because of the potential problems with
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
March 11, 1992
TO: PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
FROM: DON WICKSTROM )� )
RE: WSDOT LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING FOR ROUTE
JURISDICTION TRANSFER
SR 181 - SR 516 SOUTHERLY TO SOUTH CORPORATE LIMITS
WSDOT has submitted a letter of understanding for the transfer of
jurisdiction of SR 181 (West Valley Highway) from SR 516 (Willis
Street) to S. 277th Street.
Within the last several years, the State overlaid and improved the
street and the bridges thereon do not appear to be in disrepair.
The State will do the 1992 mandated bridge inspection report. The
City will get $27, 914 over a four-year period for its added
maintenance responsibility.
It is recommended the Mayor to authorized to sign the letter of
understanding.
AIIIEW
MWashington State Duane Berentson
AP Departmentof Transportation secretary of Transportation
I lislricl 1
15325 S.E. 30th Place
Bellevue, Washington 98007-6538
(206)562-4000
March 3, 1992
Mr. Don Wickstrom
Director of Public Works
City of Kent
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98031
City of Kent
C. S. 1740 SR 181
SR 516 Southerly to South Corporate Limits
Route Jurisdiction Transfer
"Letter of Understanding"
Dear Mr. Wickstrom:
We are transmitting two (2) originals of the "Letter of Understanding" for transfer of SR
181 to the City. Please sign both originals, if satisfactory, and return the "State Original" to
our office. the "City Original" is your file copy.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Very truly yours,
j �7jTEl RENCE G. PAANANEN, P. E.
Lo,'Ll Programs Engineer
JHH/niv jh4-06 _.
Attach.
cc: Tom Lentz MS 119
H.Peters/D.Sipila MS 105
Bob Aye MS 110
Bill Garing MS 120
Ron Matilla MS 107
John Stephenson MS 102
Stan Moon KF-01
Letter of Understanding
between
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
and
CITY OF KENT
Date: M0.r-cL
Project: SR 181, Jct. SR 516 Southerly to the south corporate limits of Kent
Route Jurisdiction Transfer
PURPOSE AND DURATION
The purpose of this Letter of Understanding (LOU) is to clarify the mutual responsibilities
and actions of Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and the City of
Kent for the transfer of this corridor from the State Highway System to the City Street
System. This LOU will cover responsibilities from the date of this document until the
official transfer on April 1, 1992 in accordance with Engrossed Senate Bill 5801.
General Information
WSDOT and the City of Kent will pursue this transfer through the responsible staff in each
agency.
WSDOT and the City of Kent met on February 25, 1992 and discussed the status of the
road improvement work on this corridor and to coordinate on the RJC turnback. The
current existing condition of SR 1.81 to be transferred is acceptable to the City of Kent.
STATE RESPONSIBILITY
The State agreed to perform the annual bridge inspection of 181/4, 181/5, and 181/7 and
provide the City with a copy of those inspection reports.
Records Transfer
The State will transfer pertinent documentation as soon as reasonable possible prior to
April 1, 1992, but all original archive documents will be transferred on April 1, 1992. Some
records will be transferred after completion of construction, which may take place after
April 1, 1992. Following is a list of primary records to be made available for transfer:
A. ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNER LIST ON THE NEW HIGHWAY
TO ACCOMMODATE NOTIFICATION OF THE TRANSFER.
B. CURRENT RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS AND PROPOSED NEW
RIGHT-OF-WAY PLANS, IF APPLICABLE.
C. AS-BUILT CONTRACT PLANS.
D. FRANCHISE, PERMIT, SPECIAL USE PERMITS, ETC.
E. ALL SURVEY RECORDS, LOGS.
F. SERVICE AGREEMENTS FOR ELECTRICAL POWER FOR
SIGNALS, ILLUMINATION, AND/OR SPECIAL FACILITIES.
G. SIGN LOGS AND VIDEO LOGS, IF APPLICABLE.
H. PAVEMENT DATA AND/OR HISTORY.
I. COMMITMENT FILES TO PROPERTY OWNERS OR
DEVELOPERS.
J. LIST OF ANY DEVELOPER MITIGATION COMMITMENT FOR
PROPOSED FACILITIES.
K. ANY AGREEMENTS (MAINTENANCE, OPERATIONS,
PARTICIPATION, OR OTHER DOCUMENTS PERTINENT TO
THIS ROADWAY).
L. ANY BRIDGE PLANS OR MAJOR DRAINAGE FACILITIES,
INSPECTION RECORDS, MAINTENANCE RECORDS, ETC.
M. ACCIDENT STATISTICS
-2-
The City of Kent will review and comment within one month of receiving review
documents.
Washington State Department of Transportation and the City of Kent acknowledges and
agrees to the conditions and stipulations of this Letter of Understanding.
WASHINGTON STATE CITY OF KENT
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL
TPrLE: 1l T
oC r a•Ms G W !HCC!` ITLE:DATE: ��ar�� . l 1 1 Z DATE:
JHH/nlv jh4-04
-3-
i
N
co
3S My 41 YLI t ..
U
' F.WLo
K.. ^
rK W
O C 4 H co
J �
k i
ic
N U F a
M AIM wngny a
1-
3 N0.0vnb'n6
m
V LL Jf'1 YY I ON'InYd 15 33Ynll?,ry
1 '4
Ka m h:
�D
N uc)
z —
O
� - --- _ s oa tiY•r
;i
rFA v. Qco
.
q •r•I �`''. c
o J Ln
ji
d b ,.
^^0 7 L"i O/ ' C3 fi > c II
o
— --
t w Y c u c z/--� ,o ^ v Y a r
Co I in -� Q I �•+
f� .n
r 0
� a
+� U I
� •r� H
+� 5 N
0 U CD
o � _ m H [
G IO its O
'� •r•1 U � b b, •" Ca
J �
U �
N
J
v
oo J� <f oc• e 7Z.
S 7C o?C 7C .t — m m _O O (7 ('l C� m m _m m _m D D ;
< :mZi a 0 ° << c o
a J 7 O
p ..
Z O x x n
A
O J 7 <
O O p o O N O p p O O
_ O m O O m d O 'O� W -3 W N m ;� O a p O p M m p
O O p 0 0 0 p O p p O 0 0 0 p O p p .. p 0 0 0 0 p 0 0 p p o o p21
o
_ u L•I
rtae,_ 'K► Ji
N W p r , N v %_ O m o y N 0 .� O � m z C, W O D
_ L
0
„Y. .
2
Lm
_� -4 D
p m 0 0 �° N N W W Of N m Y N O m 0 0 0
a _ 0Ln v VI N W = W m W
A p 7
n 2 00
a � T
< v T
9 u Y . Y Y N N Y Y Y Y N d V Y Y N Y y Y Y Y V (n Y u u P O •� W Z A
— O P O O O p O o o 0 A m m ,— O m o o o o 0 w 0 0 0 o o o o m W 0 OD
m W m co to Z C
a G U1 W m �G W N O O 0
� J a O
a a 2
° o Y - u Y u A Y �► Y Y o W O m
O N O O O p O 0 0 0 V v � W O m O o o o 0 j m 0 0 0 0 O O y N o T
a
o O1 A
n O
J
J
o Y m o w u Y Y 0 y
Y Y u Y m o s o s Z N W O O A Y u Y u s m u 1 N O O p t! O O O � �
p O m 0 0 0 p O 0 0 0 y N a O N 0 0 0 0 0 A o 0 o o o o e Q O T
W a m a m T
� N m
�O
Z
m_
m Y u u Y u u r Ne
O Q O O O O N ;; , - o - O o o o O m v 0 0 0 0 0 0 & a 0
7 W 4 N W O w
= e
S
e
Y Y u u O
tY0 m m N W L u N W N
u O o o O o o o u o Y a m O
. O O O O p O 0 0 0 N ip O — O O O O O m N 0 0 0 0 0 0 .•� j 0 t0
l.11 m W °i m N W V O to 10
m m
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 7 . 1992
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: STREET UTILITY ORDINANCE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: At their March 17 meeting, the Public
Works Committee unanimously recommended approval of the
formation of the Street Utility. Implementation of the Street
Utility will require three actions on tonight's agenda: (1)
adoption of the ordinance implementing the Street Utility; (2)
directing that the Street Utility Fund be part of the Street
Capital Improvement Fund and adjusting budgets accordingly; and
(3) authorizing the deletion of the City' s Utility Tax on the
City sewer, water and drainage customer bills and charge said
tax directly to the respective City utilities.
3 . EXHIBITS: Ordinance, excerpt from Public Works Committee
minutes and memorandum from the Director of Public Works
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Unanimous vote of Public Works Committee
(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 ,t 1- Lt,�k moves, Councilmember �✓ ("Q It ,-,--,-,seconds
that (1) Ordinance No. l' h be adopted establishing the Street
Utility, providing for the levying and collection of street
utility charges and creating the Street Utility Fund; (2) the
Street Utility Fund be part of the Street Capital Improvement
Fund and the budgets therein be adjusted accordingly; and
(3) the City's utility tax on sewer, water and drainage
customer bills be deleted with that tax being charged to the
respective City utilities ,
DISCUSSION:
11 /
ACTION: 7 h
Council Agenda
Item No. 4A
Public Works Committee
March 17 , 1992
Page 9
He continued that no matter what is done, we need the money from
the rate modification proposal. He doubted there were any new
solutions that would pop up as a result of a new comprehensive
plan. Mann asked who would determine what level of storm we would
design for. Wickstrom stated that currently Council has adopted
the 25 year 12-hour storm and the comprehensive plan was developed
around that.
Jim Hansen stated he thought the Public Works Director has done an
in depth analysis of the program but the Council needs to be able
to understand the interrelationship of the programs and what
standards drive it to have the confidence to approve it. He
suggested he work with the Public Works Department to develop an
approach to move this forward. This will be brought back before
the Committee at their April 7 meeting.
Street Utility
Wickstrom reviewed his memo listing the actions necessary to
implement the Street Utility. Jim White stated at the recent
Council retreat, Council determined that the 196th Corridor is to
take top priority with 277th Corridor second and 224th Corridor
third. Recognizing that the City has grants to move ahead on 196th
and potential private money, the bulk of the street utility funds
should be directed to 196th Corridor. Jim White stated he hasn't
heard from anyone within the City limits of Kent oppose the Street
Utility. He stated he wasn't convinced this would solve all the
traffic problems and would need to go beyond this with rail, etc.
He asked the Public Works Department to look into the possibility
of either contracting with Metro or forming our own transit system
within the City of Kent to move from East Hill Park and Ride to
West Hill and back. He asked that the potential costs be developed
as well. He stated he would perceive it to be free for the riders.
He stated he felt we were still going to have to build corridors
but would still need additional people movers. Jim White stated he
would like to hear more from the business community on the Street
Utility. He'd like to hear Boeing say they were willing to "step
up to the mark" .
Ted Nixon spoke against corridors stating that he wants the streets
back for the pedestrians and not have corridors taking traffic
through Kent so that it can't stop and shop.
Paul Mann moved the proposal be sent to Council with a
recommendation to approve. The Committee unanimously recommended
the Council approve the formation of the Street Utility.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
March 12, 1992
TO: PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
� tFROM: DON WICKSTROM``
RE: STREET UTILITY
As you know, this issue was referred to the Committee for a
recommendation thereon.
As such, attached is the packet from the last Council meeting along
with the minutes from the hearing.
Implementation of the Street Utility as presented at the public
hearings is a key element per mitigating our traffic congestion
problems. The following proposed Council actions are necessary to
implement the proposal as presented:
o Adopt Ordinance # implementing the street utility;
o Direct that the Street Utility fund be part of the Street
Capital Improvement fund and adjust the budgets therein
accordingly;
o Authorize the deletion of the city's utility tax on the City' s
sewer, water and drainage customer bills and charge said tax
directly to the respective City utilities;
March 3 , 1992
STREET (PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 2B)
UTILITY Street Utility. The public hearing on formation
of the street utility and implementation of the
street utility rates was opened at Council ' s last
meeting and continued to this meeting for addi-
tional public comment thereon. At the February 18
meeting the Director of Public Works presented the
street utility proposal along with its associated
rates, the necessity for same and the improvements
targeted for funding. The Director also noted
that the street utility rate impact is to be off-
set somewhat by the proposed elimination of the
City' s utility tax on the utility bill of its
water, sewer and drainage customers.
Woods declared the public hearing open. Bill Joy,
28183 - 109th Avenue SE, noted that the cost of
the 272nd/277th corridor will range between $16
and $30 million, and that people who live outside
the city limits of Kent will be asked to fund a
large portion. He asked how the funds which will
be eliminated from the tax on water and drainage
will be replaced. He also pointed out that the
City Attorney recently informed the Councilmembers
that they could now communicate with opponents or
proponents of the 272nd/277th corridor, and urged
them to study the draft environmental impact
statement, supporting documents and comment
letters. He also suggested holding a public forum
to assure all of the objectives of the project are
met. Barry Broxson, 28255 - 105th Avenue SE, said
that the 272nd/277th corridor will get traffic up
to East Hill, but will not alleviate existing
problems in Kent. He asked how the city can
justify a tax on Kent citizens for a road that is
completely outside the city limits. He agreed
that the city should study this thoroughly to
avoid future legal problems. He also asked how
the city can justify heavy truck on 272nd/277th,
as noted in the draft EIS - page 83 , which would
bring traffic from I-5 through the valley and up
East Hill to Kent-Kangley Road, which can barely
handle the present automobile traffic. Wickstrom
explained that without the road, the congestion on
Kent ' s city streets would be even worse, and that
studies show the road would provide significant
benefits within the city. He also noted that the
3
March 3 , 1992
STREET EIS will be presented to the Council for direction
UTILITY as to whether or not to proceed, and at that point
technical people will be in attendance to address
questions about the corridor. Lubovich clarified
that the city can build the road with the County' s
concurrence, and that the key question is the
power of condemnation. He offered to further re-
search the issue, and Woods asked that Mr. Broxson
be informed as to the results of the research.
White noted that he had read a letter to the
editor alleging that this corridor would be a
truck corridor, but that he was not aware of that.
Wickstrom said it has never been proposed as a
truck corridor. Johnson said there is no question
that trucks would use it, and that they cannot be
prohibited from using it just as they use Kent-
Kangley, Benson, or any highway.
John Kiefer, 11048 SE 274th, noted that there must
be some kind of mitigation for the residents of
the area. He pointed out that on advice of the
previous City Attorney, Councilmembers have not
been able to listen to concerns regarding this
project. Johnson explained that since City Attor-
ney Lubovich issued a contrary opinion, he has had
discussions with opponents and proponents on the
issue and has read the EIS and related correspon-
dence and testimony. He added that as a citizen
he is concerned that there are a lot of county
people driving through the city causing accidents
and fatalities . He questioned whether the people
who are in opposition to this project are willing
to use transit or carpools as an alternative.
Kiefer noted that no provision has been made for
high occupancy vehicle lanes or light rail . He
said such provisions should be made now, not in
the future, and suggested having more public
hearings on the issue.
Harlan Bull , 20601 - 100th Avenue SE, asked
whether the ordinance will specify what project
the funds will be spent on and what happens to the
funds before the project is ready. He also said
he would like to see a sunset clause in both ordi-
nances . White noted that he intends to look at
the possibility of a 10-year sunset clause and at
4
March 3 , 1992 -
STREET using the utility for specific projects. He
UTILITY invited everyone to attend the Public Works Com-
mittee meetings at 2 : 00 p.m. on the first and
third Tuesday of each month. Lubovich clarified
that the ordinance as drafted does not single out
any particular project which the funds would be
used for, and that it would not approve or disap-
prove the corridor project. Connie Baesman, 10206
SE 224th, voiced concern about the statement the
city would be making by funding a street utility
in support of the corridors at this time. She
agreed that traffic problems exist and that the
corridor is one solution, but said more alterna-
tives should be considered. She said the costs
and environmental effects need to be known, and
urged the Council to look further into this issue.
She pointed out that the Puget Sound Council of
Governments recommended this with an HOV lane, but
that the proposal before the Council does not pro-
vide for that. She distributed copies of a letter
to the City from Chris Leman of the Institute for
Transportation and the Environment which states
that Kent needs to look at the total picture and
at alternatives. She said that people would be
willing to accept a road if other alternatives are
considered and it is determined that a road is the
best solution. She added that if a road is the
best answer, it should be done properly.
Gay Fournier, 28261 - 108th Avenue SE, pointed out
that while county residents drive through Kent,
they also shop in Kent, and suggested that every-
one work together on this issue. She voiced con-
cern about five-lane roadways entering two-lane
roadways and asked how and when that will be coor-
dinated. She stated that she feels traffic will
be increased from the intersection of the proposed
corridor and Kent-Kangley to Highway 18 . She won-
dered whether the Council should be assessing a
street utility tax when they are not sure whether
they can legally build this road in the county or
not, and said that the King County Attorney' s
opinion is that the City cannot build the roadway
or condemn land in the county. Bill Joy noted
that there is a park-and-ride lot in Kent and that
Kent would like to have a train station downtown.
He questioned why the parking lot and train
5
March 3 , 1992
STREET station would be necessary if the city is not
UTILITY going to bring traffic to them. Rhonda Taylor,
12418 SE 273rd Place, asked whether other cities
have similar utility taxes and whether businesses
within Kent will be at a disadvantage. Wickstrom
explained that Renton has a tax of $4 . 35 per
employee per month, Bellevue has a tax of $3 , 35,
and that Kent' s is proposed to be $1. 90 . He added
that Kent would also eliminate the utility tax on
sewer, water and drainage, and clarified that the
taxes in other cities are not for limited terms.
Mann pointed out that the Council will be holding
their retreat on March 13 and 14 and asked that
they be provided with a history of the 272nd/277th
corridor and all the information they need to have
on it.
Upon a question from Laurie Muller, 10997 SE
284th, Wickstrom explained that the utility tax is
being absorbed by the respective utilities and is
being dropped from customers bills. He said that
because of the growth the city has experienced,
the utilities are healthy and can absorb it.
Muller urged the Council to postpone the tax until
all information has been analyzed. She noted that
300 people had attended a meeting on the draft
EIS. Woods clarified that no action is being re-
quested tonight, that this issue is scheduled to
go back to the committee if Council concurs. Dave
Heutchy, 20925 SE 287th, noted that the turnpike
theory is that no matter how many roads are built,
they will fill up. He said that 272nd/277th will
fill up and could lead to higher density develop-
ment and that yet another road will have to be
built. He urged the Council to look at alterna-
tives. He also stated that there is more to
building a road than money, such as costs to the
environment, the quality of life, and the people
impacted. He said the Council is in a position
now to determine what they want in the future.
Barry Broxson noted that Wickstrom had recently
addressed annexing part of East Hill and had said
it has nothing to do with this road. Broxson said
it would cost thousands of dollars to annex the
area and asked whether that had been factored in
when determining the tax. John Kiefer wondered
whether $1. 90 per employee per month will solve
6
March 3 , 1992
STREET the problem or whether it will have to be raised
UTILITY in the future. Connie Baesman stated that she
feels the entire planning process should be worked
on at the county and city level because it needs
to be changed to meet modern standards . Wickstrom
noted for Gay Fournier that the street utility
affects only people within the city, and that
people outside the city limits will not see a
change except for a rate reduction on the drainage
utility. He also explained for her that the $1. 90
charge is one-half of the previous operating bud-
get of the street department. Fournier asked
where the annexation proposal stands today and
Johnson explained that the annexation was initi-
ated by the residents of the area, therefore it is
up to them to bring the city a petition and that
they have not done so. Wickstrom noted that all
comments and questions and answers will be a part
of the final EIS and that it is available to Coun-
cilmembers if they desire to read it. Fournier
said that putting the corridor in will worsen
traffic and invited each Councilmember to visit
the area. She said that if a road does go in, it
should be done properly and with foresight.
There were no further comments and WHITE MOVED to
close the public hearing. Orr seconded and the
motion carried. White noted that this area con-
tinues to grow and said that additional roads
should be looked at thoroughly and done correctly.
He challenged the people in the audience to come
up with alternatives and said the city will
explore them, adding that this issue will be dis-
cussed as long as it takes. He invited everyone
to attend the Public Works committee meetings and
MOVED that this issue be referred back to the Pub-
lic Works Committee. Orr seconded and the motion
carried.
Woods pointed out that the Council retreat is held
one day a year and that while Council may receive
the information Mann requested, it is unlikely
they will spend a great deal of time discussing it
at the retreat. She said they are prepared to
discuss it at another time. She noted that the
retreat will be held this year at the West Hill
Fire Station.
7
Kent City Council Meeting
Date March 3 , 1992
Category Public Hearings
1. SUBJECT: STREET UTILITY
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The public hearing on formation of the
street utility and implementation of the street utility rates
was opened at Council' s last meeting and continued to this
meeting for additional public comment thereon. At the
February 18 meeting the Director of Public Works presented the
street utility proposal along with its associated rates, the
necessity for same and the improvements targeted for funding.
The Director also noted that the street utility rate impact is
to be offset somewhat by the proposed elimination of the City' s
utility tax on the utility bill of its water, sewer and
drainage customers.
3 . EXHIBITS: February 18 Council minutes, material from February
18 Council packet
4 . RECOMMENDED BY:
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCALIPERSONNEL 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
to refer this issue back to the Public Works Committee for
committee recommendation thereon.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 2B
February 18 , 1992
STREET (PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 2B)
UTILITY Street Utility. This date has been set for the
public hearing on formation of a street utility
and implementation of proposed rates. Implemen-
tation 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 drain-
age customers.
Wickstrom explained that the primary reason for
this utility is traffic congestion. He showed
overheads of the levels of service at various
intersections. He added that the Growth Manage-
ment Act correlates road system capacity with
development potential, and if there is no capa-
city, additional permits may not be allowed. He
pointed out that the City has received some grants
from the Transportation Improvement Board in the
amount of $19 million, with the possibility of $2
million more. He said the grants would cover the
277th corridor project, the 196th Street corridor
from Orillia Road to West Valley Highway, and the
196th corridor from West Valley Highway to East
Valley Highway. He pointed out that action needs
to be taken soon on these grants, and that other
cities would like to have them. He said that to
finance the matching funds, they are considering
funds from the street utility, the vehicle regis-
tration fee, committing existing cash, and some
gas tax funds . He noted that the street utility
charge would be per full-time equivalent employee
or residential unit. He noted that under state
law there is a maximum charge of $2 . 00 per
employee or residential unit, and that the maximum
amount of revenue that can be generated cannot ex-
ceed half of the existing operation and mainte-
nance budget. He noted that the City is proposing
a rate of $1 . 90 which was dictated by the existing
operations and maintenance budget. He explained
that they are proposing to offset the street util-
ity by absorbing the utility tax presently on
sewer, water and drainage . He noted that Penton
has an employee tax under the B & O authority
which is $4 . 35 a month, Bellevue ' s is $3 . 35 , and
Kent ' s is proposed to be $1 . 90. Wickstrom
explained for White that under the state law, if
Metro or the County implement an employee tax, the
City would have to give full credit against theirs
a
February 18 , 1992
STREET which would reduce revenues, and that is why they
UTILITY ' are proposing a cash program rather than bonding.
Wickstrom noted that the proposals to King County
are to not implement such a tax since it would
cost more to administer than they would receive.
He also explained that Kent has a billing system
set up, and that the businesses have already been
identified.
The Mayor declared the public hearing open.
Suzette Cooke of the Chamber of Commerce stated
that they have reviewed this utility and are in
support. She said they are interested in seeing
progress made on streets and relieving the conges-
tion. She cautioned that there is a limit as to
what can be passed on and that the limit is being
reached. She stated that although there is a need
for the projects, other issues will also cost
business and individuals . Harlan Bull asked how
this will be implemented if approved. He noted
that .there are many multi-tenant buildings in the
City with several tenants on one water meter. He
pointed out that the number of employees fluctu-
ates and the owner would not know to collect for
the bill if it is added to the utility bill . He
suggested that it be connected to business
licenses, and billed on that basis. He voiced
concern that the rate would be raised in the fu-
ture. Roy Moore, President of Valley Area Trans-
portation Alliance, noted that their -group repre-
sents 250, 000 jobs and $11 . 5 billion in assessed
valuation. He stated that they have always been
in support of cross valley connectors, and said
this street utility will be a great step forward.
He emphasized that there must be regional coopera-
tion. He noted that their members are willing to
pay their fair share. Steve. Dowell stated that he
feels both the drainage and street utilities are
necessary, but that he is concerned about the dis-
tribution of costs . He asked whether it is
morally justified to shift the burden to small
businesses and away from residents , and noted that
in. the long run it is the residents who buy pro-
ducts in the City who will pay this bill . He also
pointed out that employees who live in the City as
well as work in the City would be charged twice.
He said the way to escape that is not to live,
work or buy in Kent, which he hopes is not
5
February 18 , 1992
STREET council Is intent. He asked the Council to review
UTILITY the proportion of costs to small business versus
residents, and to let the residents know what this
will cost them, whether they are taxed through the
businesses and products they sell, or on their
utility bill.
WHITE MOVED that the hearing on the formation of
the street utility be continued to the March 3rd
Council meeting. Woods seconded. Motion carried.
SOLID (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3K)
WASTE Solid Waste. ADOPTION of Ordinance No. 3031
relating to solid waste handling and regulation,
regulating yard waste and authorizing liens for
failure to pay charges of solid waste services, as
recommended by the Public Works Committee.
ZONING (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4A)
CODE Planning Commission Recommendation to Amend Kent
AMENDMENT - Zoning Code Enforcement Procedures This meeting
ENFORCEMENT will consider the recommendation by the Planning
PROCEDURES Commission to amend the Kent Zoning Code Enforce-
ment Procedures. On January 27 , 1992 , the Plan-
ning Commission approved amendments to the Kent
Zoning Code that would establish new violation
enforcement procedures .
Carol Proud, Planning Department, explained that
the Zoning Code presently contains an abbreviated
procedure for enforcement of violations, that
Zoning violations are currently considered a
criminal offense with criminal penalties . She
stated that the proposed amendments would estab-
lish civil penalties rather than criminal penal-
ties which would make prosecution of zoning code
violations more effective. She also stated that
other cities have adopted civil penalties for
zoning code violations and have found that mone-
tary penalties allow for recovery of costs for
administration and is often an incentive for
prompt compliance.
Carol Morris, Assistant City Attorney, clarified
for White that this will address issues concerning
abandoned structures except in severe cases, such
as what exists in the North Park area, where
abatement procedures might be necessary. She also
6
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
February 13, 1992
TO: MAYOR KELLEHER ND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: DON WICKSTROM�
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, 0'.00 - $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 $1, 273 , 000 per year.
In keeping with the discussion presented during Council ' s
deliberation of Resolution 1270, it is proposed to lessen the
financial impact on the individual customer by eliminating the
City ' s utility tax on its sewer, water and drainage utility
charges . The attached table summarizes the net effect thereof on
various utility customers .
The Street Utility is critical with respect to implementing these
corridor project and they are critical with respect to addressing
our traffic congestion needs . Under the Growth Management Act,
concurrency between land use and the capacity of the City ' s
transportation system is mandated. Without that concurrency,
development can 't occur. Also under the Federal' and State Clean
Air mandates , traffic congestion will need to be addressed as a
means of reducing air pollution.
For the above reasons , the Public Works Department recommends
Council proceed with implementation of the Street Utility.
IMPACT OF PROPOSED RATE FOR
STREET UTILITY IMPLEMENTATION ON SELECTED CUSTOMERS'
Net
Monthly Monthly Monthly
U t i l i t y S t r e e t Difference
Tax Utility ( Saving )
Class & Individual Customer S a v i n g s Charge ($)
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 high consumption; e.g. ,
large residence, irrigation
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 1001 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 351 covered
135 employees 475.24 256. 50 (218.74)
Boeing Aerospace Co.
20403 S. 68th Ave.
470.2 acre loO'` 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
r iu,v I R N I ;
�I L�J r...ay_a...... e , 1
1�" �� CRITICAL
LOS
f ru✓rr✓r r� I INTERSECTIONS
um o
n t
I Si r r
t
T NI. It
Jfn//t•.mr
x Q'• nlw. sr.wn
It-
xelsa
x RI�
�I
OOf/NG FCAOSCFCf i[ t
I J[MR C
i Inn� - n liln 1
[ x
unnne 1 I^A y.'
me if
LF OON Y� I nJi Ir 0 rrrrT - .Z1•R[•
t
x r
• JL_u n � n u i n n �
ACN/
14
fntr
mw
lrrr Jrs, anxw [ [ Y 111 ,
J.rJ Ir rr••.rt nlrfrnf -
/vrJn(
M/(M/f J 1 ,f• t •-Ff1lU'11 x n If
SN b � � I•
Ism . I
i Y T
x 5 Y NddALN JCImtt f N/
0
•.rrrr r r R/I � I CCNJ:m
STREET UTILITY/CORRIDOR FUNDING FACT SHEET
Council Target Issue: Traffic Congestion
T O T A L
C O S T
PROJECTS (1,000) GRANT' LID COUNTY2 OTHER
272/277TH CORRIDOR
- Auburn Way North 16, 280/ 4,247/ 5,530/
to SR 516 30,0004_ 6,247 9, 000 - 6 , 503 /
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/ 16, 948/ 13, 014/ 13 , 530/
64,785 20,946 16, 464 5,573 21,760
I 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.
4 Worst case scenario.
OTHER
4 Year Cash 6 Year Cash 9 Year Cash
Flow Forecast Flow Forecast Flow Forecast
Cash 5,800 5,860 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 21 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) I ;
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
RESOLUTION M
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
t.gnificant improvements to the city ' s transportation system the
..raffic 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. sea. , 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
,f 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 9 . 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 regulla�r session of the Council of the City of Kent
this .16
day of JC-b U'' 1991.
CONCURRED in by the Mayor of the city of Kent this day of _
1991.
Dan Kelleher, Mayor 7,
ATTEST
Marie Jensen, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Rog Lubo ich
City Attorney _
i
I
i;
•I
I(
�I I
i
iI I
!� ORDINANCE NO.
I
AN ORDINANCE declaring the
�i existing street system of the City
of Kent to be a public utility,
setting forth the classification of
;i customers subject to charges,
providing for the levying and
collection of such charges and
i creating the Street Utility Fund,
from which monies shall be spent for
the construction, maintenance,
operation and preservation of the
it street utility.
I
it
WHEREAS, traffic congestion in the City of Kent is a
significant and serious problem which results in accidents
'jinvolving both personal injury and property damage; and
'I WHEREAS, in addition to the fact that many streets and
' intersections in the City are operating at or beyond their maximum
i
11capacity, future traffic projections indicate that essential
!1
;! transportation system improvements must be constructed or traffic
,i I
i' congestion will be significantly exacerbated;
,I
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
11congestion problem their number one target issue;
i I
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
lilocal transportation systems such as the establishment of a street
i�
'I
�I
ii
i i
I!
,4
I�
'i
futility under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) , Section
If 82 . 80. 040 et sec(. , ;
I,I`
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
1! construction, maintenance, operation and preservation of the
11streets as a public utility; NOW, THEREFORE,
i�
II THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
;JHEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
'i
I Section 1. Street System a Public Utility. The City of
�iKent 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.
i
,
I
Section 2 . Definitions. As used in this ordinance: i
A. "Business" means all activities, occupations,
trades, pursuits, professions and matters engaged in or located i
within the City limits with the object of gain, benefit, advantage
I� or profit to the business enterprise or to another person, directly
I
, or indirectly.
i
i
2
,I
I,
I
I I
I ,
B. "Business enterprise" means each location at which
I a person engages in business within the City.
,I
I
I
C. "Employee" means any person employed at any business
enterprise in the City, except casual laborers not employed in the
I '
ljusual 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
I business trust, and all partners of a partnership (except limited
If I
lipartners) are "employees" within this definition.
'I
D. "Full-time equivalent employee" means the calculated
lnumber of employees derived by dividing the total yearly number of
hours reported on the preceding quarterly State of Washington Labor
t
and Industries Reports by one thousand nine hundred twenty (1, 920)
I,
i
hours.
i
i
%I E. "Housing Unit" means a building or portion thereof
jdesigned for or used as the residence or living quarters of one or
more persons living together, or of one family.
Ij F. "Low-income disabled" means those persons eligible
for a reduction in utility rates as described in Resolution 980 of
; the City of Kent.
li
G. "Low-income seniors" means those persons eligible I
for a reduction in utility rates as described in Resolution 980 of
II 'i
IlI the City of Kent.
II
i
i I
, I
li 3
' I I
,
li
i
i�
I
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
u
maintenance, operation and preservation of facilities under the
jurisdiction of the street utility, all authorized by and pursuant
II, to Chapter 82 . 80 RCW.
1!
I I
Section 5. Street Utility Customer Charge -- I
jResidential . As of March 1, 1992 , the Public Works Director shall
; impose upon each residential housing unit served by the street i
futility, a uniform customer charge of one dollar and ninety cents
($1. 90) per month; provided that the residential housing units i
! described in Section 7 shall be exempt from this charge.
I
I
Section 6 . Street Utility Customer Charge -- Business. ,
A. Amount of Charge. As of March 1, 1992 , the Public I
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.
u
i
ii
ii
4
i
I
i
;; I
iI
i I
it
II I
I�
B. Calculation of Charge. The monthly business
i
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
j $0. 003958 per hour. This figure will be approximately one dollar
and ninety cents ($1. 90) per full-time equivalent employee per
11month when based upon one thousand nine hundred twenty (1, 920)
hours of employment per calendar year.
!I i
jl I
C. Under-reporting of Employees. Upon the City' s
request, a business shall provide copies to the City of its
iquarterly reports as submitted to the State Department of Labor and
Industries, reporting employee hours worked. If at any time during j
the year it appears that the number of employees in a particular
li
j business enterprise have been under-reported for the purposes of
this ordinance, an additional charge in the amount of such under-
it
ilreporting shall be due.
li
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 I
business ' employees work within or without the Kent city limits.
� I
2 . For any employees whose nominal place of j
business is within the City limits of the City of Kent, all hours
will be subject to the street utility charge. Any employee j
irregularly reporting to work within the City limits shall have all
i
of that employee ' s time subject to this charge, even if portions of
i
'! the employee' s time are spent outside the City of Kent, for I
,i
1
5
�r I
II I
I
j
,
exam le a realtor or outside salesperson. For an employee
example,
normally employed within the City of Kent, who for extended periods
I( of time reports to work outside the City of Kent, (for example, a
Ilcontractor' 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
IiCity based upon one thousand nine hundred twenty (1, 920) hours
Iannually, and pay the charge based upon those figures.
�
j� Section 7 . Exemptions from Street Utility Customer
i
Service Charges. Charges imposed by this ordinance shall not be
I
applicable to:
I
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
�IC. Property used for nonprofit or sectarian purposes,
which if said property were owned by such organization would
j qualify for an exemption under Chapter 84 . 36 RCW; and
{I
ji
l D. Residential housing units to the extent of their
j occupancy by low-income senior citizens and low-income disabled
citizens as provided in RCW 74 . 38 . 070 (1) .
i
Section 8 . Credits against Street Utility Customer
Charge. All business enterprises subject to this ordinance shall
I
be credited the full amount of any commuter or employer tax paid
I� for transportation purposes by the business, against the street
I�
i
6
�I
i
I I
II I
II
utility customer charge. In no case, however, shall the credit
exceed the street utility business customer charge. i
Section 9 . Adjustment of Street Utility Customer Charcle. ;
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
I
rates and charges set out in this ordinance shall be effective ana-I
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 I
`ipayable to the City as stated in such billing. Any street utility f
I charge which becomes delinquent shall become a lien upon the i
premises and be enforced in the same manner as rates and charges
for the use of systems of sewerage under Chapter 35. 67 RCW.
f Delinquent charges shall bear interest at eight percent (8%) per
II 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 I
for the use of the street system as set forth in this ordinance, or
j in connection therewith, shall be credited to the fund and all
revenues collected shall be used for transportation purposes only,
II 7
i'
I
i
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
Iof the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its
application to other persons or circumstances.
i
I Section 14 . Effective date. This ordinance shall take
effect and be in force and effect thirty (30) days from the time of
its final approval and passage as provided by law.
iI
I
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
8
II
I
it I
i'
I
li
I
ATTEST:
i
BRENDA JACOBER, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
I
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED the day of , 1992 •
APPROVED the day of 1992 •
i
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
i
i
(
I
i
I I
I
stutil . ord
9
e
i i
\ � i
Kent City Council Meeting
.�% Date April 7 , 1992
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: YOUTH AT RISK PROGRAM COORDINATOR POSITION
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: The Parks Committee voted 2-1 at their
March 17, 1992 meeting to bring the Youth at Risk issue to the
full Council on April 7 for the Council 's final determination.
The recommendation from the Parks Committee is that the
position, although funded at full time, should remain frozen at
3/4 time until such time as funds are available.
3 . EXHIBITS:
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Parks Committee 2-1 vote
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not R ommended
ti'
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember h-V moves, Councilmember 6 IT-/ seconds
that the Youth at Risk Coordinator position, although funded at
full time, should remain frozen at 3/4 time until such time as
funds are available.
DISCUSSION: ✓/
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 4B
Kent City Council Meeting
z^ �� Date April 7. 1992
y� Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: BUSINESS LICENSE ORDINANCE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The Business License ordinance relating
to the administration of business licenses within the City of
Kent is presented to the City Council for consideration and
passage. The ordinance updates the current general business
license code. It removes revocation procedures of business
licenses from the City Council to an administrative process
with appellate rights to the Hearing Examiner. It also removes
any related fee schedules from the code to be established by
City Council resolution consistent with current City policy.
This ordinance was before the Council in December, but referred
back to committee for further review. Included in the
ordinance are recommendations made by the Kent Chamber of
Commerce.
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo, Business License Application Form, general
business license instructions, business license procedures, the
City of Kent Development Assistance brochure, application form
of appeal, of business license denial/revocation, ordinance and
Planning Committee minutes 3/17/92
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Planning Committee (unanimous)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NOX_ YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember G,I"' .' moves, Councilmember kLlj�l seconds
adoption of Ordinance amending the business license
code.
DISCUSSION• YLL
ACTION• -A�4-T� C'1
Council Age Pa
Item No. 4C
CITY Of J_,Q_�LL ��J T
CITY OF KENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
ran c�e� MEMORANDUM
April 7 , 1992
MEMO TO: MAYOR DAN KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: BUSINESS LICENSE ORDINANCE
City staff have met on several occasions with representatives of
the Chamber of Commerce and once with Councilman White to resolve
problems with the proposed business license ordinance. The final
draft has generally been agreed to by all parties. The procedures
for administering the ordinance and a copy of the business license
application are included in your packet. Fees for license
application will remain the same. The dollar amount for appeal
fees has not yet been decided. A separate resolution will be
submitted to the Council formally establishing business license
fees. The Planning Committee discussed the Business License
Ordinance on December 3 , 1991 and January 12, 1992 . At the January
21 meeting, Chairman Johnson indicated that the issue would come
back to the Planning Committee at a future date and the Chamber of
Commerce would be advised of that date. On March 17, 1992 , the
Planning Committee adopted adopted the new business license
ordiance with one amendment in Section 5. 20. 340 (E) clarifying that
hearing examiner fees will be established by City Council
resolution.
JPH/mp:cp:busli4o7 .mem
cc: Carol Proud
Csr;a;- '> 1rC; CITY OF KENT
r l BUSINESS LICENSE APPLICATION
= � Ordinance No.
o
ALL LICENSES EXPIRE Kent Planning Department New Business $75 ( )g50 ( )
DECEMBER 31. RENEWAL Mail Address: 220 Fourth Avenues. Renewal
Xt1i11LC FEES ARE DUE BY Physical Location: 400 W. Gowe Home Occupation $ ( )
New Owner $7 5
JANUARY 31, after which Kent WA 98032 5 ( )
date penalties will be (206) 859-3390 Relocation within Kent $ 0 ( )
added. LICENSES ARE Former Name/Address of
PRORATED SEMIANNUALLY. FEE MUST PLEASE TYPE OR PRESS FIRHLY Business
ACCO;4PAHY APPLICATIOIJ
(Call King County: 296-7300) (Call Uashington State: 1-206-753-4401 or 1-800-647.7706)
1. King County Property ParceL(s) # WA State Tax ID #
2. Business Name: Proposed opening at this Location
Parent Company Name:
3. Business Location (address and zip):
4. Billing Address: City State ZiP
5. Business Phone: Manager: Phone
6. Explain in DETAIL the type of business or service rendered. Include: Type of products or materials stored, used and
distributed. Provide detailed description of daily business activities. Indicate whether whoLesale/ retail/ service/
manufacturinguse.
7. Check whether Individual _ Partnership Corporation _. If individual, list owner; if partnership list partners;
if corporation, list officers. IN ALL CASES, GIVE TITLE, RESIDENCE ADDRESS AND PHONE ULN48ER OF EACH.
Name Address Title Phone _
Name Address Title Phone _
8. Type of Building for Proposed Business (Please check): Personal Residence (Include Home Occupation Agreement)
Single-Tenant Mutti-Tenant Single-Tenant Warehouse Multi-Tenant Warehouse
Mixed-Use Described mixed-use in building
Floor Space Used Name of business center/apartment complex
Are you sharing space with established business? If so, who?
Total Number of Full Time Employees: Total Number of Part Time Employees (Do Not Include Temporary Employees)
9. outside storage? Sq. Ft Materials:
10. Address(es) of any warehouse or distribution center in Kent
11. owner of BUILDING: Address:
Owner of LAND: Address:
12. INFORMATION FOR FIRE/POLICE DEPARTMENTS: TIJO emergency names and phone numbers:
Name Phone Name Phone
T bareby certlfythaf theatatemants and itformakTorifurm shed by me kn this apClaatlar are true and caaplete
to tha beJ>t of.R1y knoNladga L 'also acknoHtedge ttiaC t1Ls st'atemenks=snd �n#Armatlnn furnlshed:by+na an, thle
applictitton aro 'publ�a records and are avollabta f.or public lnspectjon purwunt to State of Gush{nei9n. RCN
42 i7 2GG t urKJerstand;that Issuance of;this ttcense Ts coruJutlgned upon compllanceat atE ,times wttlj al{
appltcabie ordin�nces, 'iegulations and statutes of the Ctty ;af Kent and thQ StatO o washington' : The issuance
of xhis!bustness' License does not'{amply cahpltance wtth the'xon ng, a)n�form F'i,re and UUftdtng;GOdes_
13. Signature Print Name Title Date
IIICC44PLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE PROCESSED
---------------------------------------------------------------—-------—------- ---------—
FO.R OFFICE USE GHLY: Plaster Control # Land Use Code # Zone
T.R. No. Amount Date Rec'd Date Mailed:
White: Original Green: Code Enforcement Canary: Planners
Pink: Pending File Gold: Applicant's Receipt Copy forms:a:business.292
GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE INSTRUCTIONS
1. Licenses will be issued within approximately three (3) working days
from date of application. Incomplete applications will not be
accepted. Incomplete applications received by mail requiring
follow-up will delay issuance of the business license. All
applications must be accompanied by a completed hazardous
materials/waste information form. Ilome occupation applications must
also be accompanied by a completed and signed Home occupation
agreement.
2 . King County property parcel number (s) and Washington State tax
identification (UBI) numbers are required. Property parcel numbers
may be obtained by calling King County at 296-7300, from the King
County property tax statement, or from the property owner.
Applications for Washington tax (UBI) numbers can be obtained by
calling the Department of Revenue in Olympia at 1-206-753-4401.
There is also a Department of Revenue office at 919 SW Grady Way,
Suite 105 , Renton; office hours 8 AM to 5 PM Monday thru Friday;
phone number 1-800-647-7706 .
3 . Issuance of business licenses to restaurants, espresso carts,
wholesale food manufacturers, meat processors, and hot tub
establishments are contingent upon receipt of satisfactory King
County Health Department inspection.
4 . A separate business license is required for each branch,
establishment or location at which business related activity is
conducted. A separate license is not required for a facility
determined by the Planning Department Director to be an accessory
facility to a branch establishment or location for which a license
is issued.
5 . The operation o1' two or more separate businesses at one location
shall require separate licenses .
6 . When a business relocates , the license shall be returned to the
Planning Department along with a new application for licensing at
the new location. No fee is charged for the current year.
7 . Licenses are not transferrable or assignable. A new license is
required upon change of ownership, and when the primary business
being conducted has significantly changed.
8 . Licenses are to be posted in a conspicuous place at the place of
business. A license shall be displayed by the licensee at the
request of any interested person.
9 . Businesses operated not for profit are exempt from paying a business
license fee upon application and satisfactory proof of their not for
profit status.
GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSE INSTRUCTIONS
PAGE 2
lo . Issuance of a business license does not guarantee the quality of
goods, services or expertise of a licensee, and does not shift
responsibility from the licensee to the City of Kent for proper
training, conduct or equipment of the licensee or his/her agents,
employees or representatives.
11. All approved licenses are conditioned upon compliance at all times
with all applicable ordinances, regulations and statutes of the City
of Kent, King County and the State of Washington.
12 . Licenses must be renewed annually by January 31. Renewal fee is
$50 . 00, except Home Occupations are renewed for $25. 00. Renewal
notices are mailed in December of each year to the last address
provided to the City. Failure of the licensee to receive such
mailed notice shall not release the licensee from applicable fees or
penalties.
13 . It is unlawful for any person to conduct, operate, engage in or
practice any business in the City of Kent without having first
obtained a general business license for the current calendar year or
unexpired portion of the calendar year, and paying the applicable
fee. Penalty for operating without a license is $500. 00. Person:
under the age of eighteen (18) years are not required to have a
business license.
14 . A business license may be denied, revoked, or suspended (see
Ordinance # ) . The licensee has the right to appeal. Appeal
forms are available at the Planning Department, and appeals are
heard by the Hearing Examiner. There will be a $ fee for
filing an appeal.
b1hana.out
BUSINESS LICENSE PROCEDURE
Day 1: - Log applications in business license log.
- Tally Checks
- Submit checks to Customer Service (Cindy) .
Day 2 : - Receive paid applications back from Customer Service.
- Assign Land Use Codes
- Assign Master Control Numbers (computer)
- Enter all information contained on applications into
business license system (computer) .
Post payments in business license system (computer)
- Queue licenses to print (computer)
Day 3 : - Information Services Department sends printed licenses
and labels to Planning Department. Planning checks
licenses for accuracy and mails licenses to businesses.
Enter date issued in log.
Day 4 : - Type zoning permit and send with application copy to
Planners to check zoning and compliance with land use
codes. Application copy also sent to Code Enforcement
Department.
91c:blproc
BUSINESS LICENSING PROCEDURE'S
A City of Kent business license is required for any business conducted for private profit or benefit within the
City of Kent. Tile City of Kent does not collect any business and occupation taxes or admissions taxes from
Kent businesses. Persons under the age of 18 are not required to have a business license.
In addition to regular and home occupation business licenses, special licenses are required for such
activities/businesses as rock festivals, massage parlors, amusement devices, gambling, carnivals, bowling
alleys, pool tables, roller skating rinks, soliciting etc.
(1) Contact the Planning Department at 859-3390 for information on business licensing, application forms,
home occupation regulations, fees and zoning. Contact the Treasury Services Department in City Hall,
859-33675 to obtain information on special licensing requirements. Obtain application forms from the
Planning Department and Treasury Services Department.
(2) Submit completed application, home occupation agreement form, and fees to the Planning Department.
Payment of the fee does not guarantee the application will be approved, nor shall it entitle or authorize
the applicant to open or maintain any business contrary to Kent City Code.
I (3) The Planning and Fire/Building Departments will review the application. Certain types of business
license applications also must be cleared through the Police Department.
I '
i
(4) Once the application is processed, the Planning Department will mail the business license to the
applicant in approximately three (3) working days.
(5) Business license renewal notices are mailed to current business licensees in December of each year.
However, failure of the licensee to receive such mailed notice shall not release the licensee from any
fees or penalties, nor extend any time limit. Renewal fees are due by January 31.
(6) Applicants must complete a new application for relocations of the business or new ownership.
it
(7) Applicant shall inform the Planning DeparUnent of termination of business operations within the City
of Kent.
(8) The fee for a new business or new owner is $75.00, renewed annually for $50.00; home occupation fec
is $25.00, renewed annually for $25.00. There is no fee for relocations within the City. License fees
must accompany application and are prorated semiannually.
(9) Issuance of a business license is conditioned upon compliance at all times with all applicable ordinances,
regulations and statutes of the City of Kent and the State of Washington. Issuance of a business license
does not imply compliance with the Zoning, Uniform Fire and Building Codes.
*This brochure is intended only as a. synopsis of information, and not as a substitute for codes, regulations or
professional services. Contact Planning Deparonent for more information.
3/92
CIL.,oc Waien
� � APPEAL FEE $
T•_ CITY OF KENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1arvic� (206) 859-3390
APPLICATION FOR APPEAL OF BUSINESS LICENSE DENIAL/REVOCATION
APPEAL # DATE RECEIVED RECEIVED BY
NAME OF APPLICANT:
MAILING ADDRESS:
DAYTIME TELEPHONE:
BUSINESS NAME:
BUSINESS ADDRESS:
REASONS FOR APPEAL (Be specific)
If you need more space, please attach documents to this application.
If you have any questions, call the Planning Department at 859-3390.
blappeal
1
I!
I 1
I
11
i'
ORDINANCE NO.
I,
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent,
Washington, relating to business licenses,
amending the Business License Code by deleting
the existing chapter and adding a new Chapter
5 . 02 in the Kent City Code (repealing
Ordinances 1774 , 1919 and 2383) ; establishing
a uniform system for the issuance, renewal,
revocation and suspension of general business
licenses and prescribing penalties for
violations.
i
WHEREAS, the City of Kent may, under general law a.
,', pursuant to RCW 35A. 82 . 020 , license, revoke the same for cause,
; make inspections and otherwise regulate all kinds of businesses,
occupations, trades, professions and any other lawful activity in
the City; and
i
WHEREAS , the city' s current General Business License
Code, as contained in Kent City Code Chapter 5 . 02 is incomplete,
outdated and does not describe an efficient manner of business
license administration; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT HEREBY ORDAINS AS
; FOLLOWS :
!i
Section 1 . Ordinance 1774 , entitled:
AN ORDINANCE containing all general
license provisions of the City of Kent;
requiring compliance by persons required
to obtain licenses ; establishing a uniform
system for the issuance of such licenses;
i
i
I
i
setting forth the authority of the City
License Officer; prescribing penalties
i; for the violation of its provisions; and
repealing certain portions of previous
ordinances.
�i
:;and Ordinance 1919 , entitled:
i
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent,
Washington, providing for a procedure
for the revocation of Kent Business
Licenses.
i
I;
j.'land Ordinance 2383 , entitled:
II AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent,
!j Washington, relating to business licenses;
amending Chapter 5 . 02 (Ordinance No. 1744
and 1919) of the Kent City Code, "General
Business Licenses; " establishing license
ii fees, and. providing penalties for violation
of the City Code; and repealing Ordinance
No. 1344 .
I
i
and all other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict
':herewith are repealed.
i
Section 2 . The General Business License Code, Kent City
Code (K. C. C. ) Chapter 5 . 02 is hereby amended by deleting the entire
chapter and adding the following:
Chapter 5 . 02
GENERAL BUSINESS LICENSES
5. 02 . 020 . Title. This ordinance shall constitute the
"Business License Code" of the City of Kent, and may be cited as
, such.
2
5 . 02 . 040. Power to license for regulation and/or
revenue. This ordinance is adopted by the City of Kent, exercising
its power authorized under general law to license and revoke the
same for cause, to regulate, make inspections and to impose excises
for revenue or regulation in regard to all places and kinds of
business, occupations, trades, professions and any other lawful
activity (as such power is described in the Revised Code of
Washington (RCW) 35A. 82 . 020) . The provisions of this ordinance
shall be liberally construed for the accomplishment of such
purposes.
5 . 02 . 060 . Definitions. The words and phrases used in
this ordinance, except where the same shall be clearly contrary to
or inconsistent with the context of the ordinance or the section in
which used, shall be construed as follows:
A. "Business" means all activities, occupations,
trades, pursuits , professions and matters located within the City
or within the City ' s jurisdiction, operated on a permanent and/or
ongoing basis whether operated with the object of gain, benefit,
advantage or profit, or operated not for profit, to the business
enterprise or to another person, directly or indirectly. Business
herein shall mean apartment and residential rental properties of:
three or more units . Business shall not mean government agencies.
Such activities not requiring a business license may, however, be
subject to temporary use regulations of the Kent Zoning Code. This
ordinance shall not apply to any business or business enterprise
that the City is forbidden by law to tax.
B. "Business Enterprise" means each location at which
a person engages in business within the City.
3
C. "City" means the City of Kent, Washington.
D. "Director" means the Director of Planning of the
City, or his/her designee.
E. "Department" means the Department of Planning of the
City.
F. "Employee" means any person employed at .any business
enterprise who performs any part of his/her duties within the City,
except casual laborers not employed in the usual course of
business. All officers , agents, dealers, franchisees, etc. , of a
corporation or business trust, and partners of a partnership
(except limited partners) are "employees" within this definition.
G. "Engage in Business" means to commence, conduct or
continue in any business.
H. "l,icensee means any business granted a business
license.
I . "Person" means any individual , partnership, company,
or a person acting in a fiduciary capacity.
5 . 02 . 080 . administration and Enforcement.
A. The Director of Planning, under the authority
granted pursuant to the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) Chapter
35A and the Kent City Code, shall have general charge of, and
supervision over, the administration and enforcement of this
4
ordinance, and shall exercise such power and perform all the duties
imposed upon him/her by this ordinance through the Department.
B. The Director may call upon other City departments to
aid in the enforcement of this ordinance, and it shall be the duty
of all department heads to report any violations of this ordinance
to the Director.
C. Applicant shall , upon reasonable request, provide or
allow the Director to inspect relevant documentation of any
licensee for verification of the information provided by
applicant/licensee on the business license application; provided
:that the results of any such inspection shall be confidential
unless a hearing is requested under the provisions of thi-
ordinance in connection with the license.
D. The Director shall establish administrative rules
and regulations consistent with this ordinance for the purpose of
enforcing and carrying out its provisions.
5 . 02 . 100 General Business License Required. It is
unlawful for any person to conduct, operate, engage in or practice
any business in the City without having first obtained a general
, business license for the current calendar year or unexpired portion
thereof, and paying the fees prescribed herein; provided that,
persons under the age of eighteen ( 18) years shall not be required
to have a business license.
5. 02 . 120 . Separate General Business License Required.
A separate license shall be obtained for each branch, establishment
or location at which the business related activity is carried on,
5
and each license shall authorize the licensee to carry on, pursue
or conduct only that business, or business enterprise at that
location. A separate license shall not be required for a facility
;determined by the Director to be an accessory facility to a branch,
establishment or location for which a license is issued. When the
place of business of a business enterprise is changed, the licensee
shall return the license to the Department and a new license shall
be issued for the new place of business free of charge, provided
that the criteria for issuance, as set forth in Section 5 . 02 . 200
' herein are met at the new location.
5. 02 . 140 . Licenses Not Transferable. No license issued
under the provisions of this ordinance shall be transferable or
assignable unless otherwise specifically provided for; except that
a license may be transferred when a business changes its structure
of ownership, provided, however, that a new business license shall
be required upon a substantial change of ownership, whereby those
primarily accountable for the business have changed or upon
substantial change in the type of business operated, whereby the
. primary business being conducted has significantly changed.
5. 02 . 160 . License to be Posted. All licenses issued
pursuant to this ordinance authorizing the operation or conducting
of any occupation, business, trade or entertainment at a specified
location shall be posted in a conspicuous place at such location.
Such license shall be displayed by the licensee at the request of
any interested person.
6
5. 02 . 180 . Disclaimer of City Liability.
Issuance of a license pursuant to this ordinance does not
constitute the creation of a duty by the City to indemnify the
licensee for any wrongful acts against the public, or to guarantee
; the quality of goods, services or expertise of a licensee, or to
otherwise shift responsibility from the licensee to the City for
' proper training, conduct or equipment of the licensee or his/her
agents, employees or representatives, even if specific regulations
require standards of training, conduct or inspection.
5 . 02 .200 General Qualifications of Licensees.
A. No license shall be issued, nor shall any license be
renewed, pursuant to the provisions of this general licen:
ordinance to:
1 . An applicant who is not eighteen years of age
at the time of application;
2 . An applicant who has had a similar license
revoked or suspended pursuant to Section 5 . 02 . 300 of this
ordinance; or
3 . An applicant who shall not first comply with
the general laws of the State of Washington; or
4 . An applicant who seeks such a license in order
to practice some illegal act or some act injurious to the public
health or safety.
7
B. Any person, including City officials, may submit
complaints or objections to the Director regarding the application
for any license, and the Director is additionally authorized to
tion from all City departments as will
request and receive informa
ermining whether to issue or deny the
tend to aid him/her in det
license. Such .information shall be confidential unless a hearing
is requested on the application, or if the applicant shall request
the information in writing. All information, complaints or
objections shall be investigated and considered by the Director
.. prior to issuing, denying or renewing any license.
5.02 .220 . Application Procedure, License Fee.
A. The Director is authorized to prepare a schedule of
fees for general business licenses hereafter issued, and when
approved by the City Council by resolution, such schedule shall
govern the amount of the license fee.
B. All businesses operated not for profit shall be
exempt from paying a business license fee upon application and upon
satisfactory proof to the Director of said not for profit status .
i
C. The business owner shall make application for any
business license required under this ordinance to the Director on
a form prepared by the Department, which application shall be
accompanied by a receipt from the Department showing payment of the
required fee. Business licenses shall be granted annually. If the
application is made within six (6) months of the date fixed for
expiration, the fee shall be one half the annual fee.
8
5 . 02 . 240 . Approval of Business License. All licenses
approved for issuance by the Director shall be conditioned upon
compliance at all times with all applicable ordinances, regulations
and statutes of the city and the State of Washington.
5.02 .260 . Renewal. The Director shall mail the forms
for application of business license renewals to business
enterprises in the city to the last address provided to the
Director by licensee. Failure of the business enterprise to
receive any such form shall not excuse the business enterprise from
making application for and securing the required license or
renewal , or for payment of the license fee when and as due
. hereunder.
5 .02 .280 . Overpayment or Refund of License Fe
Whenever a business enterprise makes an overpayment, and within two
(2) years after the date of such overpayment, makes an application
for a refund or credit for the overpayment, the claim shall be
considered by the Director, and if approved, shall be repaid from
the general fund.
5 . 02 . 300 . Denial, Revocation or suspension of License --
Generally.
A. In addition to the other penalties provided by law,
any business license issued under the provisions of this ordinance
(or its predecessor) may be denied, revoked or suspended at any
time, where the same was:
1 . Procured by fraud, false representation or
material omission of fact, or for the violation of, or failure to
9
comply with any of the provisions of this ordinance by the person
holding such license,. or any of his/her servants, agents or
employees, while acting within the scope of their employment; or
2 . If the licensee violates any applicable city,
state or federal law, or if the purpose for which the license was
issued is being abused to the detriment of the public, or if such
license is being used for a purpose different from that for which
it was issued. No license shall be revoked or suspended except in
accordance with the procedures provided in this ordinance.
B. Upon revocation, said or similar business shall not
be granted a license, upon any new application that may be made,
for a period of sixty (60) calendar days from date of revocation.
The period of suspension shall be fixed by the Director for up to
and including ten (10) days for the first suspension and up to and
including thirty (30) days for any subsequent suspension within
twelve (12) calendar months of a prior suspension.
C. It is unlawful for any person whose license has been
revoked or suspended to continue operation of the business
enterprise, or to keep the license issued to him/her in his/her
possession and control , and the same shall immediately be
surrendered to the Director. When revoked, the license shall be
canceled, and when suspended, the Director shall retain it during
the period of suspension.
5 . 20 . 320 . Denial of License -- Request for Hearing.
Upon denial of a license, the Director shall , by certified mail,
give written notice of such action to the applicant, which notice
shall include a written report summarizing the complaints,
10
objections and information received and considered by the Director
and further stating the basis for such action. Any applicant whose
application is denied may, within ten (10) calendar days after
. notice of denial as provided in this ordinance, request a hearing
in writing on such denial before the Hearing Examiner. Any license
for which renewal has been denied shall remain in effect pending
the determination made as a result of such Hearing Examiner
hearing. If no request for hearing is received within the time
specified, the Director' s decision shall be final .
5 .20 . 340 . Suspension or Revocation Procedure.
A. Actions to suspend or revoke any license shall be
commenced by filing with the Department a written complaint setting
forth in specific terms the basis therefor. Upon receipt of suc
complaint, the Director shall review the allegations set forth in
the complaint and perform a preliminary review of the facts as
deemed appropriate under the circumstances to determine if the
allegations in the complaint may constitute cause for suspension or
revocation. If the Director determines that the allegations in the
complaint may constitute cause for suspension or revocation, a copy
of such complaint shall be mailed by certified mail to the licensee
at his last address as shown by the license records of the
Director, and shall be accompanied by a notice that the license may
be suspended or revoked.
B. The licensee shall , within ten (10) working days
after receiving any such complaint, mail by certified mail to the
complainant and file with the Director his/her written answer which
shall admit or deny the allegations of the complaint. The licensee
11.
may provide other information with the answer licensee deems
relevant for consideration by the Director.
C. Upon failure of any licensee to file an answer as
provided in this section, or in the event that no hearing is
requested, as set forth below, the Director shall investigate the
allegations of the complaint, and if cause exists therefor may
recommend suspension or revocation of the license, or otherwise
he/she shall dismiss the complaint; provided that if the Director
finds upon a sufficient showing that the conduct complained of has
been corrected and is unlikely to be repeated, he/she may dismiss
such complaint; and provided further, that the complaint shall be
dismissed where the conduct complained of has been corrected.
D. Notice of the action of the Director summarizing
his/her findings and conclusions and recommended action to be taken
on the permit, if any, shall be mailed by certified mail to the
complainant and to the licensee.
E. In all cases in which a complaint is dismissed,
other than upon a written agreement between the complainant and
licensee, or in which denial , suspension, revocation or related
action as provided for herein is taken by the City, the aggrieved
party may, within ten (10) working days of the mailing of the
notice of the Director's action, request a hearing, in writing
together with the appropriate Hearing Examiner filing fee,
established by City Council resolution, both of which the Director
shall transmit to the Hearing Examiner. The Director' s recommended
action to be taken shall constitute final action by the City should
the aggrieved party fail to request a hearing as set forth herein.
12
F. The hearing before the Hearing Examiner shall be
, held according to the procedures set forth in Chapter 2 . 54 . 100 (A)
of the Kent City Code. The Hearing Examiner' s decision on such
business license shall represent the final action by the City,
unless an appeal is made to the Superior Court of King County,
within ten (10) working days after issuance of such decision.
G. When a hearing has been requested by a licensee in
connection with the suspension or revocation of a license, the
license shall remain in effect pending the determination made as a
result of such hearing; provided that in cases involving a
substantial threat to the public health, safety or welfare, the
license may be summarily suspended and in such case the date for
hearing shall be set within five (5) days following such
suspension.
5 .20 . 360 . Penalties.
A. Monetary Penalties .
1. Penalty for operation of a business enterprise
without a license shall be assessed by the Director in an amount
not to exceed five hundred ($500 . 00) dollars. This penalty shall
not apply to business enterprises failing to pay the license
renewal fee as set forth in subsection (2) below.
2 . Failure to pay the license fee within ninety
(90) days after the date of expiration, pursuant to Section
5 . 02 . 220 shall subject the licensee to the monetary penalty in the
amount of fifty dollars ($50 . 00) to reinstate the license, in
addition to the required license fee.
13
II
B. Collection. Any license fee or tax due and unpaid
i
; and delinquent under this ordinance, and all penalties thereon may
' be collected by civil action, which remedy shall be in addition to
: any and all other existing remedies and penalties.
i
I
I
C. Criminal Penalties. Any business licensee who
violates or fails to comply with any of the provisions of this
iordinance or other lawful rule or ordinance adopted by the City
pursuant thereto, shall upon conviction be punished as described in
I
lithe general criminal penalty provisions of K.C. C. Section 1. 10. 020.
�I {j
5. 20 . 380 . General Business License Application -- Public
' Record. General business license applications made to the Director
; pursuant to this ordinance shall be public information subject to I
! inspection by all persons except to the extent those records may be I.
, deemed to be private or would result in unfair competitive
disadvantage to such business enterprise if disclosed, all as more j
!! particularly described in Chapter 42 . 17 RCW.
Section 3 . Severabil.ity. 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 j
thereof to any person or circumstance shall not affect the validity
of the remainder of this ordinance, or the validity of its I
; application to other persons and circumstances.
i,
i
I
II I
14
I
I
i' i
I
Section 4 . Effective date. This ordinance shall take
;effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its passage
and approval .
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
'ATTEST:
I,
;'BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
i
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
If i
;ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
i
PASSED the day of 1992 .
APPROVED the day of , 1992 .
,', 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
: Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as
: hereon indicated.
i
i
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
buslic.ord
15
\1f
jr Kent City Council Meeting
1,16VI ,
Date April 7 , 1992
Category Other Business
� 1
1. SUBJECT: BUSINESS LICENSE FEE SCHEDULE RESOLUTION
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This resolution was drafted in
conjunction with the ordinance amending the general business
license code. The purpose of the resolution is to establish
business license fees, and filing fees for appeals under the
business license code to the Hearing Examiner. The ordinance
amending the general business license code removes the fee
schedules from the code and authorizes the establishment of
fees by resolution.
3 . EXHIBITS: Resolution, Planning Committee minutes of 3/17/92
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Planning Committee (unanimous)
(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 k 1 L, moves, Councilmember seconds
adoption of Resolution 13 H establishing fees ( elated to
business licenses.
DISCUSSION•
l V� t i
ACTION• A^� � C't
Council Agenda
Item No. 4D
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City of
Kent, Washington, establishing fees
for business licenses and fees for
appeals before the Hearing Examiner
relating to business licenses.
WHEREAS, the City Council has passed an ordinance
revising the City' s current general business license code; and
WHEREAS, it is the City' s policy to establish fees
relating to various functions in the City by resolution rather than
by ordinance so that fees may be adjusted by the Council without
amending the text of the City' s code; and
WHEREAS, the City recently passed a business license
ordinance which requires a fee for business licenses as well as a
fee for appeals of decisions made under the business license
ordinance to the Hearing Examiner; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS :
Section 1. License Fee. There is hereby established a
fee schedule pursuant to Kent City Code 5 . 02 . 220 (A) (Ordinance No.
as follows:
$75 . 00
A. General Business Licenses 50. 00
B. General Business License Renewals $
C. Home Occupation Business License $25. 00
and Renewals
Section 2 . There .is hereby established a fee of One
Hundred Dollars ($100. 00) for all appeals under the Business
License Code to the Hearing Examiner pursuant to Kent city Code
5. 20. 340 (E) (Ordinance No. ) -
Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington this day of
1992 .
Concurred in by the Mayor of the city of Kent, this
day of 1992 •
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
Resolution No. passed by the city Council of the City of
Kent, Washington, the day of , 1992 .
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
blfees.res
2
CITY OF
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MARCH 17 , 1992 4 : 00 PM
Committee Members Present
Leona Orr, Chair
Jim Bennett
Jon Johnson
Planning Staff OTHER CITY STAFF
Lin Ball Roger Lubovich
Sharon Clamp Alana McIalwain
James Harris Carol Morris
Margaret Porter
Carol Proud OTHERS
Fred Satterstrom
Alice Shobe Linda Van Nest
Grace Hiranaka
Bill Doolittle
GROWTH MANAGEMENT UPDATE - (F. SATTERSTROM)
Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom reported that visioning meetings
were conducted last week by Anton Nelessen, and staff feels that
there was a valid representation of Kent citizens in attendance.
It is hopeful that a workshop for the City Council with Mr.
Nelessen can take place at a future date. Mr. Nelessen's
interpretation of the Visual Preference Survey results is that the
City of Kent is in the arterial road building business for no good
reason, there is too much stand-alone multifamily versus mixed use,
and Kent citizens want to see more passive and formal parks.
Data entry from the public participation forums is currently being
done, and a report to the City Council will be ready for the second
meeting of April.
BUSINESS LICENSE ORDINANCE (C. PROUD)
Senior Planner Carol Proud stated that the new business license
ordinance has the general concurrence of City planning and legal
staff and representatives of the business community. She explained
that the new ordinance places the formal administration of business
licenses in the Planning Department and appeals will be heard
before the Hearing Examiner.
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MARCH 17 , 1992
PAGE 2
Ms. Proud stated at the request of Councilman White, also included
in the packet are procedures for administration of business
licenses, a revised application, general instructions, a
development assistance brochure available to the general public,
and an application for appeal. Based on a complete application, a
business license will be issued within three working days.
Staff recommends the ordinance be approved and sent to the City
Council.
Roger Lubovich distributed a draft resolution which establishes
fees for business license applications, renewals and appeals before
the hearing examiner. He explained it is City policy to be able to
adopt fees by resolution rather than ordinance. The fees stated in
the draft resolution are the current fees for application and
renewal. The $100 Hearing Examiner appeal fee was set to cover a
portion of the cost of an appeal.
Tim Gates stated that the Kent Chamber of Commerce is in support of
the current drafts.
Roger Lubovich noted that a clarification should be made to Section
5. 20. 340 (E) of the ordinance stating that hearing examiner fees
will be established by City Council resolution.
Jon Johnson MOVED and Jim Bennett SECONDED a motion to adopt the
new business license ordinance with the recommended amendment.
Motion Carried.
Jon Johnson MOVED and Jim Bennett SECONDED a motion to approve the
resolution establishing fees. Motion carried.
HEARING EXAMINER ORDINANCE (C. PROUD)
Carol Proud explained the Hearing Examiner ordinance is directly
tied to the business license ordinance and was approved by the
Planning Committee at the December 3 , 1991 meeting. The ordinance
also adds multifamily design review to the duties of the Hearing
Examiner. Roger Lubovich explained that the new ordinance brings
the City in compliance with state law requiring 10 days for an
appeal rather than 14 days as our current ordinance states.
Jon Johnson MOVED and Jim Bennett SECONDED a motion to approve the
new Hearing Examiner ordinance. Motion carried.
WHITE RIVER VALLEY HISTORICAL SOCIETY MUSEUM (L. VAN NEST)
Linda Van Nest, President of the White River Valley Historical
Society, distributed a list of 1992 officers and explained that the
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 7 , 1992
Category Other Business
SUBJECT: HEARING EXAMINER ORDINANCE
l
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The Hearing Examiner ordinance amends
the code relating to the duties and appeal procedures of the
City's Hearing Examiner. The amendments add, as duties of the
Examiner, appeals before it relating to multifamily design
review and business license denials and revocations.
Additionally, the ordinance requires that the Hearing
Examiner's decision and findings be made within 10 working days
following conclusion of the hearing in compliance with state
law, rather than 14 days as is currently provided for in the
code.
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo, Hearing Examiner Ordinance and Planning
Committee minutes of 12/3/91
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Planning Committee (unanimous)
(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: 1 /
Councilmember- moves, Councilmember m� seconds
adoption of Ordinance 3 L;3L relating to the duties and appeal
procedures of the Land Use Hearing Examiner.
DISCUSSION: '
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 4EV(
CITY Of �L�
CITY OF KENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
MEMORANDUM
April 7 , 1992
MEMO TO: MAYOR DAN KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: HEARING EXAMINER ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS
The proposed amendments to the Hearing Examiner ordinance were
approved by the Planning Committee at the December 3 , 1991
committee meeting. The amendments include the appeal of any
business license decision directly to the Hearing Examiner. This
proposal is subject to approval of the revised Business License
Ordinance.
JPH/mp:hringex.mmo
cc: Carol Proud
1 '
ORDINANCE NO.
II
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent,
Washington, relating to the duties and
appeal procedures of the Land Use Hearing
Examiner, amending Section 2 .54 . 100 and
2 . 54 . 140 of the Kent City Code (amending
Ordinances 2802, 2469, and 2233) .
WHEREAS, Kent City Code (K. C.C. ) Section 2 . 54 . 100
describes the duties of the Land Use Hearing Examiner for the
City of Kent, by providing an exhaustive list of all of the types
of appeals heard by the Examiner; and
WHEREAS, by adoption of the Multi-Family Design Review
and amendment of the General Business License Ordinances, more
types of appeals must be added to this list; and
WHEREAS, K.C.C. Section 2 . 54 . 140 also must be amended,
since it provides that the Hearing Examiner shall issue a written
decision within fourteen days of the conclusion of the public
f hearing on a matter, which is inconsistent with the authorizing
statute, which provides that the Hearing Examiner shall issue his
I
for her written opinion within ten working days following
conclusion of testimony and hearings (RCW 35A. 63 . 170) ; NOW,
j I THEREFORE,
I
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
( HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
I 1
'i
Section 1. Kent City Code Section 2 . 54 . 100 (as last
amended by Ordinances 2802, 2469 and 2233) , is hereby amended to
read as follows:
I
2 .54 . 100. DUTIES OF THE EXAMINER.
I
A. Applications.
1. The Examiner shall receive and examine
available information, conduct public hearings, prepare a record
1 thereof, and enter findings of fact and conclusions based upon
these facts, which conclusions shall represent the final action
on the application, unless appealed, as hereinbelow specified,
for the following types of applications:
( ( ) ) a. Conditional use permits;
( (-2—. ) ) b. Shoreline permits;
( (3 ) ) c. Sign variances;
( ( ) ) d. Planned Unit Developments;
e. Multi-Family Design Review; and
f. Business Licenses (denials,
revocations) .
i
2 . The Examiner shall receive and examine
available information, conduct public hearings, prepare a record
thereof and enter findings of fact and conclusions based upon
( those facts, together with a recommendation to the City Council,
for the following applications:
a. Rezones;
b. Preliminary plats;
C. Special use combining
i
!; districts, including mobile
i home park combining districts.
li d. Initial zoning designations for
i'
annexed areas or zoning
! designations for proposed
annexations to become effective
upon annexation.
I
2
i
I
�I
,
I�
�I I
3 . The Examiner shall also conduct public
hearings when required under the provisions of the State
Environmental Policy Act; conduct public hearings relative to
j possible revocation of any conditional use permit; conduct such
other hearings as the Council may for time to time deem
appropriate.
B. Recommendation or Decision.
1. The Examiner' s recommendation or decision
may be to grant or deny the application, or the Examiner may
recommend or require of the applicant such conditions,
modifications and restrictions as the Examiner finds necessary to
j
make the application compatible with its environment and carry
out the objectives and goals of the comprehensive plan, the
zoning code, the subdivision code, and other codes and ordinance=
�lof the City. Conditions, modifications and restrictions which
:' may be imposed are, but are not limited to, additional setbacks,
screenings in the form of landscaping and fencing, covenants,
easements and dedications of additional road rights-of-way.
Performance bonds may be re-required to insure compliance with
lconditions, modifications and restrictions .
2 . In regard to applications for rezones,
preliminary and final plat approval and special use combining
;Idistricts, the Examiner ' s findings and conclusions shall be
submitted to the City Council, which shall have the final
authority to act on such applications. The hearing by the
Examiner shall constitute the hearing by the City Council.
i
Section 2 . K. C.C. Section 2 . 54 . 140 (Section 14 of
I
Ordinance 2233) is hereby amended to read as follows:
i
I
i
3
it
2 .54 . 3.40 EXAMINER' S DECISION AND RECOMMENDATION —
FINDINGS REQUIRED. When the Examiner renders a decision or
recommendation, the Examiner shall make and enter written
findings from the record and conclusions therefrom which support
such decision, which decision shall be rendered within ten
I
working days following conclusion of all testimony and hearings,
I
unless a longer period is mutually agreed to in writing by the
applicant and the Hearing Examiner. ( (=men ealendar Qays
the eenelusien e€ the hearing. ) ) The copy of such decision,
including findings and conclusions, shall be transmitted by
certified mail, return receipt requested, to the applicant and
other parties of record in the case requesting the same. I
In the case of applications requiring Council
approval, the Examiner shall file a decision with the City
i
j Council at the expiration of the period provided for a rehearing,
if one is conducted or within ten working days following
i
conclusion of all testimony and rehearings on the matter ( (e-
within fourteen 'lays of the -ee _eldsi.e.. ei a rehea
I
I
I �
Section 3 . Effective Date. This ordinance shall take
I
ieffect 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
II�
IIBRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
i
'j
4
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
DECEMBER 3 , 1991
PAGE 3
the Public Works Department. The new ordinance contains strong
language which states that businesses must comply with the laws and
regulations of the City of Kent. After a business license is
issued, a copy of the application will be routed to Public Works,
Planning, Code Enforcement, and Police. Any time a business is
found not be in compliance with zoning code requirements, fire
safety issues, etc. we have a more formal handle to clear up
problems.
Roger Lubovich noted the current code states, "it shall be unlawful
for any person either directly or indirectly to conduct any
business for which a license or permit is required. " The problem
is it does not say when it is required, creating a loophole which
has already been challenged.
Carol Proud pointed out a correction to Section 5. 02 . 220 (B) , that
business licenses will be granted annually rather than to continue
for one year from date of issuance. Also Section 5 . 20. 360 (A, 2) is
changed from 30 to 90 days. The Committee agreed to change the fee
for operating without a license and to reinstate a license revoked
through nonpayment of a renewal to a flat fee of $500. 00.
Councilmember Leona Orr MOVED to accept the new ordinance as
amended and recommend approval by the City Council . Council
President Judy Woods SECONDED. Motion carried.
HEARING EXAMINER ORDINANCE (C. Proud)
Carol Proud explained this ordinance is being amended to comply
with State law requiring the Hearing Examiner ' s written decision be
rendered within 10 working days following the conclusion of the
hearing rather than 14 calendar days as the ordinance currently
reads. Multi-Family Design Review and business license denials and
revocations are being added to the duties of the Hearing Examiner.
Councilmember Orr MOVED to accept the revisions to the Hearing
Examiner Ordinance and recommend approval by, the City Council .
Council President Judy Woods SECONDED. Motion carried.
COUNTY WIDE PLANNING POLICIES FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT (F. Satterstrom)
Fred Satterstrom explained in response to the Growth Management
Act, the legislature requires that county planning policies be
ratified or adopted by July 1992 . He presented the proposed
interlocal agreement to establish a Growth Management Planning
Council of King County. This council will be composed of
representatives from the City of Seattle, King County, and suburban
cities, and they will work with the County on the development of
county-wide planning policies that will ultimately help shape the
overall County comprehensive plan and the City' s comprehensive
plan. In response to the Growth Management Act, all County
Kent City Council Meeting
�
�� �' Date April 7, 1992��� Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The administration of human service
functions of the City of Kent is currently being performed by
the City's Planning Department. The Warner Group study, last
year commissioned by the City of Kent, recommended establishing
a separate office to administer performance of functions
related to housing and human services. An ordinance has been
prepared which creates the Office of Housing and Community
Services to administer these services. This office reports to
the Planning Director.
3 . EXHIBITS: Ordinance
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee 3-0
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: ►�N[�O YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended \ Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTI N:n
Councilmember " v moves, Councilmember �' l� seconds
adoption of Ordinance -- Ol establishing the Office of Housing
and Community Services.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 4F6>(
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 31, 1992
TO: Mayor Dan Kelleher and Members of the City Council
FROM: Jim Hansen, Assistant City Administrator
SUBJECT: Office of Housing and Community Services
On March 16, 1992, the Operations Committee recommended the formation of the Office of
Housing and Community Services. This proposal will only affect functions in the Planning
Department. Specifically, the Community Development Block Grant Program (including the Home
Repair Program), the Human Services Commission staff support and several other related human
service functions will be within the new office. This reorganization can be accomplished with no
impact to the General Fund and any associated administrative costs will be covered with CDBG
funds. Please see the attached material for further detail. Please note that this packet includes the
original material submitted by the planning department.
Following a review of this information the Executive Committee, Planning Committee and
Operations Committee recommended the following changes. These changes include the position
responsible for this office will have the title of Community Services Manger, at a salary level of 45.
The office will have a reporting relationship to the Planning Director.
cc: Ed Chow, Jr., City Administrator
Jim Harris, Planning Director
Lin Ball, Senior Planner
CITY OF )11�\,LL�t2ZSV zS
. l
CITY OF KENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
1 �FS7�0°V v
MEMORANDUM
December 6, 1991
MEMO TO: ED CHOW, CITY ADMINISTRATOR
DON OLSON, DIRECTOR OF HUMAN RESOURCES
FROM: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: OFFICE OF HUMAN AND HOUSING SERVICES
Per your request I have outlined in this memo how I envision the
formation of a new Office of Human and Housing Services and how I
see it functioning as a new Office within the Planning Department.
I have started by outlining for you how Human Services currently
operates within the Planning Department, and then have followed
with my recommendation of how the Department can be reorganized to
incorporate a new Office of Human and Housing Services .
EXISTING OPERATION
Currently, the City' s support for Human Services is housed in the
Planning Department, in the Human and Housing Services Section.
This Section, which is Managed by Lin Ball , Senior Planner, is
responsible for the administration of a number of City human
services and housing related programs. This Section is responsible
for Human Services and Block Grant budgets totalling over half a
million dollars. The programs in this Section fall into six major
areas:
1. Community Development Block Grant Program
Manage, direct, and coordinate City ' s Community Development
Block Grant Programs and Activities, including Housing Repair
Program, contracted agency programs, contract compliance,
agency monitoring, and budget responsibility.
5 agencies and 7 programs in 1992 ; total budget $249, 550.
The Housing Repair Program is operated directly out of
this Section, with a budget of $142 , 000 for 1992 . In
addition to the 3 Housing Repair staff who work on this
program year around, three temporary employees are hired
during the summer months for the summer painting program.
2 . Human Services Programs
Manage, direct and coordinate the City' s General Fund Human
Services Programs and activities, including review and
analysis of grant applications, monitoring of agencies,
contract compliance, and budget responsibility.
13 agencies and 18 programs in 1992 ; total budget
$311, 497 .
3 . Human Services Commission
Develop and manage the work program of the City of Kent Human
Services Commission, making staff assignments to assure
adequate support to carry out the work of the Commission.
4 . Housing Programs
Manage the implementation of City housing programs as
assigned. Recent example is the City ' s Senior Housing
Program. Responsible for Mayor appointed Senior Housing
Committee which developed recommendations for Council on
ownership/management/development of the Senior Housing.
Responsible for second Mayor appointed committee, Senior
Housing Support Services Committee which is working on
development of a Support Services Package for the Senior
Housing.
5 . Special Programs
Originate special programs for the City which address the
City ' s need to respond to critical human services needs in the
community. Recent examples: (1) The development and
implementation of a new human services program for the City:
City' s Emergency Severe Weather Shelter Program, to shelter
the homeless during cold weather; (2) Development of a single
men' s shelter to house homeless single men.
6 . Regional Human Services Roundtable
This is a regional body comprised of elected officials (County
Executive, Mayors, and City Council members) throughout the
County who have come together to address critical human
services needs faced by the county, and to seek solutions to
these needs.
Provide staff support to this Body, with major support to
City' s elected representative; keep City Council briefed on
Roundtable issues. Implement locally, programs of the
Roundtable.
2
Staff Support
The following level of staff support is currently assigned to the
Human and Housing Services Section:
* One (1) full time Senior Planner
* One (1) full time Human Services Planner
* 50% of a full time Planner for Block Grant/Human Services
Support
* 50% of a full time Housing Planner
* One (1) full time Housing Repair Coordinator
* One (1) permanent part-time Housing Repair Specialist
* One (1) permanent part-time Housing Repair Assistant
* Three (3) temporary summer employees in housing repair
program; working full-time for 13 weeks, consisting of: one
(1) Paint Crew Leader; Two (2) painters.
* One-third (1/3) of a part-time Planning Intern
These employees are supervised by the Senior Planner in this
Section. The Senior Planner Supervises the Housing Repair
Specialist, who in turn supervises the two permanent part-time
employees and three temporary summer employees in the Home Repair
Program.
* In addition to the staff assigned to this Section, the Section
has the staff support of the Administration Division.
Employees in this Administrative Division provide both
secretarial and accounting support to the Human and Housing
Services Section. This support is provided to all sections of
the office from a pool of personnel in the Administration
Division.
PROPOSED ORGANIZATION
The results of a City Management Study conducted by the Warner
Group were presented to the City earlier this year. One of the
recommendations made by the Warner Group as a result of this study
was for the City to create a Health and Human Services Department
to include the Parks Department' s senior citizen programs and
special populations program; Planning Department human services
programs; library coordination; and oversight of the King County
health service contract.
A Management Study Committee was appointed by the Mayor to review
the findings of the Study and come forth with a recommendation. On
July 2 , 1991, the Management Study Committee ' s recommendation was
brought to the City Council for action. The Committee' s
recommendations contained some revisions to the Warner Group' s
proposal . One of these revisions was to create the Health and
3
Human Services Department, but without the inclusion of the Senior
Center function and the Special Populations Program. The
recommendation of the Management Study Committee was adopted by the
City Council on July 2nd.
Administration has now initiated the process to create an Office of
Health and Human Services as recommended by the City Council. In
response to your request I have looked at how I feel this new
Office could function in the Planning Department. In doing this I
did not include the library coordination or health services
contract functions. I only included those programs which are
presently operating in the Planning Department.
I propose the following organizational changes within the Planning
Department to implement the Mayor's proposal to create an Office of
Health and Human Services:
1. Currently there are two Divisions in the Planning Department
which report directly to the Planning Director, the Planning
services Division, and the Administration Division (see
attached Organization Chart) . There are three independent
Sections which fall under the Planning Services Division. One
of these Sections is the Human and Housing Services section
which contains all of the human services programs .
Under the proposed reorganization, a new office called the
office of Human and Housing services would be created in the
Planning Department. This new Office would contain all of the
programs and staff support currently included in the Human and
Housing Services Section of the Planning Department (as
outlined above under "Existing Operation") . The Human and
Housing Services Section would no longer exist, leaving two
sections under the Planning Services Division.
Although this new Office would be associated with the Planning
Department, I see it as an independent entity with its own
autonomy. Although ultimate reporting accountability would be
to the Planning Director, I see the Administrator of this
Office having a high degree of independent decision making
authority for the operation of this office. In the proposed
organization chart, I have placed this Office off to the side
of the Planning Director, rather than directly under the
Director, in order to illustrate the autonomous nature of this
Office. It would be a separate entity, with the Administrator
of the Office working within a collaborative framework with
the Planning Director. The Planning Director would provide
the staffing and material resources necessary for the
operation of this Office (see attached proposed Organization
Chart) .
4
2 . This Office is proposed to be called the Office of Health and
Human Services. I would recommend that this title be changed
slightly to office of Human and Housing Services, to more
accurately reflect the programs operating out of this new
Office. "Health" is a title rarely used in the naming of
Human Services Departments, Offices, Divisions, etc. , and only
designates one of many human services programs operated by the
City. "Human Services" and "Housing" are all encompassing
titles which more accurately reflect the many programs handled
within the City's human services area.
3 . I propose that a new classification titled Human and Housing
Services Administrator be established for Lin Ball as
head of this new Office. I recommend that this new
classification be established in a minimum range of 47 . Since
this is a separate Office, I feel there is a higher level of
responsibility and accountability involved than a Division
Manager which is currently a range 45 . For this reason I have
proposed the title of "Administrator" rather than "Manager" .
4 . Due to the City ' s budget deficit for 1992 I understand that it
would be difficult to establish this new Office without some
alternate source of funding to cover the extra dollars needed
to create a Manager's position.
The Planning Department recently received notice from King
County that we will have a small amount of additional money
available to apply to our 1992 Block Grant Program.
I recommend that we allocate a portion of this money to fund
the extra dollars necessary to create the Human and Housing
Services Administrator position. This will require City
Council action sometime in the near future. More urgent,
though, than Council approval, is the need for the Planning
Department to inform the County that we want to reserve this
money for Planning and Administration. If we don't do this in
the next few days we risk loosing the ability to use the money
for this type of expenditure.
Given the time constraints on this money, I would appreciate
it if a decision on the appropriate range for this
classification could be established as soon as possible, so
that we can inform the County of the amount of money we want
to set aside.
Thank you for the opportunity to put forth my vision and
recommendation on the creation of this new Office. If you need any
additional information please don't hesitate to contact me or Lin
Ball .
5
cc: Dan Kelleher, Mayor
Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager
Lin Ball, Senior Planner
6
� N
LA O
CT
v 7 IlI1 j D m
m Ln tp z O
1 � T
7 3 h m 2
° = p 0
N N C <%C
p Ln
N' S m mIZ
o 7 G
w 3 R^
<n n =
O O
v O g
7 7
N �
0
O N S
n 3
0
d
v v 3 7
� 7 3 m
� J
N
r p m
z to c
on � O O � O
-Im
3 r
N
of A A _� O
< CoO
O � 7
3 D
N 01 J z
7 0 z
N � < G)
W O r m 3 N I
v 7 D < Z A
m m a =;. m <
C o n
0 3 m d m d
Ln J
D m n
a x o
J N
D
v
7 J
N D
m o
3
m
N y
D
D o
< y < N
^ l7
ry v l O D
01 -+
J ^�
_ (1
V
MCCARTHY,TONY / KENT70/FN - HPDesk print.
-----------------------------------------
S ject: OFFICE OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY SERVICES - FISCAL NOTE
Creator: Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/FN Dated: 04/01/92 at 1207 .
THE MANAGEMENT STUDY CONDUCTED BY THE CITY IN 1990 RECOMMENDED THE ESTABLISHMENT
OF A HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES ORGANIZATION. THE ACTION REQUESTED TONIGHT IS TO
IMPLEMENT PART OF THAT RECOMMENDATION AT NO NET COST TO THE CITY.
THE INITIAL ACTION IN THIS AREA WILL ESTABLISH AN OFFICE OF HOUSING AND
COMMUNITY SERVICES IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THE ACTION WILL PROMOTE ONE
SENIOR PLANNER TO MANAGE THE FUNCTION AT AN ANNUALIZED COST OF APPROXIMATELY
$6, 000, WITH LESS THAN $4 , 000 NEEDED IN 1992 . THIS AMOUNT WILL BE PAID FOR FROM
AN ADDITIONAL ALLOCATION OF HOUSING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS OF
$11, 820. THE REMAINING FUNDS WILL BE ALLOCATED TO PROVIDE AN INTERN WITH $5,280
BEING ALLOCATED TO THE HOUSING REPAIR SERVICES PROGRAM.
SINCE THE REQUEST TAKES ANOTHER STEP TOWARD THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MANAGEMENT
STUDY AND CAN BE IMPLEMENTED AT NO NET COST THE CITY, THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE ACTION AND THE ASSOCIATED BUDGET CHANGE. IN ADDITION
THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THE BUDGET CHANGE FOR THE ADDITIONAL FUNDS
FOR THE INTERN AND THE HOUSING REPAIR SERVICES PROGRAM.
i
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of
Kent, Washington, relating to the
Office of Housing and Community
Services.
WHEREAS, administration of the human service functions
of the City of Kent are currently being performed by the City' s
Planning Department; and
WHEREAS, a study recently commissioned by the City of
Kent recommended establishing a separate office to administer
performance of functions related to housing and human services;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Kent wishes to
adopt the recommendations of the study by creating an office
relating to housing and human services program administration;
NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. office of Housing and Community Services
Created. There is hereby created in the City of Kent the office j
of Housing and Community Services. The Office of Housing and
Community Services shall not be a separate department, but rather
shall be a division of the Planning Department, reporting i
directly to the Planning Director.
I i
i
i'
I'
I
i
i
Section 2 . General Duties and Powers. The Office of
Housing and community Services shall plan, organize, and
administer the activities and functions concerning human service
issues, including the development and assessment of human service
needs, determination of priorities for human services, evaluation
and recommendation of funding requests, and the monitoring of
performance of services provided by human service organizations
and agencies. The Office of Housing and Community Services shall
coordinate activities with other human service planning agencies
and organizations. Additionally, the Office of Housing and
Community Services shall coordinate human service activities
between Administration and the Kent Human Services Commission,
and shall implement policy recommendations established by the
Kent Human Services Commission and provide necessary support to
the Commission in the performance of its duties.
Section 3 Housing and Community Services Manager.
The Housing and Community Services Manager shall manage the
Office of Housing and Community Services under the direct
supervision of the Planning Director as delegated pursuant to RCW
35A. The Housing and Community Services Manager shall be
appointed by the Planning Director.
Section 4 Housing and Community Services Staff. The
lHousing and Community Services Manager shall, in accordance with
appropriate City policy, recruit and hire employees as may be
budgeted from time to time by the City Council to the Office of
Housing and Community Services. Staff employees shall report
directly to the Housing and Community Services Manager.
I
2
I
I '
i
Section 5. Salary. The salary of the Housing and
Community Services Manager and staff employees shall be that as
established in the annual City budget.
Section 6. Transfer of Functions and Positions. By
the creation of the Office of Housing and Community Services
pursuant to this ordinance, all of the housing and human services
functions currently performed by the Housing and Human Services
section of the Planning Department shall be transferred to the
Office of Housing and Community Services. The senior planner
position in the Planning Department currently performing housing
and human services duties shall be eliminated and the functions
currently performed by this position shall be transferred to the
Housing and Community Services Manager position created herein.
Additionally, the planning and home repair staff positions
currently serving under the senior planner position being
eliminated herein shall be transferred to the Office of Housing
and Community Services and report directly to the Housing and
Community Services Manager.
Section 7 . 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:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
3
C Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 7 . 1992
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: PROPOSED ALLOCATION OF ADDITIONAL 1992 COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG) ENTITLEMENT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This meeting will consider the City
Council Planning Committee 's recommended approval of the
proposed allocation of additional 1992 CDBG Grant Entitlement.
The recommendation is to allocate additional 1992
CDBG Program Funds to the following programs: Program Planning
and Administration-$6, 000; and Kent Housing Repair Services
Program-$5, 820.
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo, City Council Planning Committee minutes
1/21/92
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Planning Committee (unanimous)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended 4fi )I Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember ,-�,, /, U�seconds
to approve the allocation for additional 1992 CDBG Program
Funds to the following programs: Program Planning and
Administration-$6, 000; and Kent Housing Repair Services
Program-$5, 820.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION• ,✓ .�,� C I C-
Council Agenda
Item No. 4G
CITY OF T1212� ZS
CITY OF KENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
LF91�II:C"s5� MEMORANDUM
April 7 , 1992
MEMO TO: MAYOR DAN KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: PLICE SHOBE, PLANNER
SUBJECT: PROPOSED ALLOCATION OF ADDITIONAL 1992 COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ENTITLEMENT.
The City Council approved our 1992 Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG) Program on September 17 , 1991. Following approval of
the program, the City was notified that our entitlement has been
increased to $249 , 500. Therefore, the City has an additional
$11,820 to allocate for the 1992 CDBG Program year. Staff proposes
allocating the remaining funds to the following projects:
Additional
Pro'lect Funds Proposed
1. Program Planning & Administration $6, 000
2 . Kent Housing Repair Services Program $5, 820
Program Planning & Administration funds will be used to cover a
portion of the proposed Housing & Community Services Manager
position salary and to fund an intern for the proposed Office of
Housing & Community Services.
Additional funding in the Kent Housing Repair Services Program will
supplement contracted services and supplies; thereby further
reducing the current back-log of requests.
The City Council Planning Committee reviewed this proposal to
allocate additional CDBG funds and recommended approval on January
21, 1992 . The proposal before the Planning Committee included a
contingency plan which is no longer necessary because King County
Planning and Community Development Division verified that $6, 000 of
"ceiling" is available in Program Planning & Administration.
Therefore, the action proposed to the full City Council does not
require a contingency plan.
Recommended Action
1. Allocate additional 1992 CDBG Program funds to the following
programs:
Program Planning & Administration $6, 000
Kent Housing Repair Services Program. $5, 820
ALS/mp:als\cdbg\92entit.cc
cc: James P. Harris, Planning Director
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
JANUARY 21, 1992
PAGE 4
HEARING EXAMINER ORDINANCE (C. PROUD
Since the Hearing Examiner ordinance is related to the business
license ordinance, no discussion was held and it will return at a
future date.
PROPOSED ALLOCATION OF ADDITIONAL 1992 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK
GRANT ENTITLEMENT (A. SHOBE)
Planner Alice Shobe explained that the City Council approved the
1992 CDBG program, and a contingency plan was adopted in the event
that funds were either increased or decreased. The City has
received a larger entitlement than expected. It was specified that
the King County Housing Authority domestic violence program receive
an additional $12 , 500 should the City receive additional Block
Grant money, and these funds have been allocated to them. The City
now has an additional $11, 820 to allocate. Staff proposes
allocating $5, 000 to Program Planning and Administration and $6, 820
to the Kent Housing Repair Services Program. Ms. Shobe went on to
explain that if additional Planning and Administration ceiling is
available through the King County CDBG Consortium, $1, 000 will be
transferred from the Housing Repair Services Program, to Program
Planning and Administration resulting in Program Planning and
Administration receiving $6 , 000 and Housing Repair. receiving
$5 , 820.
Program Planning and Administration funds will be used to cover a
portion of the new Housing and Human Services Manager position
salary and a temporary part-time intern. Additional funds for the
housing repair program will supplement contracted services and
supplies.
CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
A.
R E P O R T S
A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT
B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE
C. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
D. PLANNING COMMITTEE
E. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
F. PARKS COMMITTEE
G. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
Brenda Jacober
City Clerk
Parks Committee Minutes
March 17, 1992
Councilmembers Present: Jon Johnson, Chair; Christi Houser and Jim Bennett.
Staff Present: Jim Hansen, Barney Wilson, Don Olson, Tony McCarthy, Roger
Lubovich, Alana McIalwain, Tom Brubaker, May Miller, Stephanie
Strozyk, Robyn Bartelt, Karen Ford, Helen Wickstrom, Lea
Bishop, Cheryl Fraser, Lee Anderson, Tim Bond, Nita Smith, and
Pam Rumer.
Others Present: Doug Smith and Bob Guile, South King County Multi Service
Center; Bill Doolittle, 412 N Washington #31; David Street,
Federal Way Boys and Girls Club; Brad Thomas, South King
County American Cancer Society; Jean Parietti , Valley Daily
News; and Doug Schwab, Riverbend Men's Club.
REQUEST BY MULTI SERVICE CENTER
Doug Smith from the Multi Service Center explained to the Committee that the
Multi Service Center provides over $500,000 of services in energy assistance and
transportation, and operates 33 homeless housing shelters for the City of Kent.
Smith said that the Multi Service Center has reserved and is holding a golf
tournament at Riverbend on August 14. He requested to have the green fees for
his tournament donated by the City of Kent. In turn, Mr. Smith assured the
Committee that the monies will be returned to programs which will provide
services to the City of Kent.
Houser questioned whether information has been put together regarding this type
of request, as this is not the first request of this nature. She requested that
the City develop a policy regarding these requests.
Brubaker explained that the law is clear that the City cannot make an
unconstitutional donation of public funds, except to the needy or infirmed.
However, he mentioned that there are exceptions and the City will work with him
to determine if the funds in question will go to aid the needy or infirmed.
Otherwise, Brubaker suggested a contractual agreement where the City will receive
some sort of consideration which gives equity for the Multi Service Center's use
of the golf course.
Johnson suggested that Mr. Smith meet with Brubaker and Bartelt to work something
out and bring a recommendation back to the next Parks Committee meeting. Johnson
also requested that Bartelt include in the recommendation how much this will
affect revenue.
Bennett was concerned that if the City sets a policy to grant these requests, the
golf course could be faced with no-income tournaments scheduled for 300 days a
2
year. Hansen suggested that the policy establish a numerical limit as to how
many requests may be granted per year.
Brubaker informed the Committee that the request made by the Women's Amateur
Qualifying Tournament to have the green fees for qualifiers waived was okayed.
It was decided that advertising and the purchase of merchandise would be adequate
consideration for use of the golf course.
Brubaker informed the Committee that he will work on a policy and he will leave
it to the Parks Committee and Parks Administration to determine if the City wants
to set a limit on the number of requests granted per year.
WEST HILL PROPERTY FOR SALE
Helen Wickstrom pointed out a 2-1/2 acre section of Saltair Hills on the west
side of Pacific Highway which the City tried to purchase in 1988 and in 1989.
At the time, the owner, Mr. Harvey Grohs, wasn't willing to sell because he had
plans for a subdivision. The Parks Department then used the $100,000 budgeted
for a West Hill park to apply for a matching grant to purchase Parkside Wetlands.
The grant was approved and most of the Parkside Wetlands site has been acquired.
Wickstrom reported that two weeks ago, the Parks Department received a letter
from Mr. Grohs stating that he is now willing to sell the property, which has an
appraised value of $145,000. She explained the City's shortfall of money to Mr.
Grohs but told him that she would bring his offer to the Parks Committee.
A fiscal note from Tony McCarthy was distributed, stating that with the City's
financial situation at this time, the Executive Committee would not be in favor,
but the City appreciates the offer.
After discussion, it was determined that Mr. Grohs is not willing to take terms,
but rather a trade of property of equal value or a cash offer.
In response to Johnson's question, neither Wilson nor Wickstrom could think of
any surplus land that the Parks Department owns worth the same amount as Mr.
Grohs' property.
The Committee instructed staff to inform Mr. Grohs that the City is interested,
but does not have the money at this time.
UNIVERSAL FIELD SERVICES CONTRACT
Wickstrom explained that she put this item on the agenda prior to speaking with
the City Attorney's office about it. She has since been advised that the issue
does not need Council approval because the State IAC and Bond Issue monies have
been budgeted and were approved by Council to purchase the property at Lake
Fenwick, and that relocation of existing tenants is part of the project scope.
Since the project has previously been budgeted and approved, Wickstrom said that
she is now bringing the issue to the Committee as an informational item.
Thirteen tenants will need to receive relocation assistance as part of this
project.
3
The Committee instructed Wickstrom to forward the contract to the Mayor for
signature without taking it to Council for further approval .
YOUTH-AT-RISK PROGRAM
Lubovich opened by explaining that his office was asked at the last Parks
Committee meeting to give an opinion as to Mayor/Council authority as it relates
to maintaining the Youth-at-Risk position at 3/4 or full time. The Attorney's
office did research and drafted an opinion (legal opinion packet available upon
request) .
The Municipal Research opinion provided that the Mayor has no authority to set
a lesser or greater salary for an employee other than that established by the
Council in the budget.
To review the issue, Lubovich looked at it from two different perspectives-- the
facts surrounding the Mayor's decision and the amendments relating to the budget
amendment, and the Mayor's general executive authority.
Lubovich said that during discussion among Council members at the Council budget
meeting, the inference from the transcript is there was an understanding that the
Youth-at-Risk position would remain frozen at 3/4, along with the City's other
28 positions frozen by Administration in 1991 .
Lubovich added that if the Council clarified its intent with respect to this
position, then it is necessary to look at the executive authority that underlies
the Mayor's ability to appoint, suspend, and layoff.
In looking at statutes, Lubovich reported that there is no case law, state or
nationwide, which interprets the Mayor's authority as it applies to this
situation. In his opinion, it is clear from the language of the statutes that
the Mayor has the authority to appoint and remove employees. He added that
implicit with that is the authority to lay off employees for budgetary reasons.
Lubovich said that the issue at hand is whether implicit in his authority to lay
off is his authority to underfill a position.
Lubovich informed the Committee that he solicited a formal opinion from Steve
DiJulio of Foster, Pepper and Shefelman. It was Mr. DiJulio's opinion that the
power to suspend includes the power to underfill a position.
Lubovich said it is his opinion that the Mayor acted within his authority. He
also mentioned that he contacted Municipal Research who also concurs with his
opinion.
Johnson said that the Committee has to decide upon what action to take to the
Council . Lubovich mentioned that to take any action against Administration, the
Council would have to appropriate funds to hire legal counsel .
Bennett commented that he is in favor of the program, but it needs to be fiscally
accountable and consistent. He recommended that the position be frozen as a 3/4
position.
4
Houser agreed with Bennett. She felt that Councilmembers knew the position would
be frozen. She admitted that this is a high priority item to be funded- if the
budget picks up.
Johnson clarified for the record that when he first brought the issue up at a
Council meeting, the Parks Committee had previously voted 3-0 to support it. The
Council then voted 5-2 in favor of Johnson's proposal . Johnson, in his
amendment, proposed to reorganize the City Clerk's position for a money savings
in order to offset increasing the 3/4 position to full time so that there would
be a savings in dollars rather than a fiscal impact.
Dave Street said he felt this is not an issue of authority but an issue about
kids. It was his understanding that the funds to cover the position at full time
did not come from reorganizing the City Clerk's office but rather from budgeting
an increase in Youth-at-Risk program fees to cover the position.
Street said that if the City is not going to fund the position at full time, the
increases in day camp fees to cover the position should be pulled out because it
is not fair to the public. He said that parents have been paying this money
willingly to fund the position at full time.
Bennett answered that it is not just an issue about kids. He said it would open
a can of worms, as other department heads would want to know why their positions
haven't been filled.
Wilson commented that the can of worms has already been opened, as two Public
Works positions that were not budgeted have been filled, and a firefighter and
police officer were also hired.
Doolittle said that as a member of the audience at the Council budget meeting,
he walked out with the impression that an amendment to increase the position at
full time was passed, as well as a separate amendment to allow the increase in
fees to fund the position.
Lubovich explained that the 28 positions plus the 1/4 position are all funded,
but they are all also frozen.
Brubaker clarified that Johnson originally proposed a more comprehensive
amendment but later came back and narrowed his amendment to funding the Youth-at-
Risk position at full time. Funds resulting from the elimination of the Office
Assistant position in the City Clerk's office were utilized to fund the increase
in the Youth-at-Risk position. It was this amendment which passed 5-2. Brubaker
said that at the same time, there was the indication from the Council that they
expected the position to remain frozen.
Houser said that she is not willing to take the Mayor to court for 1/4 of a
position, as the Mayor is the administrator of the City.
Street questioned how fee increases could then be justified. Houser responded
that she did not know the fees were increased, but if they were, she agreed that
they should be refunded to participants.
5
Wilson commented that the parents were present at the Parks Committee meeting
where a fee increase to cover the position at full time passed 3-0. The parents
agreed to pay the fees to cover the position. Wilson said that the fees were
raised $10 per student per week.
Doolittle proposed that since the fees have already been collected, the Parks
Committee take the issue back to Council as a revenue neutral request. He added
that those fees were collected on "good faith" from the participants.
McCarthy agreed that the revenue budget was increased and that trend data show
additional participation in the program. He questioned if the program revenues
cover total expenses and whether fees shouldn't be based upon what the market can
handle.
Johnson requested a motion from the Committee.
Houser moved to take the recommendation to Council that the position, although
budgeted at full time, remain funded at 3/4 until the financial picture improves.
Bennett seconded the motion.
The motion passed 2-1, with Houser and Bennett voting in favor and Johnson
opposing.
Following the vote on the motion, it was clarified that the recommendation to
Council was not to fund the position at 3/4 time but rather to maintain the
freeze at 3/4 time.
GOLF AUDIT REPORT
Johnson announced that he would like to set a meeting with the Golf Advisory
Committee to go over the audit and prepare recommendations for the next Parks
Committee.
The committee decided to determine a date later.
In response to Doolittle's question, it was decided that the Golf Advisory
Committee meeting will be open to the public, since there will be active
discussion as to policy recommendations.
GOLF COURSE EQUIPMENT
Bennett said he has received input from golf course staff, the Men's Club and
golfers regarding equipment needed to maintain and increase the quality level of
the golf course. He then proposed the purchase of a tractor and a verti-drain.
Bennett then shared a video and pictures of the equipment with the Committee.
Lee Anderson explained that the tractor was included in the original list of
equipment needed at Riverbend, but staff agreed not to buy it because it wasn't
needed that year and because of lack of budget.
Anderson said that there is a lot of compaction on the fairways at the golf
6
course. The verti-drain would aerate the ground, allowing oxygen and nutrients
to get to the root zone. He emphasized that it is now time to make a decision,
as staff will have to close the fairways and completely renovate them if we wait.
He said that the golf course needs to be aerated now in order to maintain the
same level of winter play.
Bennett reported that there is approximately $22,000 in the Equipment Rental
account which hasn't been credited back to the golf course for items which have
been removed from Equipment Rental .
Anderson explained that the equipment was in Equipment Rental , but Equipment
Rental was not servicing or maintaining the equipment in any way. The equipment
was returned to the golf course asset ledger and the golf course staff is
maintaining them. During the time the equipment was in Equipment Rental , it
accumulated approximately $22,000.
Anderson reported that the cost of the machinery before interest is $45,000
($25,000 for multi-use tractor and $18,000 for verti drain) . He said that one
option is to lease-to-own the machinery for $1,400/month for 36 months. Anderson
said this would increase the cost by $61000+ but he felt it is a feasible option.
He added that the tractor is needed for many pieces of equipment.
McCarthy explained that the Finance Department is in the same situation with
Equipment Rental . Finance returned a meter reading vehicle but is yet to be
refunded for the equipment. McCarthy said that he has written a note to Tim
Heydon but he has yet to respond.
McCarthy added that Heydon's feeling is that the monies shouldn't be returned but
should be used for replacement of other equipment. McCarthy said this isn't fair
as each department has to buy its own equipment/vehicles and then give them to
Equipment Rental . He said there should be a policy for all departments.
Houser agreed that the policy decision should be changed and the money returned
to respective departments.
The Committee agreed that the golf course should be able to get back the $22,000
from Equipment Rental , but staff needs to come up with a balanced proposal with
a strategy and recommendation for the Executive Committee.
McCarthy stated the Executive Committee would like to see some overall
recommendations from golf complex staff.
PARKS COMMITTEE MEETINGS UPDATE
It was decided that the Parks Committee will meet the first and third Tuesday of
each month at 5:30 PM in the Council Chambers East.
The next Parks Committee meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, April 7 at 5:30 PM in
the Council Chambers East.
CITY OF ���
twt;mgr.2` CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MARCH 17 , 1992 4 : 00 PM
Committee Members Present
Leona Orr, Chair
Jim Bennett
Jon Johnson
Planning Staff OTHER CITY STAFF
Lin Ball Roger Lubovich
Sharon Clamp Alana McIalwain
James Harris Carol Morris
Margaret Porter
Carol Proud OTHERS
Fred Satterstrom
Alice Shobe Linda Van Nest
Grace Hiranaka
Bill Doolittle
GROWTH MANAGEMENT UPDATE - (F. SATTERSTROM)
Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom reported that visioning meetings
were conducted last week by Anton Nelessen, and staff feels that
there was a valid representation of Kent citizens in attendance.
It is hopeful that a workshop for the City Council with Mr.
Nelessen can take place at a future date. Mr. Nelessen' s
interpretation of the Visual Preference Survey results is that the
City of Kent is in the arterial road building business for no good
reason, there is too much stand-alone multifamily versus mixed use,
and Kent citizens want to see more passive and formal parks.
Data entry from the public participation forums is currently being
done, and a report to the City Council will be ready for the second
meeting of April.
BUSINESS LICENSE ORDINANCE (C. PROUD)
Senior Planner Carol Proud stated that the new business license
ordinance has the general concurrence of City planning and legal
staff and representatives of the business community. She explained
that the new ordinance places the formal administration of business
licenses in the Planning Department and appeals will be heard
before the Hearing Examiner.
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MARCH 17 , 1992
PAGE 2
Ms. Proud stated at the request of Councilman White, also included
in the packet are procedures for administration of business
licenses, a revised application, general instructions, a
development assistance brochure available to the general public,
and an application for appeal. Based on a complete application, a
business license will be issued within three working days.
Staff recommends the ordinance be approved and sent to the City
Council.
Roger Lubovich distributed a draft resolution which establishes
fees for business license applications, renewals and appeals before
the hearing examiner. He explained it is City policy to be able to
adopt fees by resolution rather than ordinance. The fees stated in
the draft resolution are the current fees for application and
renewal. The $100 Hearing Examiner appeal fee was set to cover a
portion of the cost of an appeal.
Tim Gates stated that the Kent Chamber of Commerce is in support of
the current drafts.
Roger Lubovich noted that a clarification should be made to Section
5 . 20. 340 (E) of the ordinance stating that hearing examiner fees
will be established by City Council resolution.
Jon Johnson MOVED and Jim Bennett SECONDED a motion to adopt the
new business license ordinance with the recommended amendment.
Motion Carried.
Jon Johnson MOVED and Jim Bennett SECONDED a motion to approve the
resolution establishing fees. Motion carried.
HEARING EXAMINER ORDINANCE (C. PROUD)
Carol Proud explained the Hearing Examiner ordinance is directly
tied to the business license ordinance and was approved by the
Planning Committee at the December 3 , 1991 meeting. The ordinance
also adds multifamily design review to the duties of the Hearing
Examiner. Roger Lubovich explained that the new ordinance brings
the City in compliance with state law requiring 10 days for an
appeal rather than 14 days as our current ordinance states.
Jon Johnson MOVED and Jim Bennett SECONDED a motion to approve the
new Hearing Examiner ordinance. Motion carried.
WHITE RIVER VALLEY HISTORICAL SOCIETY MUSEUM (L. VAN NEST)
Linda Van Nest, President of the White River Valley Historical
Society, distributed a list of 1992 officers and explained that the
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MARCH 17 , 1992
PAGE 3
museum, although located in Auburn, is a regional facility that
works with Kent, Auburn, Algona and Pacific. The museum serves
100, 000 people in the area including 35, 000 school children. She
explained that the Society is a non-profit organization. The
Society fully owns the museum building which houses more than 50%
Kent items. They have a 99 year renewable lease (for another 99
years) with the City of Auburn. The worth of the museum and
collections are presently appraised at over $1 million. Ms. Van
Nest distributed a Society resume giving a chronological list of
accomplishments and pointed out that the museum contains a very
good library for research.
Ms. Van Nest noted that for the last 30 years, the Society has been
a volunteer group although they have not had the same commitment of
volunteers as in the past. As a result, the City of Auburn has
been providing a staff person since 1991. The City of Auburn is
looking for a five year contractual agreement with the Society to
provide a staff person and maintenance of the exterior of the
building. The Society is concerned because Auburn' s commitment
totals $65, 000 while Kent has donated $5 , 000, which is to be cut to
$2 , 500 for 1992 . Donations are down because people view the
facility as an Auburn museum rather than a Valley museum. The
Society is concerned and would like to know if there is any
additional support available from Kent.
Planning Director Jim Harris explained that Administration has been
overseeing historical issues since the City' s contact person,
Senior Planner Lauri Anderson, resigned. He suggested researching
what the Administration, Planning and Parks Departments are
currently doing and what they see in the future for historic
preservation. This information would be brought back to the
Planning Committee.
In response to Chair Orr ' s questions regarding the status of the
log cabin museum proposal, Ms. Van Nest stated that it was her
understanding that the City was not interested in pursuing the
project. She indicated that the Society' s Interim Museum Planning
Commission met with Patrice Thorell, Nancy Woo and others and were
told that the City could not manage the log cabin museum project.
Ms. Van Nest believes that the Society ' s cause fits better with
Planning rather than the event coordinators in Administration, and
if a person were to be assigned to the Society, it should be from
the Planning Department.
Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom explained that the Planning
Department has been given the responsibility of dealing with the
historic preservation of buildings. The interlocal agreement
between the City of Kent, Auburn, and the Society has historically
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MARCH 17 , 1992
PAGE 4
been handled by Administration with Nancy Woo as the contact
person.
Alana McIalwain stated that Nancy Woo has been attending White
River Historical Society meetings as a liaison from Administration.
She stated that the Administration Department has suffered the same
consequences as other departments having lost a staff position.
Ms. McIalwain stated that Administration is not able to manage a
lot of people power to the Society and has no objection to the
Planning Department taking the lead if that would better serve the
Society. Planning Director Harris feels the City Council should
make the determination on which department should take the lead.
Alana McIalwain added that in regards to the log cabin project, it
is her understanding that because of the cost involved in
relocating the structure and the question on where it could be
relocated that a reasonable alternative could not be reached.
Council President Woods feels there is a fear that Auburn is
maneuvering itself into a position of taking over the valley
museum. The mayor has been appraised of the situation. Ms. Woods
feels that more "in kind" contributions could be made to the
Society until additional funds are available.
Bill Doolittle is surprised that the museum is in the Planning
Department and not the Parks Department because the museum is art.
Mr. Doolittle also feels that a private company could be pursued to
take on the log cabin museum project.
Chair Orr suggested Jim Harris and Alana McIalwain meet and reach
an agreement on how this subject can best be handled. If they
cannot come to an agreement, the subject can be brought back to the
Planning Committee.
Bill Doolittle suggested approaching the senior citizen advisory
board for their participation. He feels there is a lot of talent,
energy, and free time that Kent senior citizens could contribute.
Jim Harris stated he will work with Alana McIalwain and report back
to the Planning Committee.
SOOS CREEK PLAN (J. HARRIS)
This item was deferred to the next meeting.
SANDWICH BOARD SIGNS REPORT (F. SATTERSTROM)
Fred Satterstrom stated that Don Rust, owner of Bagman Cafe, has
asked that portable signs be addressed as a possible revision to
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MARCH 17 , 1992
PAGE 5
the sign regulations section of the zoning code. Mr. Satterstrom
talked with Mr. Rust and agreed that Mr. Rust and Russ Stringham,
owner of the Hungry Bear, will look at the applicable City
ordinances. Mr. Rust and Mr. Stringham will then meet with Jim
Harris and Fred Satterstrom to discuss the issues. The process for
resolution and airing those issues will be also be discussed. Mr.
Satterstrom will report back to the Planning Committee on this
issue in two weeks.
ADDED ITEMS
PROPOSED 1993 LOCAL CDBG PROGRAM POLICIES (A. SHOBE)
Planner Alice Shobe explained that each year the City receives
federal money managed through the King County Consortium. The City
is required by the federal government to adopt local program
policies stating our intent and guidelines on how the money will be
spent. The City uses the policy for determining which applications
will be funded for 1993 . The CDBG policies identify both local and
regional needs. Although the policies stress local over regional
needs, in the last two years there has become more emphasis on
regional programming especially for issues such as homelessness.
Staff recommends continued support of the consortium-wide housing
pot which was created in 1991. The City of Kent allocated
approximately $9, 000 in 1992 to the King County CDBG Consortium for
housing programs. This regional pot of money addresses the fact
that it is difficult to determine where homeless people are from.
Ms. Shobe stated that the project categories and additional
evaluation criteria are unchanged from the policy adopted for 1992 .
She explained that it is unknown at this time how much block grant
money the City will receive or the specific breakdowns. Hopefully
this information will be available from the County in two weeks.
Staff recommends approval of the policies as presented and forward
to the City Council on April 7 , 1992 .
Planning Director Harris added that this item will need to be
placed on the March 17 Council agenda as an added item to set the
hearing for April 7 and he has handouts for the Council.
Lin Ball stressed that the Council needs to be aware that this
recommendation includes the approval of continued participation in
the Corsortium-wide pot for the emergency shelter.
Jon Johnson MOVED and Jim Bennett SECONDED a motion to approve the
recommended proposed 1993 local CDBG program policies. Motion
carried.
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MARCH 17, 1992
PAGE 6
MISCELLANEOUS
Jim Bennett stated he has been presented with a petition from
residents who will be affected by the proposed downtown zoning
plan. Jim Harris advised Mr. Bennett that the proper place to
bring up the petition is at the Council meeting when the downtown
plan is presented to the Council.
WEST HILL ANNEXATION
Chair Orr stated that at their recent retreat, City Council members
agreed they would like the City to proceed with the West Hill
island annexation. Jim Harris reminded Ms. Orr that at a recent
Planning Committee meeting Assistant City Attorney Tom Brubaker
explained that this issue will come to the Council in June due to
the timing of elections. Councilmember Johnson asked about the Del
Mar annexation and Mr. Harris replied that the citizens in that
area are currently circulating a petition. Chair Orr stated that
there is confusion with the Council on the island annexation. Some
councilmembers think that the City can annex the island without an
election simply because the City surrounds it. Mr. Harris replied
that we will have Tom Brubaker come to the next Planning Committee
meeting to explain the issue again.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5: 10 p.m.
PC0317 . 92
CITY CLERK
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
MARCH 17, 1992
PRESENT: Jim White Jim Hansen
Jim Bennett Tony McCarthy
Paul Mann John Bond
Don Wickstrom Johnie Nall
Gary Gill Charlie Lindsey
Carol Morris
Connie Epperley, Sharon West, Charlie Kiefer, Mr. and Mrs. Rust,
Joyce Barnier, W.J. Carey, William Joy, David Label, Ted Nixon, Joe
Hembree
Parkside Walkway
Wickstrom stated this item was referred to the Committee from
Council. Mr. Hembree stated that Council had erroneous information
upon which their decision on the petition to vacate the walkway was
made. He suggested the issue be evaluated again to see if the
correct information would change Council's mind on closing the
walkway. Wickstrom stated that a public hearing was held at the
time and staff recommendation was not to close because it is a
pedestrian link. The Public Works Department has made improvements
by widening, relocating the fence and installing lights. White
asked if any barricades had been installed which would prevent an
auto from entering. Nall indicated that bollards had been
installed at both ends. White referred to a crosswalk at the west
end over Military. Wickstrom stated that has not been reviewed
yet. The property was dedicated to the City for public pedestrian
walkway and utilities as a condition of the plat. Jim White asked
if we were to close it would it be a violation of that plat. Carol
Morris said it would not be if it were closed because it were no
longer needed for pedestrian purposes. But that would be the only
condition for which it could be vacated. Jim Bennett stated that
the City seems to be criticized because we are not carrying out the
wishes of the citizens. In this case, we did that plus a little
more and maybe created concerns for safety in crossing Military.
However, that could be another issue. In response to Jim White' s
question, Wickstrom indicated staff would stand by their original
recommendation of not to vacate. There is a significant amount of
development on the west side of Military. Their access road out to
Military Road is 250th. The only other access is Military to Reith
or up to approximately 248th. Mr. Hembree said the actual road is
252nd and the road they would have to walk up to is 250th,
approximately 440 feet. Your report indicated a much greater
number. Jim Bennett suggested the other members of the Committee
should go out to the site and bring this item back to the Committee
at their next meeting. Gill added that at the intersection with
that pathway and Military there is a bus stop. When we referred to
1300 feet, we were looking at the distance someone would have to
Public Works Committee
March 17, 1992
Page 2
walk if they lived near the West Fenwick Park area. Paul Mann
asked about walkways and bike path on Reith Road. Wickstrom stated
we have widened the shoulder in that area to provide a walkway.
When Reith was rebuilt the shoulder was widened to provide a
walkway. Jim White suggested that the other two Committee members
look at the area and bring back suggestions to the Committee.
Odor Control of Sewer System
Jim White stated that Mr. Nixon had brought up a problem of odor
from our sewer system. Mr. Nixon said there is an odor problem on
Temperance. When he researched it, he found the City had an odor
study done in 1991. He said the number one recommendation of the
study was to develop an ordinance requiring Soos Creek Water and
Sewer District to limit their levels of sulfide. He asked why that
had not been done when it, according to the report, would correct
about 90% of the problem and why we had gone ahead with installing
the filters which would only correct a small amount of the problem.
Wickstrom stated we need to have our attorney look into whether we
can legally require Soos Creek Water and Sewer District to limit
their sulfide. Historically, the District has not been cooperative
with the City. Nixon stated he felt that if the consultant made
the recommendation we should be able to implement it. Carol
Morris responded that the consultants are not attorneys and thus
not familiar with what legally can be done and what we are talking
about here is the method of requiring enforcement. Nixon stated he
didn't feel that matters since the consultant should be familiar
with what has been done in other municipalities. Nixon wondered
how long the attorney's research would take. Morris stated that
she could not state how long it would take since she hasn't seen
the report but as soon as she received the information she would
begin work on it. Jim White stated that the matter could be
brought back before the Committee when the Attorney has completed
the research and we would remain in contact with .Mr. Nixon.
Bill Carey - Drainage on 240th
Mr. Carey asked to address the Committee concerning a drainage
problem for his property in the vicinity of 244th as well as three
other properties. He stated the drainage system to the west of
112th Avenue is inadequate. He commented that the runoff from the
new Fire Station Training Center has caused a serious erosion
problem on his property. He contended that a natural drainage area
was filled in to construct the facility. He continued with a
recount of various other deficiencies he felt existed in the
drainage system for the area. Mann asked if we weren't addressing
the drainage problem in the CIP. Wickstrom said in the proposed
CIP for the drainage utility and part of the drainage utility rate
Public Works Committee
March 17, 1992
Page 3
modification proposal, we have designated $1. 6 million for
improvements to the area. - He continued there are definitely
problems in the area but you can't just take it down the hill and
release it. Then you end up with a problem in the canyon and
valley floor. We are currently evaluating what type and size
facilities are needed. Financing for work in 1992 is part of the
drainage utility rate structure. Gary Gill stated there are
serious problems in the area and it is a large drainage basin. A
large part of the drainage basin is in unincorporated King County.
Gill stated there is a combination of things contributing to the
problem. The existing shopping center development was built before
any on-site detention was required. The newer developments were
built under the current storm water regulation which require on-
site detention for a 25-year storm and a 10-year release. The new
regulation that King County has adopted and ones that are in draft
form from DOE require 4-8 times as much on-site detention. Gill
stated we are looking at those new regulations and will be coming
to the Council in the next few months with some recommendations for
revising our standards in the storm water area. Gill stated that
in addition there are downstream problems. West of 104th Avenue,
there are complaints that backyards are being inundated because of
the increased volumes of stormwater. Simply upsizing the pipes on
240th will create a greater problem downstream. We have to provide
a combination of improvements of upsizing the system and providing
regional detention. A simple increase in the detention at the fire
station would only be a drop in the bucket compared to the problems
of the whole basin. We've completed the initial analysis and are
looking at what alternatives and costs are involved. Jim White
asked when this would be completed. Gill replied he felt it would
be another couple of months.
Jim White asked if a wetland was being created by the drainage from
the fire station. Mr. Carey stated his property was designated as
a potential wetland. He continued with a discussion of the
procedure in determining wetland. The property owners are not
notified and the responsibility and cost of proving that property
is not wetland is placed on the property owner. He contended that
34% of the property classified as wetland is based on
misinterpretation of the standards. Paul Mann stated he felt this
point should be addressed at some point in time. Carol Morris
stated that it was her understanding that the Planning Department
would accept a report from a wetlands consultant hired by the
property owner to review for compliance with the manual. Jim White
commented he felt part of the problem is that the City does not
have a wetlands policy adopted. He continued that it is his
understanding that the consultant determined that everything that
is not filled or already built on was a wetlands. The property
owner then has to prove that it is not wetlands. Mr. Carey stated
Public Works Committee
March 17 , 1992
Page 4
that one soil consultant he contacted had indicated the minimum
cost would be $500 to have them do a report. Paul Mann stated this
type of thing should be considered when we consider the wetlands
ordinance. Jim White stated he has been frustrated with what has
been going on with wetlands because we have no adopted policy and
staff has nothing to follow.
Gill added that when the City makes the final determinations on the
improvements needed for this area, we will have to delineate the
wetlands and determine what restrictions we will have. Currently
DOE requires that if a natural wetland area is used for stormwater
detention, the water must be pretreated before it gets into the
wetland. Thus, if it is a wetland, we will have to incorporate
pretreatment into the design.
There was discussion about the runoff from the fire station and its
effect on Mr. Carey's property. Jim White asked that Mr. Carey
work with Gary Gill regarding this problem. Gary added that we
are looking at the fire station's system to see if it is operating
properly.
Green River Basin Program Interlocal Agreement
Wickstrom stated that the agreement executed in 1985 with King
County, Renton, Tukwila, and Auburn for the management of the Green
River expired in July of 1991. We are presenting two agreements
for approval. The first is an update of the original 1985
agreement extending it for another 10 years. The original
agreement implemented the Flood Control Zone District as a way of
having one agency responsible for the maintenance of the levee
system and recognized there were significant problems in terms of
levee heights along the river system. The new agreement gives each
jurisdiction responsibility for levee construction (height) on
those portions of the levee that fall within its boundaries.
Wickstrom stated this is a preferred method since Kent has the
largest assessed value within the Flood Control Zone District, the
largest number of levee miles. Thus, under other financing
methods, Kent assumed a greater share of the costs. Levee
improvements to those areas with less than 1-foot of freeboard have
to be completed by 1996, those areas with less than 2-feet have to
be improved by 2000 and the remainder after that time. This
agreement gives us management control such as budget review over
the Green River Flood Control Zone District. The new agreement
also provides for an update of the pump operations plan and flood
warning procedures plan. The programs are financed through the
Green River Flood Control Zone District so there are no financial
impacts to the City. Wickstrom continued he would recommend we
sign the agreement subject to the City Attorney's office satisfying
Public Works Committee
March 17 , 1992
Page 5
some concerns they have over the hold harmless clause of the
agreement. The Committee unanimously recommended approval for the
Mayor to sign the agreement subject to resolution of the City
Attorney' s concerns.
Wickstrom stated the second agreement is between Kent, the County
and Auburn for the Mullen Slough, South Auburn Mill Creek area.
This is a one year agreement for design studies to determine what
controls are needed and the benefits of same. The cost to the City
would be approximately $61, 666 which we have budgeted. Wickstrom
added that the City Attorney's office has the same concerns on the
hold harmless clause of this agreement. The Committee recommended
approval for the Mayor to sign the agreement subject to resolution
of the City Attorney' s concerns.
Garrison Creek Short Plat
Wickstrom detailed this is a 9-lot short plat on 218th Street and
95th Place South. The developer has completed the utility
improvements and we are recommending acceptance of the bill of sale
for same. The Committee unanimously recommended approval to accept
the bill of sale.
L I D. 335 - 77th Avenue South Street Improvements
Wickstrom explained this was an LID for the improvement of 77th
north of S. 212th Street. The contractor has completed the work
and we are recommending the project be accepted as complete. Jim
White questioned that the final contract price was over the bid
amount. Wickstrom explained there were very poor soil conditions
in the project area necessitating change orders. The Committee
unanimously recommended approval to accept the contract as
complete.
WSDOT Letter of Understanding SR 181 Route Jurisdiction Transfer
Wickstrom stated that several years ago, the State legislature
authorized a Road Jurisdiction Study to determine what State roads
could be turned back to the responsibility of the respective
cities. At that time, they were trying to turn over SR 515 and
West Valley (SR 181) up to I-405. We pointed out that the Valley
Freeway can't carry all the traffic and both SR 515 and SR 181 were
needed to do so. However we had no problem with taking over West
Valley (SR 181) between 272nd and the bridge. The State has
recently rebuilt that portion of West Valley and now wants to turn
it over to the City for continued responsibility. They are
proposing to grant the City $27, 914 over a four-year period for
this added maintenance. The State will do the 1992 mandated bridge
Public Works Committee
March 17, 1992
Page 6
inspection of the three bridges that are within this portion. Jim
Bennett questioned whether $27, 000 was adequate for the
maintenance. Wickstrom explained for this small section it
probably is; however, we usually don't get anything. Because there
were so many roads being turned back to the City, the legislature
felt some of the burden should be relieved so allocated funds on a
per mile basis. The Committee unanimously recommended approval for
the Mayor to sign the letter of understanding.
Sale of Property to State
Wickstrom explained that in conjunction with the State's SR 516
road widening project, they need to acquire a portion of a parcel
owned by the City in the vicinity of Kent Kangley road and 152nd
Avenue S. E. The parcel is approximately 4 , 000 square feet which we
acquired in 1957 for a pump station for the Kent Springs
Transmission Main. We have since abandoned the pump station. The
State is willing to acquire the whole parcel. Jim White inquired
about the price. Wickstrom responded that we have not come to
terms with the State on the price as yet. The Committee gave
approval for staff to proceed with negotiations for the sale and to
bring the final recommendation back to them once a firm price is
established.
Drainage Utility Rate Modifications
Wickstrom stated since Committee has heard the presentation at the
public hearings, he has summarized in his memo the actions
necessary in order to implement the program. He reviewed these for
the Committee. Jim White commented that he had asked Wickstrom to
look into the possibility of acquiring or somehow taking over that
portion of Drainage District #1 north of James Street because of
the flooding problem in that area. White stated that before we
move ahead with the drainage utility he would like to have a
resolution on that. Wickstrom added that approximately $950, 000
has been earmarked in the Drainage CIP to address that problem.
Wickstrom stated he would not recommend taking over the District
entirely at this point because of the potential problems with
disposing of the ditch cleanings (potentially classified as a
hazardous waste) . He would recommend addressing the area separate
versus taking on the whole district. Jim White continued he would
like us to take on that portion of the District that lies within
the City of Kent at least. He wondered if we could address the
flooding in that area if we didn't work out something with the
Drainage District. Wickstrom explained that to address the
problem storage is needed. He doubted there was any more
downstream capacity. We will be working with the District asking
them to take care of their existing facilities downstream. To get
Public Works Committee
March 17, 1992
Page 7
capacity, we would have to implement the lagoon project or provide
additional capacity at the Black River pump station by I-405.
Wickstrom stated he felt taking over the District would create a
lot of liability, add to our maintenance concerns and probably not
do anything for the problem. Jim White stated he was not ready to
support this at Council until he is convinced we are addressing the
flooding problem on the valley floor. He didn't want this to be a
bandaid approach. Wickstrom replied that capacity is needed and
the $950, 000 he mentioned before has been targeted to study what
can be done and to proceed with construction of those improvements
for this area. Wickstrom added that Council has to determine what
degree of protection they want to provide. If Council wants to
protect against storms similar to the two previous years, the
City's design standards will have to be revised. We currently use
25 year, 10-hour storm in the valley as a design standard. The
previous storms were much higher and to protect against them we may
need to design for the 100-year storm. As previously pointed out,
our design standards for development to provide on-site storage are
out of date as well and we may have to require more on-site storage
for individual developments.
Paul Mann stated we need a resolution on this problem. If the
Committee holds it, it retards any progress that can be made. He
asked why another study is needed. Wickstrom explained that the
only improvement we haven't made as far as the Mill Creek area is
concerned is restriction of the outlet at the Lower Earthworks
Park. Our previous study showed that restriction would help
maintain the stream within its existing banks. The Fisheries
Department is placing stringent criteria on that restriction.
However, the storms we have had have been more severe than our
design standards. Our detention standards are inadequate to
address storms of this intensity. Wickstrom stated he wasn't sure
just addressing the restriction at the outlet would correct the
problem. He stated he felt we needed to look at additional storage
as well. That will take further analysis to see how much we can
provide and where it can be provided. Paul Mann asked how long
that would take. Wickstrom stated that funds for this study are
included in the drainage rate modification proposal. There is no
money now to proceed. Jim White asked how much is collected now.
Wickstrom replied that approximately $2 million a year is
collected. Half a million dollars go for debt service on the
original issue, approximately $1.2 million go for maintenance and
operation of the existing system, leaving about $225, 000 toward new
capital improvements. He further explained that the existing
system consists of the Upper Mill Creek, approximately 150 miles of
storm systems in the street, street sweeping, Garrison Creek basin,
and all the detention basins in the subdivisions in the City. The
maintenance was paid from the General Fund prior to the Drainage
Public Works Committee
March 17, 1992
Page 8
Utility.
Mrs. Barnier commented about the drainage problems on her property.
Wickstrom replied the lagoon project would address these problems.
Jim Hansen stated he felt Wickstrom probably has the answer to the
problems but they may not be clear to the Council or the public.
He suggested a more condensed description so that everyone could
understand. He added he feels the Council wants to respond perhaps
on an annual basis to make some adjustments if necessary so the
public will sense that their money is being spent toward the
highest priority problem areas. Wickstrom pointed out these
projects are those that were proposed in the comprehensive plan.
The first phase of the drainage utility was to acquire the
necessary property for these projects so that we could preserve it
for implementation in the future. That has been done. The next
stage is the implementation of the projects which have identified
to solve the problems. Jim White stated he is not opposed to this
but he want to be convinced these projects will solve the problem.
Wickstrom stated the comprehensive plan is the key to the problems
and providing storage. The plan prior to that was waiting on the
SCS drainage channels. We now have more data that tells us our on-
site retention requirements for individual developments are greatly
understated. The new King County standards require significantly
more volume. We will be bringing new standards before Council in
the next few months but, Wickstrom emphasized, they will have
development implications since building to a 25-year storm is
significantly cheaper than building to a higher storage
requirement. White replied that if we don't require new
development to have stiffer standards then we ask the citizens as
a whole to pay for that developer and that isn't fair. Jim Bennett
concurred he would like to see a more condensed summary.
Ted Nixon stated that Council will need to decide what level of
protection they want to provide and then accept if flooding occurs
beyond that. He stated he felt there was more storage behind the
orifices and perhaps just tightening down on the orifice sizes
might be some of the regulation. He felt staff should provide an
outline of what would flood during a 25-year storm, a 50-year
storm, etc. and then Council can decide which level they want the
standards to address. Paul Mann asked why development hasn't been
addressed. Wickstrom replied that is what he alluded to earlier
that will be coming before Council in a few months - the storm
design standards.
Paul Mann suggested that Mr. Nixon' s suggestion as well as the
development issue be incorporated. Wickstrom stated that if a new
comprehensive plan were to be done the cost could exceed $200,000.
Public Works Committee
March 17, 1992
Page 9
He continued that no matter what is done, we need the money from
the rate modification proposal. He doubted there were any new
solutions that would pop up as a result of a new comprehensive
plan. Mann asked who would determine what level of storm we would
design for. Wickstrom stated that currently Council has adopted
the 25 year 12-hour storm and the comprehensive plan was developed
around that.
Jim Hansen stated he thought the Public Works Director has done an
in depth analysis of the program but the Council needs to be able
to understand the interrelationship of the programs and what
standards drive it to have the confidence to approve it. He
suggested he work with the Public Works Department to develop an
approach to move this forward. This will be brought back before
the Committee at their April 7 meeting.
Street Utility
Wickstrom reviewed his memo listing the actions necessary to
implement the Street Utility. Jim White stated at the recent
Council retreat, Council determined that the 196th Corridor is to
take top priority with 277th Corridor second and 224th Corridor
third. Recognizing that the City has grants to move ahead on 196th
and potential private money, the bulk of the street utility funds
should be directed to 196th Corridor. Jim White stated he hasn't
heard from anyone within the City limits of Kent oppose the Street
Utility. He stated he wasn't convinced this would solve all the
traffic problems and would need to, go beyond this with rail, etc.
He asked the Public Works Department to look into the possibility
of either contracting with Metro or forming our own transit system
within the City of Kent to move from East Hill Park and Ride to
West Hill and back. He asked that the potential costs be developed
as well. He stated he would perceive it to be free for the riders.
He stated he felt we were still going to have to build corridors
but would still need additional people movers. Jim White stated he
would like to hear more from the business community on the Street
Utility. He'd like to hear Boeing say they were willing to "step
up to the mark" .
Ted Nixon spoke against corridors stating that he wants the streets
back for the pedestrians and not have corridors taking traffic
through Kent so that it can't stop and shop.
Paul Mann moved the proposal be sent to Council with a
recommendation to approve. The Committee unanimously recommended
the Council approve the formation of the Street Utility.
Public Works Committee
March 17, 1992
Page 10
Other Items
Charlie Kiefer addressed the Committee regarding the annexation
covenants his father was being asked to sign in order to develop
his 9-acre parcel. Wickstrom stated that Mr. Kieffer signed an
annexation covenant initially. There is a valid annexation
petition being circulated by property owners in the area. By
signing the covenant, Mr. Kieffer has agreed to sign an annexation
petition. It was suggested Mr. Kiefer review the documents with
the City Attorney's office.