HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Meeting - Council - Agenda - 04/06/1993 ........................§ t
MM
S
Cityof Kent
Cit Counc
il MeetlnO .
v
i,
Agenda
y4
CITY OF
€ : 's� s•. �� i
SIP °it
a9
r a,
'i
k Mayor Dan Kelleher ;;, i
3 Council Members
Judy Woods, President '
Jim Sennett Paul Mann
E�z Christi Houser Leona Orr
on Johnson Jim White April 6 1993
s I,
Office of the City Clerk ,
il,
MY OF I SUMMARY AGENDA
KENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING
April 6, 1993
Council Chambers
7 : 00 p.m.
MAYOR: Dan Kelleher COUNCILMEMBERS: Judy Woods, President
�A Jim Bennett Christi Houser Jon Johnson
Paul Mann Leona Orr Jim White
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
1. p,'YBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
j Regional Justice Center Update
( �8: Employee of the Month
�¢: Proclamation - Public Health Week
ProcloL m"on - Gomw% benfelp� eeX
2 . -'PUBLIC HEARINGS
S. 238th Street Vacation (STV-93-1)
Chestnut Ridge Annexation - Ordinance
CONSENT CALENDAR
X. Minutes
,.B: Bills
1994 CDBG Local Program Policies & Funding - Set Date for
Public Hearing
\ J). Kent American Legion Baseball Commercial Sign Proposal for
Kent Memorial Park
Kent Little League Field Use Authorization for Agreement
Lake Plaza Condominium Master Meter
City Transit Advisory Board - Resolution
Construction Standards - Set Public Hearing Date for
,J! Human Services Reappointment
Board of Adjustment Reappointment
Funding for Korean War Memorial
Budget Change for Correction Facility Security Improvements
.M: Acceptance of Traffic Safety Grant
_i. LID 342 - Sidewalk Improvements - Resolution of Intent /-
_jG� Saturd y Market oard Appointment
4 . HERBUSINESS SSe�� ��)
Refunding of 1980, 1986 and 1990 Voted Bonds - Bond
Ordinance & Purchase Contract
Refunding of 1978 and 1989 Councilmanic Bonds - Bond
Ordinance and Purchase Contract
s% Venture 84 Rezone
I'Pl. Designation of Disaster Manager for Disaster Reimbursement -
Resolution
h'. Agreement for Sale of 800 MHz Radio/MDT System to Valley Com
_�F- Lindental Plat Developers Agreement/277th Street Corridor
Restricted Parking Zones - Ordinance .,�'
Heath Techna Franchise Ordinance - 1st Reading -47�
Funding for Youth Center Study - Resolution I
5 . BIDS
1965 Crown Pumper
6 . CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
7 . REPORTS
EXECUTIVE SESSION - LABOR NEGOTIATIONS -4' pe',(SOn [Ae
8 . ADJOURNMENT
NOTE: A copy of the full agenda packet is available for perusal 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) Regional Justice Center Update
B) Employee of the Month
C) Proclamation - Public Health Week
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6 1993
Category Public Hearings
ri. SUBJECT: S. 238th STREET VACATION (STV-93-1)
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This public hearing will consider an
application by Oberto Sausage Company to vacate a portion of
S. 238th Street as mentioned in Resolution No. 1346 and as
shown on the accompanying map and discussed in staff report.
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff report and map; application
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Planning Department
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO�_ YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
OPEN HEARING:
PUBLIC INPUT• qW
CLOSE HEARING:
7 . CITY COUNCIL A TION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
to approve/ the Planning Depart ent' s recom-
mendation of approval with five conditions of an application to
vacate a portion of S. 238th Street (STV-93-1) , and direct the
City Attorney to prepare the necessary ordinance upon receipt
of compensation at 1/2 the full appraised value thereof.
DISCUSSION• ✓W
ACTION• V / V`
Council Agenda
Item No. 2A
CITY OF
CITY OF KENT
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
(206) 859-3390
MEMORANDUM
April 6, 1993
MEMO TO: MAYOR DAN KELLEHER AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: JAMES P. HARRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON AN APPLICATION TO VACATE A
PORTION OF S. 238TH STREET
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS
I . Name of Applicant
Oberto Sausage Company
7060 S. 238th Street
Kent, WA 98032
II . Reason for Requesting Vacation
The applicant states, "To allow for additional parking and
xpansion of existing
landscape area as required for the e
facilities. "
III. Staff Recommendation
After reviewing comments from the following departments and
agencies:
• Public Works Department
The Public Works Department states that S.
238th Street is an improved City street. As
such it would be classified under Chapter
6 . 09 . 060 of the Kent City Code as a Class B
Street for which compensation therefore is
required.
• Washington Natural Gas
• METRO
• US West Communications, Inc.
and conducting our own review, the Planning Department
recommends that the request to vacate a portion of South 238th
Street as mentioned in Resolution 1346 and shown on the
accompanying map, be APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall deed to the City the necessary
right-of-way to reconstruct the cul-de-sac turn-
Street Vacation No. STV-93-1
April 6, 1993
Page 2
around westerly of the present turn-around in the
proximity denoted on the accompanying map.
2 . The applicant shall compensate the City at one-half
the appraised value of the net square footage of
the right-of-way being vacated(net square footage =
total square footage to be vacated LESS total
square footage to be deeded) .
3 . The applicant shall construct a new cul-de-sac turn
around area at the relocated area. Said new cul-
de-sac shall be in accordance with City standards
including asphalt paving, curb and gutter, drainage
system and other appurtenances associated with good
street construction. The minimum radius to face of
curb shall be 45 feet.
4 . With respect to any existing City utilities which
may exist with the property to be vacated, the City
shall retain utility easements over, upon and under
thereto. The City shall retain the right to grant
such utility easements to other public and/or
private utility companies whom may have existing
utilities within the said vacated street right-of-
way.
5. The existing street improvements and appurtenances
within the vacated street shall remain intact and
the City shall retain full use and control thereof
until such time as construction on the re-located
cul-de-sac has commenced.
JPH/mp:c: stv. 931
w
OZ
OO
f U
. Q
O
Q 3
LLJO
of
1 i
0 C) \
N U '
0
M f
Ln 0o i�
I . �
W ri r`
CO CO
ED
1- to
M
— clq I '� o
N / V)�. ZO. a 1
o �0 0 Q
In 0
Q O w
Op .
,00,92 Q
� 11- �
of j .O�LO
Q
r JI t
.Iw
Ln _S "�
o. 00
cr. i N'00
. tn
N'U
o£ ,oc
• �I
�� A-7770 1 S��
MAIL TO: t < H, APPLICANT:
Gerald B. McCaughan Name: oberto Sausage Co.
CITY OF KENT FUUC i 11T ?
220 So. 4th Ave. �.l1-Y i;):- ;or141 Address: 7060 so. 238th St.
Kent, WA 98032 yEst.drf 61:i;f'1
Kent. WA 98032
(NL
Phone: 625
STREET AND/OR ALLEY VACATION APPLICATION AND PETITION
Dear Mayor and Kent City Council :
We, the undersigned abutting property owners, hereby respectfully request that
certain c ?oath st. hereby be vacated. (General Location)
Legal Description
see Exhibit "A" Attached
t
BRIEF STATEMENT WHY VACATION IS BEING SOUGHT
To allow for additional parking and landscape area as required for the
expansion of existing facilities.
Sufficient proof, copy of deed contract etc. supported by King County
Tax Rolls shall be submitted for verification of signatures. Without
these a "CURRENT" title report shall be required. When Corporations,
Partnerships etc. are being signed for, then proof of individual's
authority to sign for same shall also be submitted.
Attach a color coded map of a scale of not less than 1" = 200' of the area
sought for vacation. (NOTE) I-lap must correspond with legal description.
ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS TAX LOT it
SIGNATURES AND ADDRESSES LOT, CLOCK & PLAT/SEC. TWN. RG
1 (\ 3 - n s -
I[� SJ /�G• I k 2 nf West-In
-r Tt' lat
KC Rec # 7410080502
Sfarl irS A 06Y27-0 Rza I raji
929160-0010, 929160-0020,
6 MAptE- W 1� a2atti 6n-nzzn3yyn eett pp
-fW� G./A C,QQ�O Volume'101 3�agest14n15a Rec. Krs Rn�lcounty
WA
SW 4 sec. 13-22-4
$150.00 Fee Paid Treasurer's Receipt No. _
Appraisal Fee Paid Treasurer's Receipt No.
Land Value Paid Treasurer's Receipt No.
Deed Accepted Date
Trade Accepted Date
5224-33A
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6-4. 1993
Category Public Hearings
1. SUBJECT: CHESTNUT RIDGE ANNEXATION
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: This date has been set for the public
hearing on the final Council action necessary for completion of
the Chestnut Ridge Annexation.
3 . EXHIBITS: Ordinance, Council minutes, BRB Letter and vicinity
map
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X _ YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REOUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS;
OPEN HEARING:
PUBLIC INPUT: U4.0
CLOSE HEARING:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACT N:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
adoption of Ordinance No. 30qq annexing the Chestnut Ridge
n
annexation area.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 2B
z �
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City Council of
the City of Kent, Washington,
annexing to the city certain lands
contiguous thereto, in the vicinity
of 208th Street and 92nd Avenue,
and more particularly described as
set out in the attached Exhibit A,
commonly known as the Chestnut
Ridge Annexation.
WHEREAS , in accordance with Chapter 35A. 14 RCW, the
owners of not less than 60 percent of the assessed valuation for
general taxation of certain real property (the "Chestnut Ridge
Area") , which is more particularly described hereinafter in this
ordinance, filed with the City Council of the City of Kent,
Washington, their petition to annex the Chestnut Ridge Area to
the City of Kent; and
WHEREAS , the City determined the Chestnut Ridge Area
Annexation Petition to be sufficient in all respects; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Chapter 35A. 14 RCW various
. proceedings were had; and
WHEREAS , notice of intention to annex was filed with
the King County Boundary Review Board; and
WHEREAS, the Boundary Review Board has received no
request for jurisdiction and has deemed the Chestnut Ridge Area
Annexation approved as a matter of law as of March 29 , 1993 ; and
WHEREAS , the city has published and posted notice of a
public hearing on the Chestnut Ridge Area Annexation in
accordance with RCW 35A. 14 . 130 so that interested persons could
voice their approval or disapproval of the annexation; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Kent held the
public hearing on the Chestnut Ridge Area Annexation in the City
Council Chambers at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Kent
City Council at 7 : 00 pm on April 6 , 1993 ; and
WHEREAS, it appears to the City of Kent that the
Chestnut Ridge Area Annexation meets all requirements specified
by law, to and including consideration of the passage of this
ordinance, and that the land to be annexed is contiguous to the
City of Kent and has not heretofore been incorporated in or as a
city or town; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS :
Section 1. That there shall be annexed to the City
of Kent, Washington the property situated in the County of King,
State of Washington; which property is legally described in
Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by reference having
boundaries as outlined in the map attached hereto as Exhibit B
and incorporated by reference.
Section 2 . That, in accordance with the Chestnut
Ridge Area property owner' s petition, the property hereby annexed
shall be assessed and taxed at the same rate and on the same
basis as other property within the City of Kent is assessed and
taxed to pay for any outstanding general indebtedness of the City
to which the area was annexed and which indebtedness has been
approved by the voters, contracted for, or incurred prior to, or
existing at the effective date of this annexation.
Section 3 . The property annexed shall be subject to
the City of Kent ' s existing zoning regulations, specifically
those regulations that apply to newly annexed territory as set
forth in Kent city Code 15 . 03 . 020 (E) .
Section 4 . That the annexation of said property
will become effective upon the effective date of this Ordinance,
and said property shall become a part of the City of Kent,
subject to all the laws and ordinances of the City then and
thereafter in effect except as otherwise provided by law.
Section 5 . Within thirty (30) days from the
passage, approval and publication of this Ordinance as provided
by law, the City Clerk of the City of Kent shall under the
direction of the Mayor of the City of Kent determine the resident
population of the annexed territory which population
determination shall consist of an actual enumeration of the
population which shall be made in accordance with the practices
and policies and subject to approval of the Planning and
Community Affairs Agency of the State of Washington and which
population shall be determined as of the effective date of
annexation as specified in this Ordinance.
Section 6. Within thirty (30) days after the
effective date of the annexation referred to in this Ordinance,
the City Clerk of the City of Kent, pursuant to RCW 35A. 14 . 700 ,
3
shall prepare a certificate signed by the Mayor and attested by
the city Clerk in such form and containing such information as
shall be prescribed by the Office of Financial Management of the
State of Washington and the City Clerk shall thereafter submit
said certificate in triplicate to the Office of Financial
Management of the State of Washington, along with the population
determination of the annexed territory.
Section 7 . Upon passage of this annexation
ordinance, the City Clerk of the City of Kent, pursuant to RCW
35A. 14 . 140 , shall send to the Office of the Clerk of the County
Council a certified copy of this ordinance together with a copy
of a letter from the Executive Secretary of the King County
Boundary Review Board which letter contains a copy of the
decision of the Boundary Review Board relating to this
annexation.
Section 8 . Severability. If any section, sentence,
clause or phrase of this ordinance should be held to be invalid
or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity
or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance.
Section 9 . Effective Date. This ordinance shall take
effect and be in force thirty (30) days from and after its
passage, approval and publication as provided by law.
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
4
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED I day of ' �` 1993 .
APPROVED day of 1993 .
PUBLISHED day of , 1993 .
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance
No. , passed by the City Council of the City of Kent,
Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as
hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
CRESRIDGE.ORD -
5
Beginning at the north quarter corner of Section 7 , Township
22 North, Range 5 East, W.M. , thence south along the center
line of said section 7 to the south margin of South 212th
Street, thence easterly along said margin to. the east line of
the west half of the southwest quarter of the northeast
quarter of said section 7 , thence northerly along said east
line to the north margin of South 212th Way, thence
northeasterly and easterly along the northerly margins of
South 212th Way and South 208th Street to the west margin of
100th Avenue Southeast, thence northerly along said west
margin to the south margin of South 200th Street, thence
westerly along said south margin to the west margin of 92nd
Avenue South, thence southerly along said west margin to the
north line of said section 7 , thence easterly along said line
30 feet to the north quarter corner of said section 7 and the
point of beginning.
EXHIBIT A
i
)morn]t
EIL
xa+xo ss
W
0
s+mno n
P -
- h aJ
W
PRy -� N
rauN rs i ,
90
A� a
a
: o
o.
E�
D s xoev u
s xoe�n sr
NOTE:PROPERTY LEYES SDONS ARE.]PPROIINATE
IT
V s
s,.
4
JJ
r .
EEISIINC CM L TTS SHOWN AS S)IADSD IREA
EXHIBIT 13
July 7 , 1992
ANNEXATIONS general election will have the opportunity to
cause a referendum election to be called. In that
event the effectiveness of the ordinance would be
stayed until the vote is scheduled in one of the
next general elections, which would be either in
September or November and that the electors of the
island area would have an opportunity to vote as
to whether or not they wish to be citizens of Kent
or remain in unincorporated King County.
WHITE MOVED that the Council adopt Ordinance No.
3049 annexing the West Hill Island, subject to the
City' s existing indebtedness and to the zoning re-
quirements of the Kent City Code. Johnson
seconded and the motion carried.
(OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4A)
Chestnut Ride Annexation. This date has been set
g
for a public meeting with the petitioners of the
Chestnut Ridge Annexation, a 190-acre area adja-
cent to the City' s eastern border in the vicinity
of 208th and 92nd Avenue. The City Clerk has
given the required notification to the petitioners
and public of this meeting. The motion was sup-
ported by the Public Works Committee at their July
1 meeting.
Public Works Director Wickstrom noted that a 10%
petition has been received from the residents of
Chestnut Ridge. He pointed out the location on
the map and noted that the City has met with the
residents in regard to the annexation process. He
noted that approximately 495 people live in the
area and that the zoning is primarily single
family. He indicated that the assessed valuation
is approximately $38 million, that it would cost
approximately $51, 000 to bring things up to stan-
dard, that there is a need for about $200, 000
worth of overlays in the next ten years, and that
police costs would be approximately $35 , 000. He
said that the Public Works Committee has reviewed
this and supports it. He added that once the
Council authorizes circulation of the 60%
petition, the petitioners will circulate it
through the area and try to secure signatures from
people who represent 60% of the assessed value of
the area.
10
July 7 , 1992
ANNEXATIONS Howard Woodword, President of the Chestnut Ridge
Homeowners Association, noted that they represent
93 homes and 500 of the valuation. He said they
are interested in being members of the City of
Kent as opposed to Renton, and that by annexing
they would be better able to control the remainder
of development in their area. He added that their
location is a stepping stone to Benson Highway
which would be an asset for businesses as the City
grows.
WHITE MOVED that the 10 percent petition for the
Chestnut Ridge annexation be accepted, the boun-
daries as identified by staff be accepted, the
annexation area be subject to the City' s existing
indebtedness and the 60 percent petition be circu-
lated. Mann seconded and the motion carried.
PUBLIC WORKS COMN TTEE
DULY 19 1992
PRESENT: Jim White Kevin Lindell
Jim Bennett Mae Miller
Paul Mann Mr. and Mrs. Rust
Don Wickstrom Jean Parietti
Tom Brubaker Howard Woodward
Ed Chow Diana Woodward
Ed White Joan Jansen
Bill Wolinski Connie Epperley
Upper Garrison Creek Flood Control Project
This item was continued to the next meeting since Mr. Carey was not
present.
Chestnut Ridge Annexation
Wickstrom explained that Council will be asked to act on this
annexation request at their July 7 meeting and this material is
being presented so that the Committee can send a recommendation to
that Council meeting. Wickstrom reviewed that the area is
approximately 190 acres. The action was initiated by the property
owners. Staff attended a community forum after which we received
a 10% petition for annexation. The assessed value of the area is
approximately $38 million. It is primarily residentially zoned,
single family lots ranging from 5, 000 square foot lots up to 9, 600
square feet. The financial analysis indicates there would probably
be a negative impact to the City of approximately $46, 000. (NOTE:
A revised analysis using more up to date information indicates a
positive impact. ) Wickstrom noted that Council can accept the
petition and give staff direction on the boundaries, can determine
if the annexation should assume the City's bonded indebtedness or
deny the petition. The area is in the urban growth area designated
for Kent.
Jim Bennett asked what the financial impact was based on.
Wickstrom explained it is based on existing assessed value, known
revenue sources and estimation of the City's costs. Wickstrom
stressed that these figures are not exact. Paul Mann asked how
this would affect our current staffing with the Police Department.
He added that two positions in the Police Department were denied
and they currently have a new vacancy that should be filled. He
questioned whether those two positions were going to be filled.
Chow responded they were still in frozen position status. Jim
Bennett asked what the ratio of police officers to population in
Kent_ is. He commented that since we already respond up to the
boundary of this area, he didn't feel this would have as much
impact as might be expected. Tom Brubaker observed that it was
Public Works Committee
July 1, 1992
Page 2
noted by Police in Annexation Committee meeting that residential
annexations do not typically generate a lot of police activity as
compared to commercial and multifamily areas. Jim White noted that
we are currently responding to the west side of 92nd which borders
this annexation area. Wickstrom stated that we are currently first
in with Fire response at this time.
Ms. Jansen noted that most of the lots in the annexation area were
recently reassessed and were increased significantly. She
commented that this area would be a good stepping stone to further
annex over to the Benson. She stated the community is more
interested in being annexed to Kent than to Renton. Jim White
confirmed the area is in Kent's planning area.
Tom Brubaker stated that the County and neighboring cities are
working together to define urban growth boundaries for the future.
It is possible that, even if Council approves, this annexation
might be delayed until these boundaries are determined. He added
that the meeting with the petitioners is the only time that council
has the opportunity to expand the boundaries of the annexation. It
can later be decreased but this is the only time boundaries can be
increased. Jim White asked what the impact on the annexation would
be if the boundaries were expanded to include the property over to
104th. Don Wickstrom stated that the original request only
included the small neighborhood area and we had squared the
boundary up somewhat. Tom Brubaker cautioned that if the
boundaries are expanded the 60% petition has to be signed by 60%
of the assessed valuation of the area. Thus, if you expand to
include a commercial area the assessed valuation would increase
significantly and if the owners of that commercial property did not
support the annexation could be defeated. However, if that were .
the case, Council could decrease the size of the annexation
boundary. Jim White asked if Council could hold it over and not
take action at the July 7th meeting. Brubaker will look into it
but it was noted that the time period for responding to the
petition is 60 days from receipt. Wickstrom commented when
looking at an appropriate boundary we did not want to include 212th
because of the accident and safety problems it currently has.
Paul Mann suggested a recommendation to Administration that the two
frozen positions in the Police Department be filled. Jim White
stated while we could make the recommendation, he was not
comfortable making the annexation contingent upon that. Paul Mann
added that we are considering other annexations and if no
consideration is given to additional police officers we will drain
the department. Jim White stated he agreed with that concept
however, the Council has had an annexation policy on the books for
years and if we do not move ahead on this annexation then we need
Public Works Committee
July 1, 1992
Page 3
to back away from the annexation policy entirely and just say the
community will not grow any more. He continued that if we look at
the ratio of police and fire per capita we will probably find that
Kent has one of the highest ratios in the county. Paul Mann moved
that the Committee accept the Chestnut Ridge annexation. Jim White
clarified that the motion was to recommend the boundaries as
defined by the staff, the annexation should include the City's
bonded indebtedness and authorization to circulate the 60%
petition. The Committee unanimously approved.
Washington State Boundary Review Boarc
For King County
Central Building, Suite 608, 810 3rd Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104-1693 (206) 296-6800
March 29, 1993
TO: THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF KENT
FROM: ALDA H. WILKINSON, Executive Secretary
IN RE: CLOSING LETTER
FILE NO. 1794 - CITY OF KENT - CHESTNUT RIDGE ANNEXATION
You have been advised that the above file was filed effective February 12, 1993.
The Board has received no request for review as specified in RCW 36.93. Therefore, the 45-day
filing period having elapsed, this notice is hereby deemed suproved as of March 29. 1993.
Sewer and water district proposals and some other actions are also subject to approval by the
County Council. If there are changes by the Council, the Board may be required to hold a
public hearing at that time.
In order for the proposed action to be finalized, it is necessary that you complete the other
statutory requirements or procedures specified in your Notice of Intention. Where required,
please file one certified copy of your final resolution or ordinance accomplishing this action
with the Office of the Clerk of the Council, Room 402 King County Courthouse, Seattle,
Washington 98104, ATTN: Ms. Helene Mociulski, together with a cony of this letter.
AHWICW
CC: Office of the Clerk of the Council, ATTN: Helene Mociulski
Ms. Lois Schwennesen, Director, Parks, Planning & Resources Department
ATTN: Mr. Jim Reid, Manager, Planning Division
K.C. Department of Public Works, ATTN: William Vlcek
K.C. Department of Assessments, ATTN: Diane Murdock
Manager, Division of Records and Elections
ATTN: Elections Superintendent
King County "911" Program
Q\docs%forwX13
4 uew n
C AIRPORT
... OH >x :11{
L x xS =
s3 PR PO
F 3 a'x"xt 3a� Tx!x'*» 'xy rMx �0
S 2COTx 91 >, z rrt Y' v'Ys?3 fi k M a x C ix� MRs j(334 uxg F
'�' >_r��x ��� �45#.•�`�f 'a)itlyQt.eF'y �> �kr 3 33�d�Fa i a a iJ ��S rs 7Y' r>:: �F d35. xF �:'}sR tiF#' Li> F IF fi xr"Fx
204iX Si
-c
sJ x
IBTX 4i
:r Fi3r�.Vha Fn._��� n {✓' {}b ix#a �� J M a:v�iki3 Yc ��#Ti A0 d: 3
3 3 r3 F`Jx ,sJC stl�FvY,,��sss��[ F3jx�rbR�.s 'nybse € a35,yt,y � x( #„° ; at xu s
v
5 xZ f F
> - s > F e Cy' x€ r'• k� Jsg�s £.f ss � ?£L 3'� f e x. � .x -
y�+<��� vx. # � � s kt a-crx � S(;U'�3�>v-' maw� 'S�J� ."•'� k �W y,'"§ a.\ xP t ,� t ,.
,
3 >a s
Y ,C FEXx1CM1 >F Nt 1 ) 5 K
N
R: t
S +�
STOP
lx 9 2]]LX n4�
a I I R,A 1'.1 1. 1�Jjl 0 i fill jj i 1. 11111 11 11 k f
7 IT)
I lit I If A, LL R,
$111 6 1.) 1!11,, I I
1 14 1-4
�..A)
1 ° —"{_w m fl. ]rl.e,r°I I 1 I r .. ..�.tin I
�1.14A
1 71-1
203fl 15T,
lif C4 I.
01141,
q'i 4A
it
ru—
Oct I,
TIT— !r 7-T-- j M
1EDS 11 IT ,)tlj U
it 1 4 ,& C' 1-1 WA SH 1,:N G T'11
1., )If 1.,
I U3j_V- vl,,�
IS
Q'; 6-E I
>
U
M.
IL(I
7M Us. 205T I S Via
----ii:ip
z- --------
C E T R /)'Ll,
M P R 0 W:i
air
t�,I PI
Af E AT
_j
S It`- .-/ Ibs - ;- -
2S. 2067 H P Ly
DO IvU
t-li ST11 vl�w Isla its
U,
_nw
0 q 1w-
C 0 P A N Y L7. �j r
A D:1)
R it
2oi III r I..
"I r I = a
TIT vT -
r.
��l i:y ' ___S 20BTH—"
FY
11
at
Z
Z
f Area: Approx. 190 acres
Assessed Value: 38,638,287
Estimated Population: 495
AtU W'
Ej
LP
7
Q.
I 21 I I I T'l I H T 01
III E-----------—
Tit
CONSENT CALENDAR
n
3 . City Council Action,:, Y
Councilmember�( wmoves, Councilmember
seconds that Consent Calendar Items A throughX be approved.
Discussion
Action
3A. Approval of Minutes.
Approval of the minutes of the regular Council meeting of
March 16, 1993.
3B. Approval of Bills.
(� Approval of payment of the bills received through March 22,
1993 after auditing by the Operations Committee at its meeting
on March 31, 1993 .
Approval of checks issued for vouchers:
Date Check Numbers Amount
Approval of checks issued for payroll:
Date Check Numbers Amount
Council Agenda
Item No. 3 A-B
Kent, Washington
March 16, 1993
Regular meeting of the Kent City Council was called to order at
7 : 00 p.m. by Mayor Kelleher. Present: Councilmembers Bennett,
Houser, Johnson, Mann, Orr, White and Woods, Chief Administrative
Officer McCarthy, City Attorney Lubovich, Police Chief Crawford,
Fire Chief Angelo, Planning Director Harris, Public Works
Director Wickstrom, Human Resources Director Olson, Information
Services Director Spang, and Acting Finance Director Miller.
Approximately 45 people were at the meeting.
PUBLIC Chris King Dav, Mayor Kelleher read a proclama-
COMMUNICATION tion declaring March 17, 1993 as Chris King Day in
the City of Kent. He noted that Chris King has
been chosen as the winner of "A Salute to Citizen-
ship" for the State of Washington by the Philip
Morris Companies, Inc. and, because of her out-
standing service to the City of Kent, has been
selected for this honor. He urged all citizens of
Kent to recognize Chris King' s contributions to
the community and then presented her with the
proclamation.
CONSENT WOODS MOVED that Consent Calendar Items A through
CALENDAR M be approved. White seconded and the motion
carried.
MINUTES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3A)
Approval of the Minutes. Approval of the minutes
of the regular Council meeting of March 2 , 1993 .
HEALTH & (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3J)
SANITATION Kent school Administration Remodel. ACCEPTANCE of
the bill of sale and warranty agreement submitted
by Kent School District 1415 for continuous opera-
tion and maintenance of 2 , 493 lineal feet of water
main extension, 1, 355 lineal feet of sanitary
sewer extension and 2, 620 lineal feet of storm
sewers, in the vicinity of 12033 SE 256th Street
and release of bonds after expiration of the
maintenance period.
TRAFFIC (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3I)
CONTROL LID 333 Signalization at 72nd/180th Street.
AUTHORIZATION to accept as complete the contract
with Breaker Construction for a traffic signal
installation at the intersection of 72nd Avenue S.
& S. 180th Street.
1
March 16, 1993
TRAFFIC (BIDS - ITEM 5A)
CONTROL 104th Avenue SE and SE 256th St set Left Turn Lane
Improvement. Bid opening was held on March 4th
with seven bids received. The low bid was sub-
mitted by Gaston Brothers Excavating in the amount
of $398,951. 44 . The Public Works Committee has
recommended this bid be accepted, subject to con-
currence therein by the Transportation Improvement
Board (TIB) .
WHITE MOVED that the contract for 104th Avenue SE
& SE 256th Street Left Turn Lane Improvements be
awarded to Gaston Brothers Excavating in the
amount of $398,951.44 , subject to the concurrence
by TIB. Woods seconded and the motion carried.
WATER (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3H)
Arnold Evans Water Consumption Adjustment.
AUTHORIZATION to adjust the water bill at 217 E.
Russell Street as a one-time only adjustment due
to the failure of a private water system during
the January storm, in accordance with the provi-
sions of Ordinance No. 2732 , as recommended by the
Public Works Committee.
FRANCHISE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3D)
Puget Power Franchise Ordinance. ADOPTION of
Ordinance No. 3096 which was discussed at the
Council meeting of March 21 1993 . As required by
State law, this date has been set for the second
reading (review) of the proposed Franchise which
describes conditions, terms, requirements, etc.
under which Puget Sound Power & Light subscribes
to for use of City rights-of-way for the placement
and operation of its facilities.
COUNCIL (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3C)
Excused Absence. APPROVAL of a request from
Councilmember Christi Houser for an excused
absence from the March 2 , 1993 City Council
meeting.
LIBRARY (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3F)
Annexation to the Ring County Library Svstem -
Kent Library. APPROVAL of Ordinance No. 3097 to
initiate a process of potential annexation by the
City of Kent to the King County Library District,
2
March 16, 1993
LIBRARY as recommended by the Operations Committee on
February 16, 1993 . The information for the
annexation has been previously reviewed at a
Council Workshop of November 17, 1992 , where the
only issues seemed to be the cost of a special
election and the timing of the one-time only
savings to the City. The Library District will
extend the 1993 contract amount for 1994, saving
the City approximately $300, 000, if a favorable
vote is obtained at the City's September 14 , 1993
primary election. It is the intent of the City to
reduce its property tax levy beginning in 1995 by
the amount of the 1994 library services contract.
The Kent Library Board has recommended approval of
this ordinance.
ANNEXATION (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3M)
(ADDED BY CITY ATTORNEY LUBOVICH)
Chestnut Ridge Annexation. AUTHORIZATION to set
April 6, 1993 as the public hearing date on the
Chestnut Ridge Annexation.
HUMAN (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4C)
SERVICES Catholic Community Services - Emergency Severe
Weather Shelter Procedural Change. The Human
Services Commission and the Planning Committee
have recommended that Catholic Community Services
be allowed to ration the remaining dollars for the
Emergency Severe Weather Shelter Program to make
it stretch through the end of 1993 . In order to
do this, in February they started vouchering only
in extreme conditions or for families with
children. The Council is being asked to allow
Catholic Community Services the flexibility to
continue using its best judgment in administering
the Emergency Severe Weather Shelter Program with
this new procedure.
Upon the Mayor's question, Lin Ball of the Housing
& Human Services Office clarified that these funds
are from the General Fund.
Susan Ramos, Chair of the Human Services Commis-
sion, explained that this issue is being brought
before the Council because the procedure would be
in conflict with the original resolution. She
noted that more than half of the allotted funds
have been spent in January because of the
3
March 16, 1993
HUMAN unpredictable weather and felt this procedure is
SERVICES the responsible thing to do even though the issue
will probably be revisited in the fall .
ORR MOVED to allow Catholic Community Services the
flexibility to continue using its best judgment in
administering the Emergency Severe Weather Shelter
Program by vouchering only in extreme conditions.
Woods seconded and the motion carried.
PARKS & (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3E)
RECREATION Ring County Turnkey Park. AUTHORIZATION to accept
transfer of title from King County for Turnkey
Park located in the City of Kent.
ECONOMIC (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3G)
DEVELOPMENT Economic Development Council. AUTHORIZATION for
CORP. the Mayor to execute a service contract with the
Economic Development Council of Seattle and King
County (EDC) to perform various services regarding
economic development strategies.
FEES (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3K)
Planning Department Zoning Permit Fees. APPROVAL
of Ordinance No. 3098 amending Ordinance No. 2667
to increase the zoning permit fee to $32 in order
to implement an increase of $3 , 760 in miscellane-
ous Planning Department fees as adopted in the
1993 Budget.
REZONE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3L)
venture 84 Rezone #RZ-92-3 . AUTHORIZATION to set
April 6, 1993 as the date for a public meeting to
consider the Hearing Examiner's recommendation of
approval for a rezone application (RZ-92-3) by
Sound Ventures of Kent, acting on behalf of Budget
Rent A Car. The property is located on the west
side of 84th Avenue So. , approximately 300 feet
north of South 222nd Street. A public hearing on
the application for this rezone was held on
February 3 , 1993 by the Hearing Examiner.
COMPREHENSIVE (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4B)
PLAN MAP Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment (CPA-93-1) . The
AMENDMENT Planning Commission has recommended approval of
the proposed plan amendment changing the City-wide
Comprehensive Plan from Single Family Residential
4
March 16, 1993
COMPREHENSIVE to an office designation on three lots. In
PLAN MAP addition, the "Single Family Designated Area"
AMENDMENT overlay shall be modified to delete these three
lots.
Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager, clarified that
this is an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Map
not a zoning amendment. He noted that three
parcels of property are affected by the amendment
which include the Keck Home, the Masonic Home, and
a duplex, all located near the intersection of
Jason Avenue and Smith Street. He explained that
the property is located next to the Downtown
Planning Area boundary and the planned land use
for the Downtown area is mixed use development.
Satterstrom noted that the zoning is Downtown
Commercial so it is a very intensive type of mixed
use commercial zoning and planning. He stated
that this plan amendment would modify two plans:
1) the City-wide Comprehensive Plan; and 2) the
Valley Floor Plan. He also noted that there would
be a small modification to the "Single Family
Designated Overlay" which would delete these three
lots. The Planning Commission recommended this
amendment from their last meeting on
February 22nd.
ORR MOVED to adopt Resolution No. 1349 approving
the proposed plan amendment changing the City-wide
Comprehensive Plan from Single Family Residential
to an office designation on the subject three lots
and modifying the "Single Family Designated Area"
overlay to delete these three lots, as recommended
by the Planning Commission. White seconded and
the motion carried.
PERMIT CENTER (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4A)
Permit Center. The proposed resolution would
adopt the recommendation of the Planning Committee
to establish a new organization for the permit
process system.
McCarthy stated that the purpose of tonight's
meeting is to report to the Council on Adminis-
tration's effort to meet one of their 1992/1993
Target Issues: "To enhance the delivery of City
services by improving the effectiveness and effi-
ciency of the permit process. " He noted that the
5
March 16, 1993
PERMIT CENTER Council requested a one-stop permit center long
before the Centennial Building was completed in
November, 1990; and the City commissioned an
independent consultant study in 1990 which recom-
mended a separate Office of Building and Code
Enforcement. He explained that in 1991 the Mayor
commissioned an Advisory Committee to review the
permit process and their report, issued May 28 ,
1992, recommended the creation of an Office of
Development Permits and Inspections.
McCarthy noted that the Mayor' s Advisory Committee
report has been distributed previously to the
Council with wide review by the Planning Committee
and others. He noted that it identifies the
following six recommendations:
1) Implement the 1992-1993 Council Target Issue
to: Enhance delivery of City services by improv-
ing the effectiveness and efficiency of the Permit
Process;
2) Combine basic multi departmental building per-
mit functions and personnel into an independent
Office of Development Permits and Inspections;
3) Recognize the permit review process as an
important integral component of the City' s
financial well being such that it is a tool to
enhance economic development;
4) Direct analysis and eventual grouping of
similar development review functions to eliminate
process delays and duplication and require lesser
numbers of personnel for overall permit proces-
sing;
5) Select an interim project manager who is
either a licensed architect or civil engineer and
has extensive experience in permitting;
6) Use implementation of this new Office of
Development Permits and Inspections to set a
precedent for revision of other permit related
processes.
6
March 16, 1993
PERMIT CENTER McCarthy noted that department heads have been
given the opportunity to provide an alternative
and that their alternative focuses on maintaining
the existing organization in the Fire Department
with an assigned Planning Department Planner and a
Public Works Department checklist for pre-applica-
tion signoff. He explained that this alternative
will improve the time lines but does not get to
the heart of a one-stop permit center, and that
Administration feels the Mayor' s Advisory Commit-
tee proposal is the right step to implement the
Council ' s desire. McCarthy stated that the
Advisory Committee proposal aims at improving the
efficiency of the permit process and directs the
movement of personnel from various departments
into one department with a common goal and
priority -- to process permits and do inspections.
He noted that the consolidated department will:
1) Eliminate the need for tracking permits
between departments;
2) Provide a central contact for customers
inquiring about the status of a permit;
3) Save inspection time as inspectors become
cross trained to perform multiple inspections
currently done by inspectors in various depart-
ments;
4) Focus the total permit process toward en-
hancing economic development while insuring code
compliance;
5) Allow the City to rightsize the organization
while downsizing the number of staff;
6) Allow the City to hire an individual most
qualified to understand the building issues by
requiring the applicant to be a licensed architect
or civil engineer;
7) Allow the City to set a precedent for right-
sizing other permit activity and other City
functions.
7
March 16, 1993
PERMIT CENTER McCarthy noted that the Mayor' s Advisory Committee
Report is a first step toward a one-stop permit
center and improvements in all permit processing
activity. He explained that the implementation of
this plan will authorize the City to establish an
Office of Development Permits and Inspections
which will operate under an interim project
manager' s authority who will report directly to
Administration during the development stages.
Upon the Mayor's request, McCarthy explained that
this item has been to the Planning Committee three
or four times with Chamber of Commerce representa-
tives present, department heads have presented
their proposals, and Councilman Johnson moved to
bring the issue forward for Council action.
JOHNSON MOVED to adopt Resolution No. 1348
establishing a new organization for the permit
process system, as recommended by the Planning
Committee. Houser seconded. Orr offered a
friendly amendment to change one word in the
resolution (Page 3, Section 2E) from "department"
to "organization" . Johnson and Houser accepted
the change as a friendly amendment and it was so
ordered. Johnson noted another change to be made
on Page 3, Section 2B, "reasonable level of qual-
ity of public services" should be changed to
"reasonable level of quality public services" .
Houser accepted this change as a friendly amend-
ment and it was so ordered.
Paul Morford, Chairman of the Mayor' s Advisory
Committee on the Permit Process, distributed
copies of the Committee' s Final Report, a memoran-
dum of endorsement and plan of action from the
Mayor, and a letter of endorsement from the
Chamber of Commerce, to the Council. He briefly
gave some background history and reviewed portions
of the report. He noted that Jim Hansen, former
Assistant City Administrator, had been involved
since 1988 and had chaired a task force on
streamlining the permit process. He pointed out
that Hansen headed up the construction of the
Centennial Building with the hope that everything
could be on one floor with a one-stop permit
center, but was disappointed and frustrated when
this could not be accomplished. He noted that the
Committee had accumulated almost a whole file
8
March 16, 1993
PERMIT CENTER drawer full of correspondence, letters and reports
including the Warner Study from Hansen and that
Hansen had reviewed the Advisory Committee' s
preliminary proposal before he left the City.
Morford noted that Hansen felt that the report
before the Council tonight was the right approach
and on the right track.
Morford explained that Gary Honiker, Chairperson
for the Chamber of Commerce Tenant Improvements
Committee, wrote the Mayor's Advisory Committee in
1990 expressing his frustrations with City staff
and department heads resistance to change, and
that staff was not committed to improvements but
more in justifying the existing structure. He
noted that Honiker resigned, the Chamber of
Commerce called him the next day to Chair their
committee, and the Mayor requested him to Chair a
task force on the total permit process. He noted
that he had accepted both positions and that the
Mayor appointed the following members to the
Advisory Committee: Paul Morford, Chairman and a
professional engineer; Paul Mann, Councilmember
and Chairman of the Public Safety Committee;
Torjan Ronhovde, a registered architect; John
Murdoch, Boeing Permit Specialist for Aerospace in
Kent; Ted Knapp, Bircher Development; Ed Chow,
former City Administrator; and Raul Ramos,
Planning Consultant.
Morford explained to the Council the process the
Committee used to gather some of the information
included in their report. He noted that the
Advisory Committee reviewed the existing organiza-
tional chart, met with department heads, separated
all the different types of permits such as single
family, mobile homes, tenant improvements, etc. ,
for the whole previous year and put an average
time it took to obtain a permit. He noted that
for a single family permit it took a total time
flow of 50. 6 days with a total of 11 hours of
actual work. He explained for the Council that
the Advisory Committee came up with recommenda-
tions of which a good portion are already in
operation and working well. Morford noted that
the Advisory Committee then reviewed the action
plan to see how to make this plan work. He stated
that since the Mayor's Advisory Committee, the
9
March 16, 1993
PERMIT CENTER Chamber' s Committee on Tenant Improvements, and
the Warner Study all recommend putting it into a
separate section, the Council should go ahead to
adopt and implement it now. Upon White' s ques-
tion, Morford explained that he saw a problem with
the current resolution because it calls for more
study before implementation and he feels enough
study has been done. The Mayor clarified for
Bennett that the only issue on the floor is the
resolution that is proposed and before them, but
if Bennett wanted to adopt another plan and
propose a different resolution it could be done.
Jeff Stewart, Benjamin Homes Builder, noted that
his company builds about 50 homes a year and that
they were considering a plat for 23 lots in Kent.
He stated, however, that when they found out about
the bottleneck in the Planning Department and that
it could take up to 18 weeks before a permit would
be issued, his company would probably not even
consider the development because it would be too
much of a risk. He noted that every month added
to a building cycle adds $500 to the cost of a
home which translates into another $700-$800 in
the final price. He expressed that the changes
being proposed tonight are good ones for the
community. Woods explained that last June the
Planning Department had ten planners and now they
currently have three. She noted that while the
Council would like to facilitate permits more
rapidly, it is not only the permit process that is
on the back burner but almost any other project
with will be there for a long, long time because
the City is operating with a barebones Planning
Department. Orr added that it is important that
the community and the development community as
well as residents of Kent as a whole understand
that even if Morford' s proposal is adopted now,
there are not the people available to implement
the plan at this time. She expressed that no
matter which way the Council goes, it is going to
take some time to get it up to speed.
Morgan Llewellyn, Real Estate Broker in Kent,
noted that the Mayor 's Advisory Committee was
originally started because of problems with the
Senior Housing Project. He emphasized that cities
are facing many difficulties in tough times with
10
March 16, 1993
PERMIT CENTER limited resources and they will have to look at
doing things differently. He stated that the
Advisory Committee's purpose was to take a fresh
look at the permit process but that the Council
will have to decide how to achieve the goals. He
urged the Council to implement the Advisory
Committee' s recommendations. Steve BpX ee,
Northwest Corporate Real Estate, noted that the
Chamber of Commerce began looking at the permit
process in 1990 because their members were expres-
sing concerns and comments about it. He stated
that cities are facing many challenges and that
government needs to look at how they can do a
better job with less resources to serve the
community, the business, and the citizens. He
recommended moving forward with the Advisory
Committee' s proposals. Enrique Mora, Benjamin
Homes Builder, noted that the Planning Department
informed him today that there is only one planner
left and that it would take 4-6 months for
Planning approval. He expressed that it isn't
fair for single family builders to have to wait as
long as someone who is going through the SEPA and
Wetland checks because the only thing that needs
to be checked are the setbacks. He requested that
the Council look into the possibility of getting
someone just to check single family home plans out
in the short term to help relieve this problem.
Johnson emphasized that it is his intent, as a
Councilmember, to see that the resolution is
followed through to the letter, if passed. Upon
White' s question, McCarthy noted that if the
Council gave direction tonight the City could look
at filling this position immediately with a Civil
Engineer from Public Works on an interim basis and
then do a selection process to hire a licensed
architect or engineer. McCarthy clarified for
White that, if adopted, the position would be
classified as an acting or out-of-class pay
position on an interim basis. He noted that the
interim project manager would establish organiza-
tional objectives and quantify measures while the
staff works with the Permit Study Committee to
develop a complete and proper job description
followed by advertising, recruiting selection,
etc.
11
March 16, 1993
PERMIT CENTER The Mayor clarified for the Council that the
resolution before them is requesting a specific
plan from Administration that will be reviewed at
the Council/Department Head retreat in April. He
noted that it does not say the Council is direct-
ing the City to move forward and implement the
recommendations of the Advisory Committee or any
other specific recommendations right now. City
Attorney Lubovich noted that the resolution just
commits to a single organization and following the
retreat Administration will have 60 days to come
back to Council with its proposal on how it is to
be structured. He also noted that if a change is
to. be made different than "after the retreat" , the
resolution would have to be amended. Orr noted
that she can support the resolution the way it is
currently written, but if changes are going to be
made she needs to know before the vote is taken.
She expressed that a retreat is important to
gather more information from the departments
because she is not completely convinced that the
Advisory Committee has gotten complete informa-
tion. White noted that he will not be able to
support the resolution as it is written because it
is not moving ahead as quickly as it should and
addressing the issue. The Mayor reiterated that
this resolution, if adopted, does not authorize
Administration to make any structural changes at
this time. Johnson explained that direction will
come after the retreat so that a team concept can
be developed and that everyone involved under-
stands what is going to happen and what resources
are needed to implement it. Upon White' s ques-
tion, Johnson noted that his intent was to have
the 60 days run from the Council meeting following
the retreat and that something would be in place
and operational by the third week in June. White
clarified that he is not opposed to doing some-
thing with the permit process and not opposed to
the report from the Advisory Committee, but his
concern is that it is not happening quick enough.
Tom SharU, 11126 SE 256th, Kent, requested that
the Council/Department Head retreat date of
April 12th, the City Council meeting date of
April 20th, and the 60 days thereafter be
incorporated into the resolution. ORR MOVED a
12
March 16, 1993
PERMIT CENTER friendly amendment to include the date of the
Council retreat on April 12th, the Council meeting
date of April 20th, and adding 60 days thereafter
to the resolution. City Attorney Lubovich noted
that the following could be inserted on the last
page under sub-paragraph F: "Perform these tasks
within sixty (60) days of Council direction on
April 20, 1993 or as otherwise directed by
Council" . Houser seconded, with approval by
Johnson, and the motion carried.
Upon White's question, McCarthy noted that in
order to have someone on board within sixty (60)
days the advertising would have to start the day
after the retreat. City Attorney Lubovich noted
that if any ordinance is to be passed after the
retreat, depending upon the organizational struc-
ture, there is a 30 day implementation period. He
explained that if a new department is created then
an ordinance would be necessary. The Mayor noted
that it is possible to advertise for a position
before the 30 waiting period is finished and
possibly accordion the process. Bennett noted
that the Council is working for the citizens and
business people of the community and that delaying
this process is not exercising it very well.
The Mayor noted that two letters have been
received and submitted for the record from the
following: 1) Mr. Theodore Nixon, Architect;
2) Mr. David Bocek, D. Bocek Company. WOODS MOVED
to make these letters a part of the record and
have the Clerk read them into the record. White
seconded and the motion carried.
The original motion then carried, with White
opposed.
FINANCE (CONSENT CALENDAR - ITEM 3B)
Approval of Bills. Approval of payment of the
bills received through March 4 after auditing by
the Operations Committee at its meeting on
March 15, 1993 .
13
March 16, 1993
FINANCE Apiproyal of checks issued for vouchers:
Date Check Numbers Amount
3/1-3/15/93 128208-128697 $11207 , 247 . 03
Approval of checks issued for payroll:
Date Check Numbers Amount
3/19/93 Checks 181891-182275 $ 288, 349 . 28
3/19/93 Advices 5508-5816 $ 355 , 066 . 46
$ 643 ,415.74
REPORTS Council President. Woods reminded the Council
that a volunteer is needed to serve on the Library
Board.
Public Works Committee. White noted that a pro-
posal to create a Transit Advisory Committee,
similar to the Bicycle Advisory Committee, will be
discussed at the next Public Works Committee on
Thursday, March 18th.
Parks Committee. Bennett noted that the deadline
for the Golf RFPs was on Monday, March 15th, at
5: 00 p.m. and that eleven proposals were received.
He also noted that the time for the Committee
meeting has been changed from 5:30 p.m. to
5:45 p.m. on the 1st and 3rd Tuesdays of each
month.
Budget Committee. Johnson noted that he had
attended a workshop last Thursday, March filth, in
Tacoma with the Puget Sound Regional Council. He
mentioned that the PSRC discussed the issue of the
airport at Sea-Tac but no position has been taken
as of yet but he has information for the Council
as far as where the Organization stands on this
issue. He also noted that Suburban Cities will be
discussing this issue on Wednesday, March 17th and
possibly taking a position on the issue.
Administrative Reports. McCarthy noted that the
Council packets include a report concerning staff
reductions in the Planning Department and Adminis-
tration' s effort to assist them in providing
additional staff through transfers and long-term
14
March 16, 1993
REPORTS recruitments. He noted that the report also gives
the status in regard to the Library landscaping
and that by the end of March there might be some
grass and shrubs outside of the Library.
McCarthy informed the Council that the Selection
Committee will meet on March 18th at 6: 00 p.m. to
review the eleven Golf RFPs and decide where to go
from there.
McCarthy noted that the Operations Committee today
recommended the Council and Mayor be connected to
the City' s computer system allowing better com-
munication between the City and the Council and
between the Councilmembers themselves. He stated
that the initial funding will be about $7 , 000 with
annual costs of approximately $2 , 000 which include
dedicated lines and printers. He informed the
Council that the Information Services staff will
be contacting them individually to set this up,
but for those not wanting a terminal, the City can
add them to a distribution list, have Administra-
tion print out the messages on a regular basis,
and put the messages in the Council boxes.
McCarthy also noted that the Operations Committee
discussed garbage rates, recycling issues and that
Public Works Director Wickstrom is prepared to
answer any questions or comment about information
to apprise the Council of what is happening in
this area.
ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8: 35 p.m.
Anl Z l�
Donna Swaw
Deputy City Clerk
15
n nN Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6. 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: 1994 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT (CDBG)
PROGRAM POLICIES AND FUNDING LEVELS
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorization to set April 20, 1993 , as
the date for a public hearing to consider the 1994 Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program Policies and Funding
Levels.
3 . EXHIBITS: None
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Planning Committee (vote 3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO�_ YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3C
nU
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6, 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: KENT AMERICAN LEGION BASEBALL ASSOCIATION
COMMERCIAL SIGNS INSTALLATION AT KENT MEMORIAL PARK
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authorization for the Kent American
Legion Baseball Association to install outfield wall signs on
the outfield fence at Kent Memorial Park in exchange for
improvements to the park, as recommended by the Parks Committee
3-0.
3 . EXHIBITS: Kent American Legion Baseball Association
Presentation to Kent Parks Committee
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Parks Department Staff: Parks Committee (3-0)
Kent American Legion Baseball Association
(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
KENT AMERICAN LEGION BASEBALL ASSOCIATION
PRESENTATION TO:
KENT PARKS COMMITTEE
KENT MEMORIAL FIELD SIGN PROGRAM
DENT MEMORIAL FIELD SIGN PROGRA VI
Purpose:
• Provide additional revenue for Kent American Legion Baseball
Program.
• Give Kent Memorial Field a Professional look consistent with
other prominent baseball fields in Washington State.
• Visible recognition of businesses who support our program.
Program:
Install 22 S' x 9' Outfield Wall Signs which would be displayed
during the Summer Season from May through August. The signs
would be professionally prepared on 3/4'marine grade plywood
(please see attached picture of sample sign). Cost to each business
would be $500. Businesses who have made a commitment to the
signage subject to Kent Parks Committee approval are:
Valley Medical Center
Bowen Scarff Ford/Volvo
Kent Medical Center
Oh Boy! Oberto
Darigold
McDonalds
Pepsi
Washington Cedar
Athletic Supply Company
Meridian Valley Athletics
Easton
Tyee Mortgage Company
Wilson Sporting Goods
Johnny's Food Center
Rawlings Sporting Goods
Les's Fat Bat
U.S. Bank
Eagle Hardware & Garden
AIARCH 16, 1993 KENT PARKS COMMITTEE
Field Improvements
As you are aware Kent American Legion Baseball made a
contribution of approximately $5,000 for sod and Turfus material
for the Kent Memorial Field. In addition, we have offered to paint
the concession stand and install an improved ventilation system.
We have also purchased a wind screen for center field at a cost of
$250. We are also in discussion with Jim Ball and the field
manager to install a Scorer's Booth and to paint the bleachers. We
are committed to putting our time and money resources into
improving Kent Memorial Park.
Major Tournament Events, 1993
Memorial Day Weekend, May 23 - June 1
* 8Team Art Wright Memorial Day Tournament which will
include the Washington State Connie Mack Baseball Champion,
the National Babe Ruth Champion Team and our own Kent
U.S. Bank Team.
Kent Meridian Senior Legion Tournament, July 16, 17, 18
Kentwood Junior Legion Tournament, June 18, 19, 20
District I Senior Championship, July 30, 31, August 1
Washington State Junior Legion Championship, August 6,7,8
Summary
We appreciate the Kent Parks support of the Kent American
Legion Baseball Program and we feel this program will enhance the
community support of our program, contribute to the financial
strength of the Association, and give Kent Memorial Field a
professional look.
MARCH 16, 1993 KENT PARKS COMMITTEE
.
i�
O
r -
3..
v\
.Wit
i
LJ
i
X
�D Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6. 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: KENT LITTLE LEAGUE FIELD USE AGREEMENT
2 . SUMMARY S ATEMENT: Authoriza-
tion forj4dministration to amend, in a form acceptable to the
City Attorney, the existing field use agreement for the Uplands
Playfields Nos. 1 & 2 with Kent Little League. This
amendment will extend the term of the current agreement from
one to five years in exchange for field use fees and base line
fencing to be installed according to specifications set by Jack
Ball, Parks Maintenance Superintendent.
3 . EXHIBITS: Agreement
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Parks Department Staff• Parks Committee (3-0)
(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. 3E
AGREEMENT between the City of Kent, a Washington municipal
corporation ("City") , whose mailing address is 220 Fourth Avenue
South, Kent, Washington 98032 , and Kent Little League, a Washington
nonprofit corporation ("Little League") , whose mailing address is
12900 Kent-Kangley Road, Kent, Washington, 98031.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City owns, operates and maintains various
baseball fields within its City limits for the purpose of improving
recreational opportunities for citizens throughout the greater Kent
municipal region; and
WHEREAS, the City' s Parks Department administers the operation
and maintenance of these fields, specifically the Uplands
Playfields Nos. 1 and 2 ; and
WHEREAS, the Little League offers unique recreational
opportunities to the children of the greater Kent municipal region
through its baseball program; and
WHEREAS, the Little League desires to obtain the use of
additional baseball fields within the City; and
WHEREAS, the City is willing and able to rent the Uplands
Playfields Nos. 1 and 2 to the Little League.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions
contained herein and attached and made a part of this agreement,
the City and the Little League agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1. The City shall lease the Uplands Playfields Nos. 1 and 2 to
the Little League for baseball practice during the 1993 Little
League season at the dates and times indicated on Exhibit A, which
is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
2 . The City shall lease the Uplands Playfields Nos. 1 and 2 to
the Little League for baseball game days during the 1993 Little
League Season at the dates and times indicated on Exhibit B, which
is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
3 . The Little League shall pay the City, prior to each game or
practice date, as follows: Ten dollars ($10. 00) for the lease of
both fields for one practice day; Forty-one and 86/100 dollars
($41.86) for one field for one game day; Seventy dollars ($70. 00)
for two fields for one game day. Game preparation shall include
chalklining the field.
LITTLE LEAGUE LEASE - Page 1 of 5
4 . Upon failure by either party to comply with the terms and
conditions stated in this agreement or for other good cause shown,
this agreement may be terminated by either party upon giving seven
(7) days written notice at the address listed above.
5. Except for reasonable wear and tear, the Little League shall
return the fields to the City after each practice or game day in as
good a condition as the fields were in at the beginning of the day.
6 . The City reserves the right, without prior notice if
necessary, to cancel or suspend this agreement in the event that
weather conditions exist, as determined at the sole discretion of
the City, that make the intended use of the fields by the Little
League unacceptable; provided, however, that the City shall use its
best efforts to keep the fields open for play and, if cancellation
or suspension becomes necessary, to provide notice to the Little
League as soon as possible.
7 . The schedules of practice and game days listed on Exhibits A
and B shall not be changed without the prior consent of Ms. Lori
Hogan of the city' s Parks Department, or such other person as the
City may authorize from time to time. The Little League should
deliver any schedule change requests at least one week prior to the
time of the requested change.
8 . The City and the Little League agree that no liability shall
attach to the City by reason of entering into this agreement,
except as may be expressly provided herein.
9. The Little League shall not assign this agreement nor any part
thereof without the prior written approval of the City.
10. The Little League agrees to bind itself, its successors and
assigns to ensure and guarantee full performance of all terms of
this agreement.
11. The Little League, for itself and its successors and assigns,
agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its
officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers from any and
all claims, actions, judgments, losses, costs (including personnel
related costs, reasonable attorney' s fees and all other claim
related expenses) and damages whatsoever (specifically including,
but not limited to, claims made upon the City arising by reason of
accident, injury, or death to any person or by reason of injury to
property) , that may be made against the City because of any act,
action, neglect, omission or default on the part of the Little
League arising out of or in connection with the above-referenced
lease and use of the Uplands Playfields Nos. 1 and 2 , except upon
a finding by a trier of fact that such loss was caused by the sole
negligence of the City. This promise of indemnity specifically
applies in the case of injuries to the Little League' s employees,
volunteers, coaches, players and attendees.
LITTLE LEAGUE LEASE - Page 2 of 5
12 . The Little League shall not commence work under this agreement
until it has obtained the public liability and property damage
insurance required in this Section 12 and until those policies of
insurance or insurance certificates have been submitted to and
approved by the City.
The Little League shall obtain the following policy or
policies of insurance:
Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance. The
Little League shall take out and maintain during the life of
this agreement such automobile, public liability and property
damage insurance as shall protect the Little League and any of
its employees or volunteers utilizing the general recreation
areas covered by this agreement, from claims for damages for
personal injury, including accidental death, as well as from
claims for property damages, which may arise from operations
under this agreement whether such operations be by the Little
League or by any subcontractor, employee, volunteer or
attendee, or by anyone directly or indirectly employed by
either of them. The minimum amounts of such insurance shall
be as follows: One Million dollars ($1, 000, 000. 00) per
occurrence combined single limit, One Million dollars
($1, 000, 000. 00) in the aggregate.
Said policies must specifically name the City as an additional
insured party thereunder and must stipulate that the coverage as
provided by said policy shall not be terminated, reduced, or
otherwise changed in any respect without providing at least thirty
(30) days prior written notice to the City. Any exclusions,
exemptions, exceptions, or other policy coverage limitations of
said policy, including any identifying particular activities or
actions of the City, must first be reviewed by, and written
acceptance provided by, the City before commencement of this
agreement. A failure to provide insurance coverage and written
acceptance of the tendered policy shall be deemed to constitute
nonacceptance of the agreement by the Little League. In order to
protect the public interest and notwithstanding any provisions
herein to the contrary, the Little League' s failure to comply with
any provision in this Section 12 shall subject this agreement to
immediate termination without notice an without recourse by any
person.
13 . The City and the Little League hereby grant to each other on
behalf of themselves, and to any or all insurers providing
insurance to either of them covering the premises or any portion
thereof, a waiver of any right of subrogation that any insurer of
one party may acquire against the other as a result of payment of
any loss under such insurance.
14 . The Little League shall comply with all federal, state and
local laws, rules, regulations and ordinances in the pursuance of
LITTLE LEAGUE LEASE - Page 3 of 5
shall
its bes
se
all terms of this agreement. The Little Leaguelayers,uvolunteerst
efforts to ensure that its employees, coaches, p
attendees follow all City and State parking regulations.
15. The Little League shall exercise precaution at all times for
the protection of persons (including subcontractors, employees and
volunteers, and all of their agents and employees)
applicable safety n rand
The Little League shall comply with l safety and health
health standards, and any other appropriate
codes.
16. The Little League shall comply with all federal, state and
local laws, rules, regulations and ordinances prohibiting
discrimination in employment with regard to age, sex, race, color,
creed, national origin, or mental handicap, unless based upon a
bona fide occupational qualification.
17 . In any claim or lawsuit for damages arising from the operation
of this agreement, the each party shall be entirely responsible for
its own legal costs and attorney' s fees incurred in defending or
bringing such claim or lawsuit.
18. This agreement shall be construed and interpreted in
accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. In the event
of any dispute between the parties herein which cannot first be
settled by the decision of the City, both parties agree to resolve
such dispute exclusively under the jurisdiction and venue and under
the rules of the Superior Court of King County, Washington.
19 . If any term, provision, condition or other portion of this
agreement, or its application to any person, is held to be
inoperative, invalid or void, then the same shall not affect any
other term, provision, condition or other portion of this agreement
or its application to any person.
20. This agreement constitutes all of the covenants, promises,
agreements and conditions, either oral or written, between the
parties.
21. All notices given by either party to the other party shall be
in writing and may either be delivered personally or may be
deposited in the United States Mail, postage prepaid, Certified
mail, addressed as specified in the first page hereof, or to such
other respective addresses that either party may from time to time
designate in writing. Notices sent by mail shall be deemed to have
been delivered when properly mailed; the postmark affixed by the
United States Post office shall be conclusive evidence of the date
of mailing. If delivered by mail, an additional three (3) post
office business days shall be added to any applicable notice
period.
LITTLE LEAGUE LEASE - Page 4 of 5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this
agreement to be executed this day of
1992 .
CITY OF KENT
by
its
KENT LITTLE LEAGUE:
by
its
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney
LITLEAGK.'93
LITTLE LEAGUE LEASE - Page 5 of 5
City Council Meeting Kent y g
Date April 6, 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: LAKE PLAZA CONDOMINIUMS MASTER METERS
2 . STATEMENT: As recommended by the Public Works
Committee, and in accordance with Ordinance No, 237
�u oriza o use two master meters to provide water service
to two separate complexes of the Lake Plaza Condominium
Development
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Committee Minutes, Memorandum from S&M
Enterprises and vicinity map
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (3-0 vote)
(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. 3F
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
MARCH 18, 1993
PRESENT: JIM WHITE ED WHITE
JIM BENNETT JOHN BOND
PAUL MANN RAUL RAMOS
DON WICKSTROM LINDA JOHNSON
TOM BRUBAKER JOHN KIEFER
GARY GILL BILL DOOLITTLE
BILL WOLINSKI MR & MRS RUST
STAN WADE
Resolution - Creating the City Transit Advisory Board
Jim White stated that this is patterned after the Bicycle Advisory
Board placing greater emphasis on transit as was established in the
Council 's goals and objectives.
Committee unanimously agreed to recommend adoption of this
Resolution.
Lake Plaza Condominiums Master Meter
Wickstrom stated that under City ordinance, in order to obtain a
master meter to service more than one complex, Council approval is
required. Wickstrom stated that Lake Plaza Condominiums wants two
master meters to service two complexes .
Committee unanimously agreed to recommend approval of two master
meters at Lake Plaza Condominiums.
Construction Standards
Wickstrom stated that this has been a long awaited process in
developing these Construction Standards . We have developed them
through our own in-house staff, while working with the Planning
Dept. and Maintenance and have developed what we felt was
appropriate. A review committee was selected made up primarily of
the development community. Wickstrom stated that we received names
thru the Master Builders, the Chamber and the Association of
General Contractors. We placed advertisements in the newspapers
advising that copies were available for input to the committee.
1
S & M ENTERPRISES
1700 WESTLAKE AVENUE NORTH, STE. 700
SEATTLE, WA 98109
PHONE (206) 284 9971
FAX(206) 282 7940
March 17, 1993
Mr. Don Wickstrom
Public Works Director
City of Kent
220 4th Avenue S
Kent, WA 98032-5895
RE: Lake Plaza Condominiums#CE-91-9
Dear Don,
This Monday, March 15, 1993, 1 met with Tom Tozuma. He notified me that he had completed his
final review of the Lake Plaza Condominiums plans at which time he informed me that we would
require a variance to use two master water meters, as shown, in lieu of one meter per building.
I hereby request a variance for the aforementioned project to use two master water meters.
Please inform me at your earliest convienience when this variance has been approved so that I
can pick up the building permit for the project.
I appr ciate your help on this matter.
Sincerel ,
S & MIE TERPRISES
Enrique P. ora --
Partner
z2(TH m 227TH ST
ST SE 226TH PL 220TH ST< SE 223TH "'r SE 228TH
u SE ST W
229?), i�,f 29THS a
W OQ W PL 1= `.
< (Pw ( SE 231„ ��� �' dl, SE 2
x ST ST
S 2313T SE 2 1 T ,i. SE 231ST PAR R x
p y� NT
p ST PK) > 2PLTM, y0� xa �� L SE 231ST F
< {f' 232ND ST �W
s 232ND S 232N 232ND ST -< 2 ^<
ST ST ".;'•' SE 232ND PL 232ND r Qy 0. a 'fir 3RD
A
0 S 94TH CT S < •.� i\LF ~ Ol. St 233RC` �,'�
a d s _ - x
x234TH s
< \ S 5THg SE .sE
'\ 235 TH 234TH
1 a SE 236TH ST A v ST Barricade
S 236TH
(WO ST
o xw
o ~�I SE 23M PL a Wgter
SE 237TH ST > w Heservo,
n (Prq CD \ 233TH
r`1 ly (PV[) . SE 239TH I ST 8 S \
® x< H F- W ST , N
8 O rl
,18 17 s in
2- SE TH sT j 17
ST —
< • Ped Oxwg EAST HILL 20 1
S 2413T ST t ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
•z ; o
e s 242ND<
ST m
f
S 243R0
ST a
0
i y SE 244TH ST
~ O
< 8 xa
m S 2s6TH
'< PL
x x p SE 24 TH
cl
k ' s 248TH STI SE 243TH " ST
H I -
1 Fig.- PROJECT LOCATION47
a
. w
x ou
% 516
W
SE 251 ST
Y rltt.��c:1.I W >
:•� . I•�HH w <
*�yA 252N0 T W SE 254ND ST
'�1�• :: EAST HILL ` SE 252N0 P!
a r'. ° CENTER = a = = SE 253RIF
1J i �%.?-,,/►" French SE 232ND 8 »
ST
Field f a
"CoYty * $15 I < W SE 2s4TH` 1\ a
3 40,' KENT—MERIDIAN = x x 1' k b
'i
OR.H1. SCHOOL a 5 -• > 0 SE
SE 256TH ST .: „ <7
T 4
30 W
y °y $ W 29 28 23
a j >
�S71h tsar m .se?s>r.
Swrn3
nl5 Cluh �'' ••' ti�'1f� p
Ir
l�f;V 1,-• LAKE PLAZA CONDOMINIUMS
PA UK y
Imo'` 1�• SE 260TH ST aSE
SCENIC HILL 260TH
3T
:LEMENTARY -. _w •:.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: CITY TRANSIT ADVISORY BOARD - RESOLUTION
2 . SUMMARY FA ME21 As recommended br the Public Works
Committe , doption of Resolution No. /3�� creating the City
ransit Advisory Board, with regard to a transit system within
the City of Kent.
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Committee Minutes and resolution
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (3-0 vote)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO ! YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION-
Council Agenda
Item No. 3G
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
MARCH 18, 1993
PRESENT: JIM WHITE ED WHITE
JIM BENNETT JOHN BOND
PAUL MANN RAUL RAMOS
DON WICKSTROM LINDA JOHNSON
TOM BRUBAKER JOHN KIEFER
GARY GILL BILL DOOLITTLE
BILL WOLINSKI MR & MRS RUST
STAN WADE
Resolution Creating the City Transit Advisory Board
Jim White stated that this is patterned after the Bicycle Advisory
Board placing greater emphasis on transit as was established in the
Council ' s goals and objectives .
Committee unanimously agreed to recommend adoption of this
Resolution.
Lake Plaza Condominiums Master Meter
Wickstrom stated that under City ordinance, in order to obtain a
master meter to service more than one complex, Council approval is
required. Wickstrom stated that Lake Plaza Condominiums wants two
master meters to service two complexes .
Committee unanimously agreed to recommend approval of two master
meters at Lake Plaza Condominiums.
Construction Standards
Wickstrom stated that this has been a long awaited process in
developing these Construction Standards . We have developed them
through our own in-house staff, while working with the Planning
Dept. and Maintenance and have developed what we felt was
appropriate. A review committee was selected made up primarily of
the development community. Wickstrom stated that we received names
thru the Master Builders, the Chamber and the Association of
General Contractors. We placed advertisements in the newspapers
advising that copies were available for input to the committee.
1
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, creating the City
Transit Advisory Board, describing its
formation, constitution and duties with regard
to a transit system for the City.
WHEREAS, the City Council intends that a comprehensive
City transit plan be developed and adopted in order to promote the
use of public transportation as a mode of urban transportation in
the City; and
WHEREAS , traffic congestion, limited parking facilities,
increasing fuel costs, concern for personal health, and energy
shortages have combined to make public transportation, such as a
City transit system, an increasingly attractive alternative to
unrestrictive• use of the automobile; and
WHEREAS, the active involvement of commuters and other
potential users of a City transit system in the form of an
organized board to advise municipal authorities is vital to insure
proper development of a transit system for the City; NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Intent. That it is the intent of the City
Council to create the City Transit Advisory Board to advise the
City Council, the Mayor, and all departments and offices of the
City on matters related to public transportation including
specifically the development of a City transit system. Such Board
shall have the opportunity to contribute in an advisory capacity to
all aspects of the City' s planning processes insofar as they may
relate to public transportation.
Section 2 . Board Formation & Constitution. That the
City Transit Advisory Board shall be composed of no more than 11
members appointed by the Mayor, subject to confirmation by the City
Council to serve staggered terms of one and two years. The Board
shall serve under the direction of the Mayor subject to Council
directives, and shall receive technical support from City staff as
set forth below.
a. Potential users of a City transit system;
b. Organizations concerned with safety;
C. Representatives of business organizations;
d. Interested private citizens concerned with public
urban transportation issues.
The foregoing- members shall be the only voting members of the
Board.
Section 3 . Duties & Responsibilities of Board. The
Board shall review proposals to implement and operate a transit
system in the City and advise the Mayor and City Council,
representatives from the following City departments and offices who
are so delegated by the Department Head. Assigned staff members
from the following departments shall be nonvoting members of the
Advisory Board and shall provide technical assistance and provide
input as needed:
a. Public Works Department;
2
b. Police Department;
C. Planning Department; and
d. Finance Department.
In addition, the Board shall:
a. Assist in the formulation of Kent ' s Comprehensive
Public Transportation Plan.
b. Review proposals and plans for a City transit
system and routes within the City of Kent.
C. Promote City transit as a viable form of urban
transportation.
d. Consider transit proposals that would link into
METRO and proposed heavy commuter rail systems.
e. Consider City transit system proposals that can be
utilized to assist in the implementation of the
City' s Commute Trip Reduction Program.
f. Study programs and incentives to encourage
commuting through provision of safe, accessible
routes and secure parking facilities .
Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington this day of , 1993 .
Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this
day of 1993 .
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
3
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 1993 .
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
transit.res
4
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, creating the City
Transit Advisory Board, describing its
formation, constitution and duties with regard
to a transit system for the City.
WHEREAS , the City Council intends that a comprehensive
City transit plan be developed and adopted in order to promote the
use of public transportation as a mode of urban transportation in
the City; and
WHEREAS, traffic congestion, limited parking facilities,
increasing fuel costs, concern for personal health, and energy
shortages have combined to make public transportation, such as a
City transit system, an increasingly attractive alternative to
unrestrictive use of the automobile; and
WHEREAS, the active involvement of commuters and other
potential users of a City transit system in the form of an
organized board to advise municipal authorities is vital to insure
proper development of a transit system for the City; NOW,
THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1 . Intent. That it is the intent of the City
Council to create the City Transit Advisory Board to advise the
City Council, the Mayor, and all departments and offices of the
City on matters related to public transportation including
specifically the development of a City transit system. Such Board
shall have the opportunity to contribute in an advisory capacity to
all aspects of the City' s planning processes insofar as they may
relate to public transportation.
Section 2 . Board Formation & Constitution. That the
City Transit Advisory Board shall be composed of no more than 11
members appointed by the Mayor, subject to confirmation by the City
Council to serve staggered terms of one and two years. The Board
shall serve under the direction of the Mayor subject to Council
directives, and shall receive technical support from City staff as
set forth below.
a. Potential users of a City transit system;
b. Organizations concerned with safety;
C. Representatives of business organizations;
d. Interested private citizens concerned with public
urban transportation issues.
The foregoing members shall be the only voting members of the
Board.
Section 3 . Duties & Responsibilities of Board. The
Board shall review proposals to implement and operate a transit
system in the City and advise the Mayor and City Council ,
representatives from the following City departments and offices who
are so delegated by the Department Head. Assigned staff members
from the following departments shall be nonvoting members of the
Advisory Board and shall provide technical assistance and provide
input as needed:
a. Public Works Department;
2
b. Police Department;
C. Planning Department; and
d. Finance Department.
In addition, the Board shall:
a. Assist in the formulation of Kent' s Comprehensive
Public Transportation Plan.
b. Review proposals and plans for a City transit
system and routes within the City of Kent.
C. Promote City transit as a viable form of urban
transportation.
d. Consider transit proposals that would link into
METRO and proposed heavy commuter rail systems.
e. Consider City transit system proposals that can be
utilized to assist in the implementation of the
City' s Commute Trip Reduction Program.
f. Study programs and incentives to encourage
commuting through provision of safe, accessible
routes and secure parking facilities.
Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington this day of
1993 .
Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this
day of 1993 .
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
3
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 1993 .
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, DEPUTY CITY CLERK
4
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6 1993
Category Consent Calendar
/J. BJECT: CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS
2 . SUMMARY STATEM As recommended by the Public Works
Committee - uthorization o set May as the pu is earing
da a or the Public Works Construction Standards.
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Committee Minutes and Memorandum from
Director of Public Works
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (3-0 vote)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO�_ YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION:
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3H
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
MARCH 18, 1993
PRESENT: JIM WHITE ED WHITE
JIM BENNETT JOHN BOND
PAUL MANN RAUL RAMOS
DON WICKSTROM LINDA JOHNSON
TOM BRUBAKER JOHN KIEFER
GARY GILL BILL DOOLITTLE
BILL WOLINSKI MR & MRS RUST
STAN WADE
Resolution Creating the City Transit Advisory Board
Jim White stated that this is patterned after the Bicycle Advisory
Board placing greater emphasis on transit as was established in the
Council ' s goals and objectives.
Committee unanimously agreed to recommend adoption of this
Resolution.
Lake Plaza Condominiums Master Meter
Wickstrom stated that under City ordinance, in order to obtain a
master meter to service more than one complex, Council approval is
required. Wickstrom stated that Lake Plaza Condominiums wants two
master meters to service two complexes .
Committee unanimously agreed to recommend approval of two master
meters at Lake Plaza Condominiums.
Construction Standards
Wickstrom stated that this has been a long awaited process in
developing these Construction Standards . We have developed them
through our own in-house staff, while working with the Planning
Dept. and Maintenance and have developed what we felt was
appropriate. A review committee was selected made up primarily of
the development community. Wickstrom stated that we received names
thru the Master Builders, the Chamber and the Association of
General Contractors. We placed advertisements in the newspapers
advising that copies were available for input to the committee.
1
Wickstrom requested that a public hearing be set for the April 20th
Council meeting. If there are no major reactions or major
concerns, that it would be adopted at that time. If there were
major concerns, than it would come back to Public Works Committee
for further input.
Committee unanimously agreed recommendation of a public hearing for
May 4th.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
MARCH 12, 1993
TO: PUBLIC WORKS CO ITTEE
FROM: DON WICKSTROM
RE: CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS
Enclosed herewith is the long awaited Public Works Construction
Standards. Enclosed also are several memos. The first memo (from
Stan Wade) gives the background, perspective relating to our
standards (old and new) . It also denotes the process used to
develop these new standards. Finally, it gives a synopsis of the
significant changes made (old versus new) . The second memo (from
the Review Committee) denotes the Committee' s support for, and
identifies their concerns, per these new standards. Lastly, the
third memo (Stormwater Standards) denotes the basis for the
significant change in our Stormwater standards.
The action sought from the committee is to recommend to full
Council adoption of these Standards (an adoption ordinance will be
required) . The process we propose would be to hold a Public
Hearing thereon, at the April loth Council meeting. Should no
significant comments surface at the hearing, than adoption of the
ordinance would be in order. Should however, significant comments
be raised, then the matter would be referred back to the Committee
for further review and a formal recommendation.
Action: Approval of the Adoption Process noted above and recommend
setting a Public Hearing date on the matter for the April 20th
Council meeting.
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
MARCH 123 1993
TO: DON WICKSTROM, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
FROM: S4TWADE, CONSTRUCTION ENGINEER
RE: CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS
The following is a synopsis of the history, procedure, and main
points of modification of the Construction Standards.
The last adopted standards occurred in 1962 . However, since that
time the City of Kent has adopted comprehensive plans for drainage,
sewer, water and transportation which included construction
standards. Other documents included various utility ordinances,
the subdivision code and ordinances specifying APWA and WSDOT as
standards to be followed. From these documents a draft
construction standards manual was developed over the past several
years as an in-house guide to review plans and for use in
construction inspection.
From the draft construction standards, a concerted effort was begun
to update the standards to the present submitted form. The first
step was to clarify, modify and reorganize the sections and to add
appendices which included the standard details. This task was
accomplished within the Construction Section of the Engineering
Division. The next step was a review by other sections of the
Public Works Department including design, transportation,
environmental, survey, property management, and operations and
maintenance. The Code Enforcement and Planning Departments
provided input during this phase. Also involved in assisting the
City in the development of Section 6 (Stormwater Standards) were
Entranco Engineers and Northwest Hydraulics, consulting engineers.
The final review was performed by a Construction Standards Review
committee composed of developers, engineers, and contractors. The
purpose of this review was to provide an opportunity for the
primary users of the document to give input from the private sector
point of view as well as information regarding the latest state-of-
the art design and construction practices. The input from this
group was valuable in providing a practical document. The
committee was chosen after consulting with the Association of
1
General Contractors, Masterbuilders, and the Kent Chamber of
Commerce. Finally the public was given an opportunity to review
the standards having been informed through advertising in the
Valley Daily News and the Journal of Commerce.
The major changes to the Construction Standards are as follows:
o A section was added to describe plat and short plat
conditions. (Section 1. 1. 5)
o Street use and street cut bonds will now be on a case-by-
case basis, not mandatory. (Sections 1. 1. 621. 1. 7)
o The Latecomers Agreement section was modified to require
information on methods of assessing costs, etc. at the time
of plan approval. (Section 1. 1. 11)
o A definition of terms sections was added. (Section 2)
o Easements will not be required to be recorded until the Bill
of Sale goes to Council. (Typical Section 3 . 1)
o Various changes related to materials allowed in construction
were added throughout the document.
o Specific detention criteria was established for the hill
areas, and valley areas of Kent to prevent worsening of
flooding and stream erosion from future development.
(Section 5. 0)
o Stormwater treatment requirements and sediment and erosion
control practices were incorporated in the standards to
protect the City's water resources from further degradation.
(Section 5. 0)
o Provisions were made for exemption to the standards where
requirements are to be satisfied by regional detention and
treatment facilities funded in the Capital Improvement
Program. (Section 5. 0)
o Functional classification of streets was slightly modified.
(Section 6)
o Design Standards for all street classifications is provided
in a tabular form.
o Sidewalks and driveways will meet ADA requirements. (Section
6)
o A new section on pavement design criteria was added
including upgrading of section thickness. (Section 6. 6)
2
, o Many of the standard details were changed to reflect new
materials or requirements. (Appendices)
o An "As-built" section was added. (Appendices)
o A Maintenance section for drainage facilities was added.
(Appendices)
o A Standard Construction Notes section was added.
(Appendices)
In summary, the document consists of six Sections and Appendices as
follows:
Section 1 - Permits and Approvals
Section 2 - General Conditions and Requirements
Section 3 - Water System Improvements
Section 4 - Sanitary Sewer System
Section 5 - Stormwater System
Section 6 - Streets and Roadways
Appendices:
A - Notes
B - Detail Drawings
C - Fee Schedule
D - Maintenance for Drainage Facilities
E - As-built Requirements
F - Detention Calculation Examples
3
TO: DON WICKSTROM
FROM: CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS REVIEW COMMITTEE
DATE: MARCH 12 , 1993
RE: CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS
On February loth, the Review Committee completed its review of the
ruction Standards Manual, to produce what we
proposed new Const
believe is a document which will meet the City of Kent's current
needs while also providing flexibility in areas where the private
development sector may incorporate cost saving techniques which do
not jeopardize the City' s concerns relative to fire, safety, and
integrity of the completed project.
The Review Committee was composed of representatives from the
engineering and surveying professions, contractors, developers,
builders, and personnel from the City of Kent' s Public Works
Department. The Review Committee completed a detailed review of
each of the sections of the Construction Standards over a two month
period and provided % comments, suggestions, concerns, and
alternatives to the requirements and standards within each of the
draft sections. A considerable amount of time and effort was spent
on the permits and approval section in an attempt to restructure
the permitting phase to reduce the amount of time required to
obtain building and construction permits. Certain bonds,
easements, agreements, and other documentation determined not to be
necessarily required to begin the review process were modified so
that these items could be addressed simultaneously while the review
process continued. These documents would, however, be required
prior to building permit issuance. In order to protect the City of
Kent' s staff from spending time reviewing projects which may
eventually not be issued permits, due to significant impacts or
unresolvable design criteria, (such as offsite easements or
agreements with adjacent property owners) , the developer will now
be required to submit a plan check fee at the time of plan
submittal. This procedure appears to be acceptable to both the
City of Kent and the Development Sector.
Certain other issues within the sewer, water, and transportation
sections were also modified where possible to incorporate
additional flexibility. For instance, easement widths for
utilities, types of materials, pipe cover, etc. , were scrutinized
extensively so that they were made. more practical where possible
for the specific application. Easement widths were reduced over
utility lines where practical, some additional pipe materials
fittings and construction techniques were added to the acceptable
list, and minimum pipe covers were reduced in certain cases, based
on manufacturers recommendations. Although these changes may in
1
some case help reduce construction costs for developers, they were
also determined to not have an adverse impact on the integrity of
the completed project.
Throughout the document, many clarifications were incorporated into
the sections to minimize misinterpretations as much as possible so
that consistency can be preserved for both the user and the
reviewer.
It was generally agreed upon by the Review Committee that the final
draft sections for water, sanitary sewer, and streets and roadways
were generally consistent with the standards and requirements of
most other jurisdictions and represented sound engineering and
construction practices. However, the storm drainage section
created many concerns and differences of opinion between City
staff, the Consulting Engineers, and the Developers. It is known
that the City of Kent is experiencing serious flooding and erosion
problems within both the hill and valley areas. Due to these
problems, standards for stormwater control systems, detention
facilities, and temporary erosion control have changed
significantly within this manual compared to previous requirements.
Release rates have been significantly reduced and stormwater
detention requirements have increased by a factor of 3 to 5 times.
The requirements for Hill Development generally follow the 1990
King County Drainage Manual. In addition, water quality treatment
requirements and erosion control measures have been modified
extensively.
Although it was the general consensus by the Committee that these
types of changes will substantially reduce flooding and degradation
of properties within the City of Kent, the additional financial
burden to developers from both loss of additional land and
increased construction costs was not researched, although it is
anticipated to have an economic impact. It was concluded that this
issue may need to be researched further and additional
modifications to the requirements made at a later date. It was
also agreed that modification may be restricted since development
will be required to meet Washington Fishery's requirements and/or
the Puget Sound Stormwater Management Manual by DOE, which contain
similar or more restrictive requirements. Therefore, the general
criteria for stormwater management systems remained as originally
proposed, except for minor changes and clarifications.
Although the Review Committee believes that the manual is
technically sound, the full result of the economic burden cannot be
fully assessed at this time. However, changes made to the
permitting process section are anticipated to help reduce the
amount of time it takes to obtain permits and thereby help
compensate for overall development cost increases. In addition, it
is hoped that the design manual will provide adequate information
to the designer and developer to provide for consistency and help
eliminate hidden costs to developers. Additional changes and
2
clarifications will need to be incorporated after the document has
been. in use and additional comments are received.
The Review Committee would like to thank tro osed Construction
ity of Kent for
inviting it to advise and review its p p
Standards. We believe that as a result of the Review Committee's
review, a more comprehensive set of-Construction Standards has been
produced for both the private and public sector.
BY• &4,1"
COMPANY
BY: COMPANY
P� 44 of D
BY: �� o` � `'� COMPANY
BY,
COMPANY
/f
,vGr� ,t,6/Sb,J C�✓ST2vcT/b�, �.lG.
BY: COMPANY
BY• COMPANY
y�04 D V�lO IZT CD)p Y, C
By COMPANY
BY: COMPANY
COMPANY
COMPANY
3
STORMWATER STANDARDS
MARCH 12, 1993
JUSTIFICATION FOR CHANGES:
There currently exists widespread problems throughout the City of
Kent from lack of effective controls on increases in stormwater
flow and pollution from new development. Understanding of the
impacts and the methods for control of stormwater has gradually
progressed over the past two decades.
The stormwater detention standards currently in use by the City
were adopted in December of 1978 . Various watershed studies
recently completed by the City thoroughly document the need for an
improvement in our management of stormwater both from a flooding
and water pollution perspective. Similar findings nationwide and
throughout the State of Washington have prompted the State
Department of Ecology to propose statewide guidelines for
stormwater management.
On a nationwide basis, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is
implementing control of stormwater through a National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. In their
implementation strategy for the NPDES program, the Department of
Ecology will include the City of Kent in a watershed permit for the
entire Green River watershed. A requirement of the City's permit
will be the development of a stormwater management program which at
minimum, meets the State's guidelines.
In the process of developing the proposed stormwater standards, all
available information on existing problems, currently available
control technologies and pending State and Federal requirements
were carefully considered. Recognition was made that the various
regional stormwater facilities being designed and constructed under
the utility C. I.P. program will for the most part, address any
existing problems. Given the amount . of development which has
already occurred, sites for regional stormwater facilities are
extremely limited. Where such sites are available and funds
provided in the C. I.P. program, the proposed standards allow
exemptions for both detention and treatment requirements.
In reaching a decision on the final recommended design criteria,
City staff reviewed various alternatives presented by our
stormwater consultants. These included comparisons of current Kent
standards with Washington State Dept of Ecology, King County, King
County steep slope and no standards. All options included the
construction of proposed regional detention facilities. Within the
hillside basin areas, the consultants recommended criteria similar
to the King County steep slope standards. They felt that it was
the only alternative which would significantly reduce the current
serious stream and gully erosion problems as well as flooding.
Staff however selected the alternative which was most similar to
current King County standards, because it is already being required
for development projects within King County which make up a
significant portion of Kent' s drainage basins (i.e. , Garrison and
Mill Creek) . It was agreed that any stricter design requirements
for the hillside basins needed to be reviewed further and agreed
upon through an interlocal agreement with King County so that all
properties within each drainage basin (both County and City) would
be treated in the same manner. This will be pursued in the future.
The recommended standards will increase the size of the detention
basins by about a factor of 3 to 5.
Within, the Kent valley floor area the drainage analysis also
included the evaluation of several design standards as with the
hillside drainage basins. Because the drainage problems in the
valley floor differ from those in the hillside areas, (primarily
flooding as opposed to stream erosion, sedimentation and flooding
in the hillside areas) the results and recommendations were
adjusted accordingly. Analytical results showed that the King
County standards were largely ineffective in controlling runoff
from developing areas. The proposed regional facilities such as
the Kent lagoons, can substantially reduce flows on the mainstream
of Mill Creek, but probably will not solve local flooding problems
on the minor tributaries to Mill Creek. At the same time, it is
clear that greater on-site controls for new developments will not
by itself reduce current flood flows in Mill Creek. Therefore a
combination of effective bn-site controls, regional facilities, and
local conveyance improvements is necessary to prevent current
flooding problems from getting worse. The recommended valley
standards will require 3 to 4 times greater on-site detention
storage volume than under the current Kent standards. This level
of control is necessary in order to not exasperate existing
flooding problems.
The proposed stormwater construction standards are needed to enable
the City to effectively manage their water resources and protect
citizens and businesses from additional damage. Even though the
recommended standards are a radical change from those adopted in
1978, they are consistent with present King County standards and
are primarily designed to not allow existing drainage conditions to
worsen at the expense of allowing new development.
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6, 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: REAPPOINTMENT TO HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Confirmation of the reappointment of
Judy Woods as the n-voting Council O presentative to the
Human Service Commission. This is a one year term and will
continue to 1/1/94 .
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo from the Council President Judy Woods
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Council President Woods
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT• NO X YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ N/A
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3I
MEMORANDUM
TO: DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR ( �
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS "
�J
FROM: JUDY WOODS, CITY COUNCIL PRESIDENT i
DATE: MARCH 18, 1993
SUBJECT: REAPPOINTMENT OF JUDY WOODS TO HUMAN SERVICES COMMISSION
I have recently reappointed myself to continue serving on the Human Services Commission as the
Non-voting Council Representative. This is a one year term and will continue to 1/1/94.
I submit this for your confirmation.
JW.jb
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6 , 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: REAPPOINTMENT TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Confirmation of the Mayor' s reappoint-
ment of Jack Cosby as a member of the Board of Adjustment.
Mr. Cosby' s reappointment will continue to 2/28/98 .
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo from the 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: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3J
MEMORANDUM
TO: JUDY WOODS, CITY COUNCIL ESIDENT
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
DATE: MARCH 17, 1993
SUBJECT: REAPPOINTMENT OF JACK COSBY TO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
I have recently reappointed Jack Cosby to serve as a member of the Board of Adjustment. Mr.
Cosby's new term will continue to 2/28/98.
I submit this for your confirmation.
DK:jb
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: FUNDING FOR THE KOREAN WAR MEMORIAL
2 . MMARY STATEMENT: 4is requested by the Korean War Veterans
Fund Raising Committee and recommended by the Council fort
Committee on March 22 . 1993 uthorization �
$1, 500 to support the construction of a Korean War Veterans
Memorial, The contribution would be part of an estimated
$300, 000 budget toward which over $270, 000 has been raised to
date. The Council approved a $1, 500 appropriation on April 21,
1992 conditioned on the availability of funds. The Budget
Committee approved the request without restriction. Funds will
come from the Unencumbered General Fund and be charged to its
community events budget.
3 . EXHIBITS: Minutes of 4/21/92 Council Meeting and request of
Korean War Veterans Fund Raising Committee
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Budget Committee (3-0) -
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES X
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended e!7A Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS: Unencumbered General Fund funds
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3K
'rr
April 21, 1992
KOREAN WAR (OTHER BUSINESS - ITEM 4F)
MEMORIAL ADDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MANN
Korean Veterans Memorial. Jean Belcher of TRADEC,
Inc. , noted that they represent the Washington
State Korean Veterans Memorial Committee in their
fundraising efforts. She introduced Al Rasmussen
of the Chosen Few, who is a Korean War veteran
from Washington State. Mr. Rasmussen, Past Presi-
dent of the Northwest Chapter of the Chosen Few,
explained that the Korean War Veterans Memorial
was initiated in 1989 with $25 , 000 in seed funding
from the Washington State Legislature to be used
for design, construction and location of the
memorial . He displayed a model of the memorial ,
noting that it was designed by Deborah Copenhaven.
He noted that they would like to have the memorial
built by July, 1993 and dedicated on July 23 ,
1993 , which is the 40th anniversary of the end of
the formal hostilities in Korea. He noted that
all funds raised go directly to the memorial, and
that Paul Barden raised $20 , 000 from the King
County Council . He pointed out that a memorial
for Vietnam Veterans has been built and that
Vietnam veterans have been helpful with the Korean
Veterans Memorial . He noted that the City of Kent
donated to the Vietnam Memorial and asked for a
similar contribution to this memorial . Ms.
Belcher requested 1 1/20 of the total funding
need, which is $1250 . She noted that the veterans
have raised $160, 000 to date and that they have
just received a $50 , 000 match appropriation from
the State once $200 , 000 has been reached. She
invited the Councilmembers to a reception on April
30 at the Executive Mansion in Olympia, and noted
that that would be a good opportunity to announce
the City ' s contribution publicly. City Adminis-
trator Chow stated that the Vietnam Veterans of
America, Washington State, are in support of the
Korean War Veterans and their memorial . . MANN
MOVED that the City grant $1500 toward the estab-
lishment of the Washington State Korean War
Veterans Memorial, to be given after it has been
ascertained that the funds are available. Johnson
seconded. Upon White ' s question, the Mayor deter-
mined that the funding would be based upon the
General Fund revenue projections to be presented
21
i
KOREAN VE HANS
MEMORIA1 FUND
DeWmwd of Veterans Aftatrs,P.O.Box 9778,Mal Stop PM•41.DrTQ13,WA 98504.9778
OVERVIEW
The Korean War Veterans Memorial was initiated in 1989 with $25,000 in
seed funding from the Washington State Legislature to be used specifically for
memorial design and organization of a fundraising committee. Since its
inception, support for the committee has grown to include industry leaders,
government officials, and veterans groups which have taken the lead in
fundraising activities for the Memorial. In less than one year after the capital
campaign began, the Korean War Veterans Memorial Fund Committee,
assisted by the The Chosin Few, has raised over $mod - more than half of
the required goal.
Raising the necessary funding for this project is a challenge given the
declining population of Korean War Veterans and that nearly forty years
have passed since the war, and the capacity to reach the remaining Korean
War Veterans is very limited. The support received to date by the Korean
War Veterans from the private sector has great breadth, exemplified by
contributions from the Alcohol and Drug Helpline, Indian tribes, labor
unions, corporations, cities, counties and ports from across the state. This is
particularly important considering the Gulf War and recessionary economic
trends which have been additional burdens to the fundraising efforts.
The Korean War Veterans realize this funding request from the City of Kent
must be weighed against budgetary limitations. The Korean War Veterans
would like the City to consider the tremendous sacrifice of the 122,0
00 Korean
War Veterans of Washington State who fought in this "forgotten war", both
on the front line and behind the scenes. Their courage and strength of mind
and heart deserves to be memorialized.
�REQUEST f,:�do
The Korean War Veterans Fundraising Committee respectfully requests a
contribution of from the City of Kent, to reach the V.� , goal
required for construction. The Memorial will be the first state memorial to
honor Korean War Veterans and will be placed on the capitol campus in
Olympia.
.Y
KOREAN VE ANS
August 2, 1991 11 F,
Honorable Dan Kelleher ""'t a veterans Atiairs eo.Ciox sMEMORIA1
PM-FUND
778
Mayor
City of Kent
220 South 4th Avenue
Kent,WA 98032
Dear Mayor Kelleher:
I would like to urge the City Council of Kent to take action on the contribution request made on
behalf of the Korean Veteran's Memorial Fund Committee at the Governor's luncheon, on April 23.
Based on our initial contact with Ed Chow and Steve Dowell, and the participation of other cities,
we would like to request your participation in the Korean War Memorial Capital Campaign at the
0 level of.U,)'<pr one half of a percent of the total$250,000 being raised to complete the project.
This memorial is important across the state, and is a priority project with Governor Gardner and
Secretary of State Munro. The Committee appreciates any assistance you can provide on behalf of
the City.
Enclosed are several prospectus which will provide further information on the memorial for
yourself, the council members and city officials . The project budget and timeline are also included
in the prospectus. I would also like to make myself available to meet directly with the Council to
answer any questions they may have. Thank you in advance for your favorable consideration.
Sincerely,
Belcher
ssociate
TRADEC
enclosure
R1
KOREAN V US
MEMORIA1 NO
Corporate Contributions Received Deparnentof„eter„sAnairs.eo.Box9naWaitstov 41,OMmDi.WA98504-9778
Aerospace Machinists#751
$ 10,000 Oneonta Trading Corporation $ 200
AFSCME Local#275 $ 50 Pacific Lumber& Shipping Co. $ 1,500
$ 12,000 PEMCO Corporation $ 5,000
Boeing Company $ 2,500
Burlington Resources Foundation $
2,500 Philip Morris Company
l00 Pierce County $ 5,000
Capital Development Company Pioneer Savings Bank $ 500
Carpenters Union#131 $ 100 $ 2,500
$ 600 Port of Seattle
City of Bothell 100
City of Edmonds $ 1,250 Retired Public Employees Council $
$ 200 Safeco Corporation $ 1,500
City of Forks
City of Gig Harbor $ 500 Sandvik Special Metals Corporation S 500
$ 1,000 Seafrst Bank,Sea-Tac Branch $ 200
City of Oak Harbor $ 100
City of Olympia $ 2,500 Sedgwick James Inc.
$ g00 STC $ 50
City of Port Angeles $ 1,000
City of Renton $ 1,250 Teamsters,Joint Council#28
$ 1,000 The Alcohol and Drug 24-Hour Helpline $
20
City of Richland Thurston County $ 2,500
City of Seattle $ 15,000 $ 500
City of Tacoma $ 2,500 Tobacco Institute
$ 500 TuWip Bingo $ 2,500
m
City of Tuwater $ 100
City of Vancouver $ 2,500 UFCW Local#1439
$ 1,000 United Steelworkers#329 $ 200
Clark County $ 100
$ 5,000 United Steelworkers#4017
Colville Federation of Tribes $ 100
Dist.Council of Laborers'Public Relations $ 250 United Transportation#1468 $ 2,500
Everett Municipal Employers Union $ 400 US West Foundation
Glaziers&Glassworkers,Local#188 $ 50 Veterans Remembrance Emblem Progam $ 5,000
IAMAW Hope Lodge#79
$ 200 WA State Legislature $ 50,000
IBEW Local#497 $ 100 Washington Fed of State Employees $ 500
$ 100 Washington Natural Gas $ 500
IBEW Local 73
IBEW, Local#77 $ 250 Washington State Elks Association S 3,500
Intl Chemical Workers,Local#747 $ 88 Washington State Labor Council -AFL-CIO $ 5,000
150 Washington Troopers Association $ 250
Intl Union of Elevator Constructors Local $ 00
$ 1,0
Washington Water Power Co.
IWA Local 3-130 $ 50 g $ 2, 00
Kenworth Trucks $ in-kind Weyerhaeuser
$ 20,000 WFSE Local 1301 $ 100
King County Council $ 5,000
Natl.Assoc.of Letter Carriers#79 $ 100 Yakima Indian Nation
Olympia Building Trades Council $ 50
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6, 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: BUDGET CHANGE FOR CORRECTION FACILITY SECURITY
IMPROVEMENTS
2 . UMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended b the Budget Committee
uthorization to approve a budget change for
$21, 000 from the Criminal Justice Fund needed to make securit
improvements at the Kent Correctional Facility orna Rufener,
Police Department Lieutenant, noted that an attempted break out
at the Corrections Facility had occurred on January 6 involving
a U. S. Marshall inmate. She noted the Police Department has
been working with U. S. Marshalls and Gilbert Security to look
at overall security at the Facility and explained that the
Facility is doing 76% more bookings than they had in the past.
To improve the security, several items were recommended
including cameras, additional monitor controls, high security
roll bars, roof light/beacon and a gecurity Xool ehest. This
item had previously been approved by the Executive Committee.
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Budget Committee 3-0
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5 . UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES _
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS-
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3L
1
KENT POLICE DEPARTMENT
TO: Executive Committee
FROM: Acting Captain Lorna K. Rufener
SUBJECT: Funding request out of Criminal Justice Funding
DATE : 02-17-93
On 01-06-93 , the Kent Police Department had an .at.tempted break out
at the CKCF . The accomplices on the outside of. the facility gained
access to the roof, removed a vent to the B unit and proceeded to
cut through two of the four bars in as attempt to assist in the
escape of a US Marshall inmate . A tip to staff prevented the
inmate and other prisoners from escaping. However, the breech of
security has required that we evaluate and determine if the
facility is safe for staff and the community.
In the seven years of operation, we have had two escape attempts
from INSIDE the facility. During the investigation of the most
recent attempt , the US Marshalls' have provided us with their
input . Along with their comments and my evaluation of the
security, we are requesting use of excess Police Remodel funds for
the following:
1 . Two cameras on the east side of the building exterior $4 , 300
2 . Interior cameras in the laundry area, the A and B units $7, 200
3 . One additional monitor in control $2 , 000
4 . High security roll bars installed in the vents $3 , 100
S . Roof lighting/beacon $5 , 000
6 . Security Tool Chest $ 200
Total $21, 000
In the last seven years, CKCF has only increased staff by five,
however we are doing 76% more bookings than we did when we opened.
The increased workload, activity and types of prisoners that we are
housing requires us to seriously consider making the above security
improvements .
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: ACCEPTANCE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANT
2 . UMMARY STATEMENT: As rec Committee,
pproval acceptance of $2 , 348 from the
Washington Traffic Safety Commission to be used for the
Drinking Driver Task Force supplies and program Lorna
Rufener, Police Department Lieutenant, explained that a letter
had been received from the Washington Traffic Safety Commission
explaining that the additional money was available because of
an underrun during fiscal year 1992 . -fhese funds
willV0n&bar44t$ used for programs and�ost4 of purchasing
supplies for the Drinking Driver Task Force. The Executive
Committee recommended approval of acceptance of this grant.
3 . EXHIBITS:
4 . RECOMMENDED BY:
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 3M
v s
t � S
DRIES F.IMES
(IireCtor yr inw
STATE OF WASHINGTON
WASHINGTON TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION
1000 S. Cherry 51., PO Box 40944 • Olympia, Washington 985,04-0944 • (206) 753-6195
February 22, 1993
Lt. Lorna Rufener
Kent Police Department
DWI Task Force
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Dear Lt. Rufener,
This letter authorizes you to amend your DWI Traffic safety grant
to include an additional $2,348. These are underrun funds from
fiscal year 1992 and this amount is allocated specifically to your
task force. The monies may be used anywhere within the grant. I
ask that when you amend your budget to please send a copy to me to
update our files as well. In addition, if there are changes in
activities, please advise.
Thank you for your patience and genuine cooperation in this
circumstance. If there are any questions or problems please call
me.
Sincerely,
William F. Cooper
Program Manager
Police Traffic Services
o. re
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6, 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: LID 342 - WEST SMITH STREET SIDEWALKS
2 . ZtkMARY ST by the Public Works
(Men
w1on
doption of Resolution No. /351 declaring
o order sidewalk improvements on West Smith Street
ifrom N. Washington Ave. to 64th Ave. So. and to create a local
improvement district, and setting May 4th as the public hearing
date)
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Committee Minutes, resolution and
vicinity map
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (3-0 vote)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO >� YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 3N
LID 333 - LID 338 - LID 339
Wickstrom explained these LID's are construction complete and we
would like to finalize these projects. Tentative dates have been
scheduled to set these items for public hearings.
Committee unanimously agreed to set public hearing dates on LIDs
333 , 338, and 339.
Property Acquisition
Wickstrom explained that the City has been negotiating with Mrs.
Ramstead, one of the major property owners on the 277th Corridor.
Wickstrom stated that we have an earnest money agreement for
$700, 000. This is in accordance with the appraisal. The property
in question is approximately 96 acres. Wickstrom stated that Mrs.
Ramstead has a logging permit and the City's concern is, once Mrs.
Ramstead clear cuts her property, King County can, under State law,
and will issue a moratorium on the entire site for 6 years; , which
would eliminate any building permits or additions of any kind
including us. Wickstrom explained that this is far beyond what we
would want and that is what initiated this negotiation with her.
Wickstrom further explained that a school is going in adjacent to
the property which will bring in sewer and water to the property.
This could very well increase the price and could make the property
more potentially developable.
Jim Bennett raised the question regarding what phase we are in
regarding the 277th Corridor. He noted that approximately $500, 000
was authorized to do study, survey, etc. Bennett asked how this
acquisition would impact that.
Wickstrom explained that we may become "landlords" on this property
but when the school is built in 194 the property could probably be
sold for a profit. He further stated that this is also the reason
why negotiations are under way with another property owner, Mrs.
Johnson, at the bottom of the hill. Mrs. Johnson is very willing
to sell and an appraisal will be in to the City on November 6th.
Wickstrom explained that there is money in the project fund; $2
Million in outstanding bonds on this project; $800, 000 in cash that
was set aside some time ago for and $500, 000 development fees that
have been prepaid by various developments.
Committee unanimously agreed to authorize acquisition of the
Ramstead property.
Proposed LID Smith Street Sidewalk
Wickstrom explained that this was brought forward from the last
Committee meeting because of a 1-1 split vote.
5
Wickstrom stated that we did not receive much response in favor of
the LID, although we have adequate LID commitments to proceed with
the project.
Wickstrom also stated that the City could possibly contribute some
funds to the project. There is some sidewalk funding available.
Committee unanimously agreed to authorize staff to proceed with the
Smith Street Sidewalk LID with a suggestion of "sweetening the
pot" , on this sidewalk project, per staff recommendation.
CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of
Kent, Washington, declaring its intention to order
sidewalk improvements on West Smith Street from N.
Washington Avenue to 64th Avenue South and to create a
local improvement district to assess a part of the cost
and expense of carrying out those improvements against
the properties specially benefited thereby, and notifying
all persons who desire to object to the improvements to
appear and present their objections at a hearing before
the City Council to be held on May 4 , 1993 .
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT,
WASHINGTON, as follows:
Section 1. It is the intention of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, to order the improvement of the
properties within the area described in Exhibit A, attached hereto
and by this reference made a part hereof, by the installation of
sidewalk improvements on West Smith Street from N. Washington
Avenue to 64th Avenue South as described in Exhibit B, attached
hereto and by this reference made a part hereof.
All of the foregoing improvements shall be in accordance with
the plans and specifications therefor prepared by the Director of
Public Works of the City and may be modified by the City as long as
that modification does not affect the purpose of the improvements.
Section 2 . The total estimated cost and expense of the
improvements is declared to be $961926.50 and approximately
$30,000.00 of that cost and expense shall be paid by the City and
the balance thereof shall be borne by and assessed against the
property specially benefited by the improvements to be included in
0m5509.0i -1-
a local improvement district to be established embracing as nearly
as practicable all the property specially benefited by the
improvements. Actual assessments may vary from estimated
assessments as long as they do not exceed a figure equal to the
increased true and fair value the improvements add to the property.
Section 3 . The City Clerk is authorized and directed to give
notice of the adoption of this resolution and of the date, time and
place fixed for the public hearing to each owner or reputed owner
of any lot, tract, parcel of land or other property within the
proposed local improvement district by mailing such notice at least
fifteen days before the date fixed for public hearing to the owner
or reputed owner of the property as shown on the rolls of the King
County Assessor at the address shown thereon, as required by law.
This resolution also shall be published in at least two
consecutive issues of the official newspaper of the City, the date
of the first publication to be at least fifteen days prior to the
date fixed for the public hearing.
Section 4. All persons who may desire to comment in support
of or object to the improvements are notified to appear and present
those comments or objections at a hearing before the City Council
to be held in the Council Chambers in the City Hall in Kent,
Washington, at 7 :00 p.m. on May 4, 1993, which time and place are
fixed for hearing all matters relating to the improvements and all
comments thereon or objections thereto and for determining the
method of payment for the improvements. All persons who may desire
to comment thereon or object thereto should appear and present
their comments or objections at that hearing. Any person who may
0075509.01 _2_
desire to file a written protest with the City Council may do so
within 30 days after the date of passage of the ordinance ordering
the improvements in the event the local improvement district is
formed. The written protest should be signed by the property owner
and should include the legal description of the property for which
the protest is filed and that protest should be delivered to the
City Clerk.
Section 5. The City's Director of Public Works is directed to
submit to the City Council on or prior to May 4, 1993 , all data and
information required by law to be submitted.
Passed at a regular open public meeting by the City Council of
the City of Kent, Washington, this 6th day of April, 1993.
Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent this day
of April, 1993 .
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
FOSTER PEPPER & SHEFELMAN
Special Counsel and Bond Counsel
0075509.01 -3-
I, BRENDA JACOBER, City Clerk of the City of Kent, Washington,
certify that the attached copy of Resolution No. is a true
and correct copy of the original resolution adopted on the 6th day
of April, 1993, as that resolution appears on the Minute Book of
the City.
DATED this day of April, 1993 .
Brenda Jacober, City Clerk
EXHIBIT 'A'
February 11, 1993
BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION FOR
LID 342
SMITH STREET SIDEWALKS
(WASHINGTON AVE TO 64TH AVE)
THOSE PORTIONS OF BLOCKS 9 & 29 DEFINED AS FOLLOWS:
MEEKER SUPL PLAT 1ST ADD TO KENT LOT 4 OF KENT SHORT PLAT
SP 75-15 REC AF #7601220366 SD PLAT DAF POR BLKS 9 & 29
MEEKERS SUPL PLAT OF 1ST ADD TO KENT DAF BEG AT NE COR SD
BLK 9 TH S 00-42-13 W ALG E LN BLK 9 73 FT TO TPOB TH S
00-42-13 W ALG E LN SD BLKS 9 & 29 745.85 FT TO PT WCH
BEARS S 89-17-47 E 24 .50 FT FR NE COR TR CONV AF
#7107210071 TH N 89-17-47 W 404 . 45 FT TH N 00-42-13 E
43 .52 FT TH N 89-17-47 W 156 FT TO NW COR SD TR TH S 00-
42-13 W 242 . 75 FT TH S 89-37-13 W 99 . 37 FT TH S 00-42-13
W 102 FT TH S 24-17-46 W 177.23 FT TH S 89-37-13 W 90 FT
TH S 00-42-13 W 72 . 29 FT TO SW COR SD TR BEGIN N IN OF
SMITH ST TH S 89-37-13 W ALG SD LN 324.62 FT TO POC TO
RGT RAD OF 15 FT TH NWLY ALG ARC OF SD CRV C/A 91-40-58
ARC DIST 24 FT TO E LN OF 64TH AVE S TH N 01-18-11 E ALG
SD LN 1049 . 03 FT TO ANGLE PT TH CONTG ALG E LN SD 64TH
AVE S N 00-47-27 E 258 .93 FT TO POC TO RGT RAD OF 15 FT
TH NWLY ALG ARC OF SD CRV C/A 90-13-17 ARC DIST 23. 62 FT
TO S LN JAMES ST TH S 88-59-16 E ALG S LN 915.29 FT TH N
00-42-13 W 3 FT TH S 88-59-16 E 40 FT TH S 00-42-13 W 40
FT TH S 88-59-16 E 33 FT TO TPOB AKA POR SPC 75-15 ALSO
PORTION OF BLOCK 29 DEFINED AS FOLLOWS: MEEKERS SUPL
PLAT 1ST ADD TO KENT POR BEG INTSN NLY MGN SHINN ST PROD
W & 24 . 5 FT W OF E IN BLK 29 TH S 89-39-43 W 650. 50 FT TH
N 00-42-13 E 72 FT TH N 89-39-43 E 90 FT TH N 24-17-46 W
177 .23 FT TH N 00-42-13 E 102 FT TH N 89-39-43 E 99037 FT
TH N 00-42-13 E 242 .75 FT TH S 89-17-47 E 156 FT TH S 00-
42-13 W 43 .52 FT TH S 89-17-47 E 379 . 95 FT TO W LN OF E
24 . 5 FT OF SD BLK TH S 00-42-13 W 525. 43 FT TO BEG AND
ALSO
PORTIONS OF BLOCKS 27 & 29 MEEKERS SUPL PLAT 1ST ADD TO
KENT TR 'X' CITY OF KENT SP 80-4 REC AF 18007010620 SD SP
DAF - PARCEL 'A' - TR 27 SD SUBD LESS E 240 FT THOF LESS
ANY PORS LY S OF N MGN OF SMITH ST TGW - PARCEL 'B' - POR
OF TR 29 SD SUBD DAF - BEG AT NE COR OF TR 9 SD SUBD TH
S 00-42-38 W ALG E LN OF SD TRS 9 & 29 A DIST OF 818. 85
FT TAP WCH BRS S 89-17-22 E 24 . 50 FT FR NE COR OF A TR TO
PROFESSIONAL MANIFEST INC UNDER AF # 7101200071 & TPOB
THN 89-17-22 W 24. 50 FT TH S 00-42-38 W 525. 43 FT TO N LN
OF W SMITH ST TH N 89-37-35 E ALG SD N LN 24 . 50 FT TO E
LN OF SD TR 29 TH N 00-42-38 E ALG SD E LN TO TPOB -- AKA
POR SPC 80-4 AND ALSO
PORTIONS OF BLKS 27 & 29 DEFINED AS FOLLOWS: MEEKERS SUPL
PLAT 1ST ADD TO KENT LOT 2 CITY OF KENT SP 80-4 REC AF #
8007010620 SD SP DAF - PARCEL 'A' - TR 27 SD SUBD LESS E
240 FT THOF LESS ANY PORS LY S OF N MGN OF SMITH ST TGW -
PARCEL 'B' - POR OF TR 29 SD SUBD DAF - BEG AT NE COR OF
TR 9 SD SUBD TH S 00-42-38 W ALG E LN OF SD TRS 9 & 29 A
DIST OF 818.85 FT TAP WCH BRS S 89-17-22 E 24 . 50 FT FR NE
COR OF A TR TO PROFESSIONAL MANIFEST INC UNDER AF #
7101200071 & TPOB TH N 89-17-22 W 24 .50 FT TH S 00-42-38
W 525.43 FT TO N LN OF W SMITH ST TH N 89-37-35 E ALG SD
N IN 24 .50 FT TO E LN OF SD TR 29 TH N 00-42-38 E ALG SD
E LN TO TPOB -- AKA POR SPC 80-4 AND ALSO
BLOCKS 27 & 29 DEFINED AS FOLLOWS: MEEKERS SUPL PLAT 1ST
ADD TO KENT LOT 1 CITY OF KENT SP 80-4 REC AF #8007010620
SD SP DAF - PARCEL 'A' - TR 27 SD SUBD LESS E 240 FT
THOF LESS ANY PORS LY S OF N MGN OF SMITH ST TGW - PARCEL
'B' - POR OF TR 29' SD SUBD DAF - BEG AT NE COR OF TR 9 SD
SUBD TH S 00-42-38 W ALG E LN OF SD TRS 9 & 29 A DIST OF
818 . 85 FT TAP WCH BRS S 89-17-22 E 24 . 50 FT FR NE COR OF
A TR TO PROFESSIONAL MANIFEST INC UNDER AF # 7101200071
& TPOB TH N 89-17-22 W 24 . 50 FT TH S 00-42-38 W 525.43 FT
TO N LN OF W SMITH ST TH N 89-37-35 E ALG SD N LN 24 . 50
FT TO E LN OF SD TR 29 TH N 00-42-38 E ALG SD E LN TO
TPOB -- AKA POR SEC 80-4 AND ALSO
PORTIONS OF BLOCKS 27 & 29 DEFINED AS FOLLOWS: MEEKERS
SUPL PLAT 1ST ADD TO KENT LOT 3 CITY OF KENT SP 80-4 REC
AF # 8007010620 SD SP DAF - PARCEL 'A' - TR 27 SD SUBD
LESS E 240 FT THOF LESS ANY PORS LY S OF N MGN OF SMITH
ST TGW - PARCEL 'B' - POR OF TR 29 SD SUBD DAF - BEG AT
NE COR OF TR 9 SD SUBD TH S 00-42-38 W ALG E LN OF SD TRS
9 & 29 A DIST OF 818 .85 FT TAP WCH BRS S 89-17-22 E 24 .50
FT FR NE COR OF A TR TO PROFESSIONAL MANIFEST INC UNDER
AF # 7101200071 & TPOB TH N 89-17-22 W 24. 50 FT TH S 00-
42-38 W 525. 43 FT TO N LN OF W SMITH ST TH N 89-37-35 E
ALG SD N LN 24 . 50 FT TO E LN OF SD TR 29 TH N 00-42-38 E
ALG SD E LN TO TPOB -- AKA POR SPC 80-4 AND ALSO
PORTION OF BLOCK 27 DEFINED AS FOLLOWS: MEEKERS SUPL
PLAT 1ST ADD TO KENT POR OF E 240 FT OF 27 N OF N LN OF
SHINN ST EXTND WLY AND ALSO
PORTION OF BLOCK 29 DEFINED AS FOLLOWS: MEEKERS SUPL
PLAT 1ST ADD TO KENT LOT 4 LESS ELY 58. 50 FT THOF CITY OF
KENT SHOR PLAT NO SP-74-12 (SPC 74-11) RECORDING NO
7501100471 -- PER UNNUMBERED CITY OF KENT LOT LINE
ADJUSTMENTS APPROVED 23 AUG 1982 RECORDING NO 8208310374
& APPROVED O1 AUG 1984 RECORDING NO 8408090668 -- SD
SHORT PLAT BEING A POR BLK 29 SUPL PLAT MEEKER'S 1ST ADD
TO KENT DAF: BEG SW COR BLK 28 SD PLAT TH S 89-39-43 W
ALG N MGN KENT-DES MOINES RD 819. 17 FT TO TPOB TH N 00-
20-17 W 540. 64 FT TO NXN WITH WLY PROLONGATION OF S MGN
OF SHINN ST (W SMITH ST) TH S 89-39-43 W ALG SD
PROLONGATED LN TO WLY LN SD BLK 29 TH SLY ALG SD WLY LN
TO SW COR SD BLK 29 & N MGN KENT-DES MOINES RD TH ELY ALG
SD N MGN TO TPOB LESS W 30 FT FOR PUBLIC R/W AND ALSO
PORTION OF BLOCK 29 DEFINED AS FOLLOWS: MEEKERS SUPL
PLAT 1ST ADD TO KENT LOT 1 LESS E 30 FT & LESS S 270 FT
TGW E 58 .50 FT LOT 4 CITY OF KENT SHORT PLAT NO SP-74-12
(SPC 74-11) RECORDING NO 7501100471 -- PER UNNUMBERED
CITY OF KENT LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS APPROVED 23 AUG 1982
RECORDING NO 8208310374 & APPROVED 01 AUG 1984 RECORDING
NO 8408090668 -- SD SHORT PLAT BEING A POR BLK 29 SUPL
PLAT MEEKER'S 1ST ADD TO KENT DAF: BEG SE COR BLK 28 SD
PLAT TH S 89-39-43 W ALG N MGN KENT-DES MOINES RD 819.17
FT TO TPOB TH N 00-20-17 W 540. 64 FT TO NXN WITH WLY
PROLONGATION OF S MGN OF SHINN ST (W SMITH ST) TH S 89-
39-43 W ALG SD PROLONGATED LN TO WLY LN SD BLK 29 TH SLY
ALG SD WLY LN TO SW COR SD BLK 29 & N MGN KENT-DES MOINES
RD THE ELY SD N MGN TO TPOB LESS W 30 FT FOR PUBLIC R/W
AND ALSO
PORTION OF BLOCK 29 DEFINED AS FOLLOWS: MEEKERS SUPL
PLAT 1ST ADD TO KENT LOT 2 TGW E 30 FT & S 270 FT OF LOT
1 & TGW E 35 FT & N 146.07 FT OF LOT 3 CITY OF KENT SHORT
PLAT NO SP-74-12 (SPC 74-11) RECORDING NO 7501100471 --
PER UNNUMBERED CITY OF KENT LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT APPROVED
23 AUG 1982 RECORDING NO 8208310374 & LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
NO LL-86-8 APPROVED 01 JULY 1986 RECORDING NO 8607100973
-- SD SHORT PLAT BEING A POR BLK 29 SUPL PLAT MEEKER'S
1ST ADD TO KENT DAF: BEG SE COR BLK 28 SD PLAT TH S 89-
39-43 W ALG N MGN KENT-DES MOINES RD 819. 17 FT TO TPOB TH
N 00-20-17 W 540. 64 FT TO NXN WITH WLY PROLONGATION OF S
MGN OF SHINN ST (W SMITH ST) TH S 89-39-43 W ALG SD
PROLONGATED LN TO WLY LN SD BLK 29 TH SLY ALG SD WLY LN
TO SW COR SD BLK 29 & N MGN KENT-DES MOINES RD TH ELY ALG
SD N MGN TO TPOB LESS W 30 FT FOR PUBLIC R/W AND ALSO
PORTION OF BLOCKS 27-28-29 DEFINED AS FOLLOWS: MEEKERS
SUPL PLAT 1ST ADD TO KENT 28 LESS S 150 FT OF E 150 FT &
POR OF 27 & 29 LY S OF WLY PROD OF S MGN OF SHINN ST LESS
POR OF 29 LY W OF LN BEG ON S LN 819 . 17 FT W OF SE COR TR
28 TH N 00-20-17 W TO N LN THOF
EXHIBIT 'B'
LID 342
SMITH STREET SIDEWALKS - WASHINGTON AVENUE TO 64TH AVENUE
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
See Exhibit 'A' attached and made a part hereto.
STREET IMPROVEMENT
Description: The project consists of the installation of 6. 5' wide
cement concrete sidewalks on both sides of Smith Street from
Washington Avenue to 64th Avenue. The sidewalk will be adjacent to
the existing curb with no planter strip. Cement concrete driveway
sections will be installed in- the sidewalk at existing driveways.
Existing utilities and other improvements which would interfere
with the sidewalk will be adjusted or relocated. Wheel chair ramps
will be installed in the sidewalks at crosswalks. A short rockery
may be constructed at the rear of the sidewalk at locations where
there is a significant grade change.
ON FROM- TO
West Smith Street N. Washington Avenue 64th Avenue South
CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON
LOCAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO. 342
NOTICE OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT AND HEARING THEREON
NOTICE IS GIVEN that the City of Kent, Washington (the
,,City") , pursuant to Resolution No. adopted April 6, 1993,
declared its intention to initiate the formation of Local
Improvement District No. 342 to install sidewalk improvements on
West Smith Street from N. Washington Avenue to 64th Avenue South
and to assess a part of the cost and expense of those improvements
against the property in that district specially benefited thereby.
The total cost of the proposed improvements is estimated to be
$96, 926.50, approximately $30, 000. 00 of which cost and expense
shall be paid by the City and the balance thereof shall be borne
by and assessed against the properties specially benefited by the
improvements to be included within the proposed local improvement
district to be established embracing as nearly as practicable all
. property specially benefited by the improvements.
The public hearing upon the proposed improvements will be held
before the City Council of the City in the Council Chambers in the
City Hall in Kent, Washington, at 7 : 00 p.m. , local time, on May 4,
1993 .
All persons desiring to comment in support of or object to the
proposed improvements and formation of the local improvement
district are notified to appear and present those comments or
objections at that hearing. If the City Council shall elect to
pass an ordinance forming the local improvement district, the
owners of property within the local improvement district shall have
a period of 30 days from and after the date of passage of that
ordinance to file with the City Clerk a written protest to the
ordering of the improvements. The protest should be signed by the
property owner and should state the property by address, lot and
block or other appropriate description.
Below are shown the estimated benefits to, and assessment
against, the property herein listed of which you are shown on the
rolls of the King County Assessor to be the owner. The actual
assessment may vary from the estimated assessment as long as it
does not exceed a figure equal to the increased true and fair value
the improvements add to the property.
City Clerk of the City of Kent,
Washington
am550.wr
-1-
Estimated assessment for special benefits: $
Assessment Roll No.
Legal Description:
IF THIS NOTICE IS RECEIVED BY SOMEONE OTHER THAN THE OWNER OF THE
HEREIN-DESCRIBED PROPERTY, PLEASE FORWARD TO THE OWNER AND NOTIFY
THE CITY CLERK.
omssos.wr
-2-
CITY OF KENT
PROPOSED SIDEWALK L.I.D.
� PROPOSE!D L.I.D. BOUNDARY
Ynlnrftmiyn" frrtrnrfc
ir
ILL-
54362MI65
0:
543QM�
54302=21
Ir ASSESSMENT)
NUMBER 54362MZ
-- ---
(e4l
54362M231
- --- ---�--T---r PROJECT LIMITS j
z
14
Lo
54362�65 L.I.D. COVENANT
MEEKER ST.
T----
SMITH STREET AUGUST 10, 1992
WASHINGTON AVE. TO 64TH AVE. S.
V Kent City Council Meeting
O Date April 6. 1993
Category Consent Calendar
1. SUBJECT: APPOINTMENTS TO KENT SATURDAY MARKET ADVISORY BOARD
2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Confirmation of the Mayor's appointment
of Aggie Mauritson, Linda Johnson, and Pat Williams as members
of the Saturday Market Advisory Board.
Ms. Mauritson will serve as Vendor Representative and will
replace George Mast who resigned. Her appointment will
continue to March 1996.
Ms. Johnson will serve as an At Large/Citizen Representative
and will replace Judie Sarff who resigned. Her appointment
will continue to June 1995.
Ms. Williams will serve as a Kent Merchant Representative and
will replace Faith Anderson who resigned. Her appointment will
continue to September 1996 .
3 . EXHIBITS: Memo from the Mayor
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Mayor Kelleher -
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ N/A
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
DISCUSSION•
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 30
MEMORANDUM
TO: JUDY WOODS, CITY COUNCIL %DE1CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
DATE: MARCH 29, 1993
SUBJECT: APPOINTMENTS TO KENT SATURDAY MARKET ADVISORY BOARD
I have recently appointed Aggie Mauritson, Linda Johnson, and Pat Williams to serve as members
of the Saturday Market Advisory Board.
Ms. Mauritson will serve as a Vendor Representative on the Board and will replace George Mast
who resigned. Her appointment will continue to March 1996.
Ms.Johnson will serve as an At Large/Citizen Representative on the Market Board and will replace
Judie Sarff who resigned. Ms. Johnson's appointment will continue to June 1995.
Ms. Williams will serve as a Kent Merchant Representative and will replace Faith Anderson who
resigned. Ms. Williams' appointment will continue to September 1996.
I submit this for your confirmation.
DK:jb
TO: Mayor Kelleher
Council President Woods
City Council Members
FROM: Councilmember Jim White
DATE : April 6, 1993 U
SUBJECT: Excused Absence From City Council Meeting
I would like to request an excused absence from the April
6 , 1993 , City Council meeting.
Thank you for your consideration.
JW:bj
u o(-Ct VYl �j
r
i � Ou�iCr�►'vt2.w� v��v_CxCvS�� _f", IOSt'r1rQS . �'�t�� OVr4L-
rl- .L�
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6. 1993
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: REFUNDING OF 1980, 1986 and 1990 VOTED BONDS -
BOND ORDINANCE & PURCHASE CONTRACT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Operations
Committee, Council is requested to adopt a bond ordinance and
give authorization to the Mayor to sign a purchase contract
with Lehman Brothers. This will be for approximately
$14, 545, 000 to refinance the callable portion ($12, 755, 000) of
the 1980, 1986 and 1990 Voted Bonds. The issuance rate will be
approximately 5. 1 percent and will save the City approximately
$750, 000 in present value debt service savings. The refinanc-
ing will allow a property tax reduction of approximately
1. 68 cents per thousand of assessed valuation. As a result,
the owner of a $100, 000 home will save approximately $28 . 56 per
year in property tax.
3 . EXHIBITS: Bond ordinance and purchase contract
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee 2-0 (Houser not present)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO>_ YES '
FISCALIPERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS•
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
to adopt Bond Ordinance No. and to authorize the Mayor to
sign a purchase contract with Lehman Brothers.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 4A
DRAFT DATED MARCH 16, 1993
CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington,
relating to contracting indebtedness; providing for the
issuance of $ par value of Unlimited Tax
General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 1993 , of the City to
provide funds with which to pay the cost of advance
refunding the callable portions of the City's outstanding
Unlimited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 1980, Unlimited
Tax General Obligation Bonds, 1986, and Unlimited Tax
General Obligation Bonds, 1990, and the costs of issuance
and sale of the bonds; fixing the date, form, maturities,
interest rates, terms and covenants of the bonds;
establishing a bond redemption fund; providing for and
authorizing the purchase of certain obligations out of
the proceeds of the sale of the refunding bonds herein
authorized and for the use and application of the money
derived from those investments; authorizing the execution
ofof an agreement with
, Washington, as refunding trustee; and
approving the sale and providing for the delivery of the
bonds to Lehman Brothers Division of Shearson Lehman
Brothers Inc. of Seattle, Washington.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2198 , passed December 17 ,
1980, the City of Kent, Washington (the "City") , heretofore issued
its Unlimited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 1980 (the "1980
Bonds") , in the original principal amount of $450, 000, and by
Section 1 of that ordinance the City reserved the right and option
to redeem the 1980 Bonds maturing on or after February 1, 1991, on
February 11 1990, and on any interest payment date thereafter, at
par plus accrued interest to the date fixed for redemption;- and
WHEREAS, there are presently outstanding $235, 000 principal
amount of 1980 Bonds maturing on February 1 of each of the years
1994 through 2000, inclusive, bearing interest at various rates
from 7 . 00% to 7 .40% (the "Refunded 1980 Bonds") ; and
0074553.01
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2684, passed December 15,
1986, the City heretofore issued its Unlimited Tax General
Obligation Bonds, 1986 (the "1986 Bonds") , in the original
principal amount of $12, 303 , 000, and by Section 1 of that ordinance
the City reserved the right and option to redeem the 1986 Bonds
maturing on or after December 1, 1997 , on December 1, 1996, and on
any interest payment date thereafter, at par plus accrued interest
to the date fixed for redemption; and
WHEREAS, there are presently outstanding $8 , 250, 000 principal
amount of 1986 Bonds maturing on December 1 of each of the years
1997 through 2006 , inclusive, bearing interest at various rates
from 6. 60% to 7 . 00% (the "Refunded 1986 Bonds") ; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2948 , passed November 61
1990, the City heretofore issued its Unlimited Tax General
Obligation Bonds, 1990 (the "1990 Bonds") , in the original
principal amount of $6, 700, 000, and by Section 6 of that ordinance
the City reserved the right and option to redeem the 1990 Bonds
maturing on or after December 11 2001, on December 11 2000, and on
any interest payment date thereafter, at par plus accrued interest
to the date fixed for redemption; and
WHEREAS, there are presently outstanding $4 , 280, 000 principal
amount of 1990 Bonds maturing on December 1 of each of the years
2001 through 2004, inclusive, and in the year 2009 and bearing
interest at various rates from 6.90% to 7 .30% (the "Refunded 1990
Bonds") ; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined ' that the
Refunded 1980 Bonds, Refunded 1986 Bonds and Refunded 1990 Bonds
W74553.01
-2-
(collectively, the "Refunded Bonds") may be refunded by the
issuance and sale of the general obligation bonds authorized herein
(the "Bonds") so that a substantial saving will be effected by the
difference between the principal and interest costs over the life
of the Bonds and the principal and interest costs over the life of
the outstanding Refunded Bonds but for such refunding, which
refunding will be effected by
(a) The issuance of the Bonds;
(b) The payment of the interest on the Refunded
1980 Bonds when due up to and including August 1, 1993 ,
and, on August 1, 1993 , the call, payment and redemption
of all the outstanding Refunded 1980 Bonds at a price of
par;
(c) The payment of the interest on the Refunded
1986 Bonds when due up to and including December It 1996,
and, on December 11 1996, the call, payment
a ym
-- and
redemption of all the outstanding Refunded 1986 Bonds at
a price of par; and
(d) The payment of the interest on .the Refunded
1990 Bonds when due up to and including December 1, 2000,
and, on December 1, 2000, the call, payment and
redemption of all the outstanding Refunded 1990 Bonds at
a price of par;
and
WHEREAS, in order to effect that refunding in the manner that
will be most advantageous to the City and its taxpayers, the City
Council finds it necessary and advisable that certain acquired
obligations (hereinafter defined) bearing interest and maturing at
the time or times necessary to accomplish the refunding as
aforesaid be purchased out of the proceeds of the sale of the
Bonds; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is necessary
to issue and sell $ par value of unlimited tax general
0074553.01
-3-
obligation refunding bonds to provide the funds necessary to
advance refund the Refunded Bonds and to pay the costs of the
refunding and the issuance and sale of the Bonds, and Lehman
Brothers Division of Shearson Lehman Brothers Inc. ("Lehman
Brothers") has offered to purchase those Bonds under the terms and
conditions hereinafter set forth; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN
as follows:
Section 1. Debt Capacity. The assessed valuation of the
taxable property within the City as ascertained by the last
preceding assessment for City purposes for the calendar year 1993
is $ , and the City has outstanding general
indebtedness evidenced by (a) limited tax general obligation bonds
and conditional sales contracts in the principal amount of
$ incurred within the limit of up to 3/4 of 1% of the
value of the taxable property within the City permitted for general
municipal purposes without a vote of the qualified voters therein,
and (b) unlimited tax general obligation bonds in the principal
amount of $ incurred within the limit of up to 2-1/2%
of the value of the taxable property within the City for capital
purposes only, and the amount of indebtedness for which the Bonds
are authorized herein to be issued is $
Section 2 . Authorization of Bonds. The City shall borrow
money on the credit of the City and issue negotiable unlimited tax
general obligation refunding bonds evidencing that indebtedness in
the amount of $ for the purpose of providing the funds
required to:
0074553.01
-4-
(a) Pay the interest on the Refunded 1980 Bonds
when due up to and including August
redeem1993 ,all of and
the
August 11 1993 , to call, pay and
outstanding Refunded 1980 Bonds at a price of par;
(b) Pay the interest on the Refunded 1986 Bonds
when due up to and including December d redeem g96,all ofdton
December 1, 1996, to call, pay
he
outstanding Refunded 1986 Bonds at a price of par; and
(c) Pay the interest on the Refunded 1990 Bonds
when due up to and including December 11 2000, and on
December 1, 2000 , to call, pay and redeem all of the
outstanding Refunded 1990 Bonds at a price of par;
(collectively, the "Refunding Plan") , and to pay the costs of the
refunding and the issuance and sale of the Bonds. $
of
the general indebtedness to be incurred by the issuance of the
Bonds shall be within the limit of up to 3/4 of 1% of the value of
the taxable property within the City permitted for general
municipal purposes without a vote of the qualified voters therein.
Section 3 . Description of Bonds . The Bonds shall be called
Unlimited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 1993 , of the City
(the "Bonds") ; shall be in the aggregate principal amount of
$ ; shall be dated April 1, 1993 ; shall be in the
denomination of $5, 000 or any integral multiple thereof within a
single maturity; shall be numbered separately in the manner and
with any additional designation as the Bond Registrar
(collectively, the fiscal agencies of the State of Washington
located in Seattle, Washington, and New York, New York) deems
necessary for purposes of identification; shall bear interest at
the rates set forth below (computed on the basis of a 360-day year
of twelve 30-day months) , payable semiannually on each June 1 and
December 11 commencing December 1, 1993 ; and shall mature on
W74553.01
-5-
December 1 in years and amounts and bear interest at the rates per
annum as follows:
Maturity Principal Interest
Dates Amounts Rates
1993
1994 -
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000 '
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
All of the principal amount of the Bonds maturing in the years
through , inclusive, (and $ of the principal amount
of the Bonds maturing on December 11 , ) shall constitute
nonvoted debt of the City.
Section 4 . Registration and Transfer of Bonds. The Bonds
shall be issued only in registered form as to both principal and
interest and recorded on books or records maintained by the Bond
Registrar (the "Bond Register") . The Bond Register shall contain
the name and mailing address of the owner of each Bond and the
principal amount and number of each of the Bonds held by each
owner. _
Bonds surrendered to the Bond Registrar may be exchanged for
Bonds in any authorized denomination of an equal aggregate
principal amount and of the same interest rate and maturity. Bonds
may be transferred only if endorsed in the manner provided thereon
0074553.01
-6-
and surrendered to the Bond Registrar. Any exchange or transfer
shall be without cost to the owner or transferee. The Bond
Registrar shall not be obligated to exchange or transfer any Bond
during the 15 days preceding any principal payment or redemption
date.
Section 5. Payment of Bonds. Both principal of and interest
on the Bonds shall be payable in lawful money of the United States
of America. Interest on the Bonds shall be paid by checks or
drafts of the Bond Registrar mailed on the interest payment date to
the registered owners at the addresses appearing on the Bond
Register on the 15th day of the month preceding the interest
payment date. Principal of the Bonds shall be payable upon
presentation and surrender of the Bonds by the registered owners at
either of the principal offices of the Bond Registrar at the option
of the owners.
Section 6 . Optional Redemption and Open Market Purchase of
Bonds. Bonds maturing in the years 1993 through 2002 , inclusive
shall be issued without the right or option of the City to redeem
those Bonds prior to their stated maturity dates . The City
reserves the right to redeem the Bonds maturing on or after
December 11 2003 , prior to their stated maturities dates as a whole
or in part (within one or more maturities selected by the City and
by lot within a maturity in such manner as the Bond Registrar shall
determine) , on December 1, 2002 , or on any interest payment date
thereafter, at par plus accrued interest to the date fixed for
redemption.
0074553.01
-7-
Portions of the principal amount of any Bond, in installments
of $5, 000 or any integral multiple thereof, may be redeemed. if
less than all of the principal amount of any Bond is redeemed, upon
surrender of that Bond at either of the principal offices of the
Bond Registrar, there shall be issued to the registered owner,
without charge therefor, a new Bond (or Bonds, at the option of the
registered owner) of the same maturity and interest rate in any of
the denominations authorized by this ordinance in the aggregate
principal amount remaining unredeemed.
The City further reserves the right and option to purchase any
or all of the Bonds in the open market at any time at any price
plus accrued interest to the date of purchase.
All Bonds purchased or redeemed under this section shall be
cancelled.
Section 7 . Notice of Redemption. The City shall cause notice
of any intended redemption of Bonds to be given not less than 30
nor more than 60 days prior to the date fixed for redemption by
first-class mail, postage prepaid, to the registered owner of any
Bond to be redeemed at the address appearing on the Bond Register
at the time the Bond Registrar prepares the notice, and the
requirements of this sentence shall be deemed to have been
fulfilled when notice has been mailed as so provided, whether or
not it is actually received by the owner of any Bond. Interest on
Bonds called for redemption shall cease to accrue on the date fixed
for redemption unless the Bond or Bonds called are not redeemed
when presented pursuant to the call. In addition, the redemption
notice shall be mailed within the same period, postage prepaid, to
0074553.01
-8-
Moody's Investors Service, Inc. , and Standard & Poor's Corporation
at their offices in New York, New York, or their successors, to
Lehman Brothers at its principal office in Seattle, Washington, or
its successor, and to such other persons and with such additional
information as the City Finance Director shall determine, but these
additional mailings shall not be a condition precedent to the
redemption of Bonds.
Section 8 . Failure to Redeem Bonds. If any Bond is not
redeemed when properly presented at its maturity or call date, the
City shall be obligated to pay interest on that Bond at the same
rate provided in the Bond from and after its maturity or call date
until that Bond, both principal and interest, is paid in full or
until sufficient money for its payment in full is on deposit in the
bond redemption fund hereinafter created and the Bond has been
called for payment by giving notice of that call to the registered
owner of that unpaid Bond.
Section 9 . Pledge of Taxes. For as long as any of the Bonds
are outstanding, the City irrevocably pledges to levy taxes
annually without limitation as to rate or amount on all of the
taxable property within the City in an amount sufficient, together
with other money legally available and to be used therefor, to pay
when due the principal of and interest on the Bonds, and the full
faith, credit and resources of the City are pledged irrevocably for
the annual levy and collection "of those taxes and the prompt
payment of that principal and interest.
Section 10. Form and Execution of Bonds. The Bonds shall be
printed or lithographed on good bond paper in a form consistent
0074553.01
-9-
with the provisions of this ordinance and state law, shall be
signed by the Mayor and City Clerk, either or both of whose
signatures may be manual or in facsimile, and the seal of the City
or a facsimile reproduction thereof shall be impressed or printed
thereon.
Only Bonds bearing a Certificate of Authentication in the
following form, manually signed by the Bond Registrar, shall be
valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to the benefits of
this ordinance:
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION
This bond is one of the fully registered City of
Kent, Washington, Unlimited Tax General Obligation
Refunding Bonds, 1993 , described in the .Bond Ordinance.
WASHINGTON STATE FISCAL AGENCY
Bond Registrar
By
Authorized Officer
The authorized signing of a Certificate of Authentication shall be
conclusive evidence that the Bonds so authenticated have been duly
executed, authenticated and delivered and are entitled to the
benefits of this ordinance.
If any officer whose facsimile signature appears on the Bonds
ceases to be an officer of the City authorized to sign bonds before
the Bonds bearing his or her facsimile signature are authenticated
or delivered by the Bond Registrar or issued by the City, those
Bonds nevertheless may be authenticated, delivered and issued and,
when authenticated, issued and delivered, shall be as binding on
the City as though that person had continued to be an officer of
the City authorized to sign bonds. Any Bond also may be signed on
0074553.01
-10-
behalf of the City by any person who, on the actual date of signing
of the Bond, is an officer of the City authorized to sign bonds,
although he or she did not hold the required office on the date of
issuance of the Bonds.
Section 11. Bond Registrar. The Bond Registrar shall keep,
or cause to be kept, at its principal corporate trust office,
sufficient books for the registration and transfer of the Bonds
which shall be open to inspection by the City at all times. The
Bond Registrar is authorized, on behalf of the City, to
authenticate and deliver Bonds transferred or exchanged in
accordance with the provisions of the Bonds and this ordinance, to
serve as the city's paying agent for the Bonds and to carry out all
of the Bond Registrar's powers and duties under this ordinance and
City ordinance No. 2418 establishing a system of registration for
the City's bonds and obligations.
The Bond Registrar shall be responsible for its
representations contained in the Bond Registrar's Certificate of
Authentication on the Bonds. The Bond Registrar may become the
owner of Bonds with the same rights it would have if it were not
the Bond Registrar and, to the extent permitted by law, may act as
depository for and permit any of its officers or directors to act
as members of, or in any other capacity with respect to, any
committee formed to protect the rights of Bond owners.
,Section 12 . Preservation of Tax Exemption for _Interest on
Bonds. The City covenants that it will take all actions necessary
to prevent interest on the Bonds from being included in gross
income for federal income tax purposes, and it will neither take
0074553.01
-11-
any action nor make or permit any use of proceeds of the Bonds or
other funds of the City treated as proceeds of the Bonds at any
time during the term of the Bonds which will cause interest on the
Bonds to be included in gross income for federal income tax
purposes. The City also covenants that, to the extent arbitrage
rebate requirements of Section 148 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended (the "Code") , are applicable to the Bonds, it will
take all actions necessary to comply (or to be treated as having
complied) with those requirements in connection with the Bonds,
including the calculation and payment of any penalties that the
City has elected to pay as an alternative to calculating rebatable
arbitrage, and the payment of any other penalties if required under
Section 148 of the Code to prevent interest on the Bonds from being
included in gross income for federal income tax purposes. The City
certifies that it has not been notified of any listing or proposed
listing by the Internal Revenue Service to the effect that it is a
bond issuer whose arbitrage certifications may not be relied upon.
Section 13 . Bonds Negotiable. The Bonds shall be negotiable
instruments to the extent provided by RCW 62A. 8-102 and 62A. 8-105 .
Section 14 . Advance Refundinq or Defeasance of the Bonds.
The City may issue advance refunding bonds pursuant to the laws of
the State of Washington or use money available from any other
lawful source to pay when due the principal of and interest on the
Bonds, or any portion thereof included in a refunding or defeasance
plan, and to redeem and retire, refund or defease all such then-
outstanding Bonds (hereinafter collectively called the "defeased
Bonds") and to pay the costs of the refunding or defeasance. If
0074553.01
-12-
money and/or "government obligations" (as defined in Chapter 39 . 53
RCW, as now or hereafter amended) maturing at a time or times and
bearing interest in amounts (together with money, if necessary)
sufficient to redeem and retire, refund or defease the defeased
Bonds in accordance with their terms are set aside in a special
trust fund irrevocably pledged to that redemption and retirement of
defeased Bonds (hereinafter called the "trust account") , then all
right and interest of the owners of the defeased Bonds in the
covenants of this ordinance and in the funds and accounts obligated
to the payment of the defeased Bonds shall cease and become void.
The owners of defeased Bonds shall have the right to receive
payment of the principal of and interest on the defeased Bonds from
the trust account. The defeased Bonds shall be deemed no longer
outstanding, and the City may apply any money in any other fund or
account established for the payment or redemption of the defeased
Bonds to any lawful purposes as it shall determine.
Section 5. Bond Fund and Deposit of Bond Proceeds. There is
created and established in the office of the Finance Director of
the City a special fund designated as the Unlimited Tax General
obligation Refunding Bond Fund, 1993 (the "Bond Fund") . Accrued
interest on the Bonds, if any, received from the sale and delivery
of the Bonds shall be paid into the Bond Fund. All principal
proceeds of the Bonds shall be deposited in accordance with the
provisions of Section 16 of this ^ordinance. All taxes collected
for and allocated to the payment of the principal of and interest
on the Bonds shall be deposited in the Bond Fund.
Section 16 . Refunding of the Refunded Bonds.
om4533.01 -13-
(a) Appointment of Refunding Trustee.
Bank is appointed the Refunding Trustee.
(b) Acquisition of Acquired Obligations. All of the proceeds
of the sale of the Bonds except for the accrued interest received,
if any, which shall be deposited in the Bond. Fund, shall be
deposited immediately upon the receipt thereof with the Refunding
Trustee to discharge the obligation of the City to carry out the
Refunding Plan by providing for the payment of the amounts required
to be paid by the Refunding Plan. To the extent practicable, such
obligations shall be discharged fully by the Refunding Trustee's
simultaneous purchase of United States Treasury Certificates of
Indebtedness and/or Notes--State and Local Government Series or
other direct, noncallable obligations of the United States of
America (the "Acquired Obligations") , bearing such interest and
maturing as to principal and interest in such amounts and at such
times so as to provide, together with a beginning cash balance of
$ (which amount may be increased or decreased) , for the
payment of the amounts required to be paid by the Refunding Plan.
The Acquired Obligations are listed and more particularly described
in Schedule A attached to the Refunding Trust Agreement between the
City and the Refunding Trustee, but are subject to substitution as
set forth below.
(c) Substitution of Acquired Obligations. Prior to the
purchase of any such Acquired Obiigations, the City reserves the
right to substitute other direct, noncallable obligations of the
United States of America ("Government Obligations") for any of the
Acquired Obligations and to use any savings created thereby for any
0074553.01
-14-
lawful City purpose if, (a) in the opinion of Foster Pepper &
Shefelman, the City's bond counsel, the interest on the Bonds will
remain excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes
under Sections 103 , 148 and 149 (d) of the Code, and (b) such
substitution shall not impair the timely payment of the amounts
required to be paid by the Refunding Plan, so verified by a
nationally recognized firm of certified public accountants.
After the purchase of the Acquired Obligations by the
Refunding Trustee, the City reserves the right to substitute
therefor cash or Government Obligations subject to the conditions
that such money or securities held by the Refunding Trustee shall
be sufficient to carry out the Refunding Plan, that such
substitution will not cause the Bonds to be arbitrage bonds within
the meaning of Section 148 of the Code and regulations thereunder
in effect on the date of such substitution and applicable to
obligations issued on the issue date of the Bonds, and that the
City obtain, at its expense: (1) verification by a nationally
recognized firm of certified public accountants acceptable to the
Refunding Trustee confirming that the payments of principal of and
interest on the substitute Acquired Obligations, if paid when due,
and any other money held by the Refunding Trustee will be
sufficient to carry out the Refunding Plan; and (2) an opinion from
Foster Pepper & Shefelman, bond counsel to the City, its successor,
or other nationally recognized bond counsel to the City, to the
effect that the disposition and substitution or purchase of such
securities, under the statutes, rules and regulations then in force
and applicable to the Bonds, will not cause the interest on the
0074553.01
-15-
Bonds or the Refunded Bonds to be included in gross income for
federal income tax purposes and that such disposition' and
substitution or purchase is in compliance with the statutes and
regulations applicable to the Bonds. Any surplus money resulting
from the sale, transfer, other disposition or redemption of the
Acquired Obligations and the substitutions therefor shall be
released from the trust estate and transferred to the City to be
used for any lawful City purpose.
(d) Administration of Refunding Plan. The Refunding Trustee
is authorized and directed to purchase the Acquired Obligations (or
substitute obligations) and to make the payments required to be
made by the Refunding Plan from the Acquired Obligations (or
substitute obligations) and money deposited with the Refunding
Trustee pursuant to this ordinance. All Acquired 'Obligations (or
substitute obligations) and the money deposited with the Refunding
Trustee and any income therefrom shall be held irrevocably,
invested and applied in accordance with the provisions of
Ordinances Nos. 2198 , 2684 and 2948, this ordinance, Chapter 39 . 53
RCW and other applicable statutes of the State of Washington, and
the Refunding Trust Agreement. All necessary and proper fees,
compensation and expenses of the Refunding Trustee for the Bonds
and all other costs incidental to establishing the escrow to
accomplish the refunding of the Refunded Bonds and costs related to
the issuance and delivery of the -Bonds, including bond printing,
rating service fees, insurance premiums, verification fees, bond
counsel's fees and other related expenses, shall be paid out of the
proceeds of the Bonds.
0074553.01
-16-
(e) Authorization for Refunding Trust Agreement. In order to
carry out the Refunding Plan provided for by this ordinance, the
Mayor or Finance Director is authorized and directed to execute and
deliver to the Refunding Trustee a Refunding Trust Agreement
substantially in the form on file with the City Clerk and by this
reference made a part hereof, setting forth the duties, obligations
and responsibilities of the Refunding Trustee in connection with
the payment, redemption and retirement of the Refunded Bonds as
provided herein and stating that the provisions for payment of the
fees, compensation and expenses of the Refunding Trustee set forth
therein are satisfactory to it. Prior to executing the Refunding
Trust Agreement, the Mayor or Finance Director is authorized to
make such changes therein which do not change the substance and
purpose thereof or which assure that the escrow provided therein
and the Bonds are in compliance with the requirements of federal
law governing the exclusion of interest on the Bonds from gross
income for federal income tax purposes .
Section 17 . Call for Redemption of the Refunded Bonds. The
City calls for redemption on August 1, 1993 , all of the Refunded
1980 Bonds at par plus accrued interest; on December 11 1996, all
of the Refunded 1986 Bonds at par plus accrued interest; and on
December 11 2000, all of the Refunded 1990 Bonds at par plus
accrued interest. Such calls for redemption shall be irrevocable
after the delivery of the Bonds to the initial purchaser thereof.
The dates on which the Refunded Bonds are called for redemption are
the earliest dates, respectively, on which those Refunded Bonds may
be called for redemption.
W74553.01
-17-
The proper City officials are authorized and directed to cause
the fiscal agencies to give such notices as required, at the times
and in the manner required by ordinances Nos. 2198, 2684 and 2948
in order to effect the redemption prior to their maturities of the
Refunded 1980 Bonds, Refunded 1986 Bonds and Refunded 1990 Bonds,
respectively.
Section 18 . Citv Findings with Respect to Refundim. The
City Council finds and determines that the issuance and sale of the
Bonds at this time will effect a saving to the City and its
taxpayers and is in the best interest of the City and in the public
interest. In making such finding and determination, the City
Council has given consideration to the fixed maturities of the
Bonds and the Refunded Bonds, the costs of issuance of the Bonds
and the known earned income from the investment of the proceeds of
the issuance and sale of the Bonds and other money of the City used
in the Refunding Plan pending payment and redemption of the
Refunded Bonds .
The City Council further finds and determines that the money
to be deposited with the Refunding Trustee for the Refunded Bonds
in accordance with Section 16 of this ordinance, together with
known earned income from the investments thereof, will be
sufficient to carry out .the Refunding Plan and discharge and
satisfy the obligations of the City under Ordinance No. •2198 with
respect to the Refunded' 1980 Bonds, Ordinance No. 2684 with respect
to the Refunded 1986 Bonds and ordinance No. 2948 with respect to
the Refunded 1990 Bonds and the pledges, charges, trusts, covenants
and agreements of the City therein made or provided for as to the
0074553.01
-18-
Refunded Bonds and that the Refunded Bonds shall no longer be
deemed to be outstanding under such ordinances immediately upon the
deposit of such money with the Refunding Trustee.
Section 19. Approval of Bond Purchase Contract. Lehman
Brothers of Seattle, Washington, has presented a purchase contract
dated 1993 (the "Bond Purchase Contract") , to the
City offering to purchase the Bonds under the terms and conditions
provided in the Bond Purchase Contract, which written Bond Purchase
Contract is on file with the City Clerk and is incorporated herein
by this reference. The City Council finds that entering into the
Bond Purchase Contract is in the City's best interest and therefore
accepts the offer contained therein and authorizes its execution by
City officials.
The Bonds will be printed at City expense and will be
delivered to the purchaser in accordance with the Bond Purchase
Contract, with the approving legal opinion of Foster Pepper &
Shefelman, municipal bond counsel of Seattle, Washington, regarding
the Bonds printed on each Bond. Except as provided in the Bond
Purchase Contract, bond counsel shall not be required to review and
shall express no opinion concerning the completeness or accuracy of
any official statement, offering circular o"r other sales material
issued or used in connection with the Bonds, and bond counsel's
opinion shall so state.
The proper City officials afe authorized and directed to do
everything necessary, including reviewing and executing the final
official statement, for the prompt delivery of the Bonds to the
0074553.01
-19-
purchaser and for the proper application and use of the proceeds of
the sale thereof.
Section 20. Preliminary Official Statement Deemed "Final" .
The City Council has been provided with copies of a preliminary
official statement dated , 1993 (the "Preliminary
official Statement") , prepared in connection with the sale of the
Bonds. For the sole purpose of the purchaser's compliance with
Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12 (b) (1) , the City
"deems final" that Preliminary official Statement as of its date,
except for the omission of information as to offering prices,
interest rates, selling compensation, aggregate principal amount,
principal amount per maturity, maturity dates, options of
redemption, delivery dates, ratings, and other terms of the Bonds
dependent on such matters.
Section 21. Temporary. Bond. Pending the printing, execution
and delivery to the purchaser of definitive Bonds, the City may
cause to be executed and delivered to the purchaser a single
temporary Bond in the total principal amount of the Bonds. The
temporary Bond shall bear the same date of issuance, interest
rates, principal payment dates and terms and covenants as the
definitive Bonds, shall be issued as a fully registered Bond in the
name of the purchaser, and otherwise shall be in a form acceptable
to the purchaser. The temporary Bond shall be exchanged for
definitive Bonds as soon as they are printed, executed and
available for delivery.
0074553.01
-20-
Section 22 . Effective Date of Ordinance. This ordinance
shall take effect and be in force five (5) days from and after its
passage, approval and publication, as provided by law.
By
DAN KELLEHER, Mayor
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Special Counsel and Bond
Counsel for the City
Passed the day of 1993 .
Approved the day of 1993 .
Published the day of 1993 .
I certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No.
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and
approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, City Clerk
0074553.01
-21-
LEHNIAN BROTHERS
CITY OF RENT HINGTON
Unlimited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 1993
PURCHASIfDNI—IZACT
April 6, 1993
Mayor and
City Council Members
City of Kent
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, Washington 98032-5895
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
Lehman Brothers Division of Shearson Lehman Brothers Inc. (the "Purchaser"), is
pleased to offer to purchase from the City of Kent, Washington (the "Seller") all of its
$. principal amount of Unlimited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds,
1993 (the "Bonds"). This offer is based upon the terms and conditions set forth below
and in Exhibit A attached, which when accepted by the Seller shall constitute the
terms and conditions of our Purchase Contract for the Bonds. Those terms and
conditions are as follows:
1. Prior to the date of delivery: end paymentller or the pass Bnnds ident anified in parorizingaphe
of Exhibit A ("Closing"),
issuance of the Bonds (the "Bond Ordinance") in form and substance acceptable to
the Purchaser.
2. The Seller shall sell and deliver to the Purchaser, and the Purchasero inc pal
purchaall
se, accept delivery of and pay for the entire $_— P
amount of the Bonds, for a purchase price set forth in paragraph a of Exhibit A.
The Purchaser's payment to the Seller will reflect accrued interest to the date of
Closing and any underwriting discount.
3. The Seller consents to and ratifies the use by the Purchaser of the information
contained in the Preliminary Official 'Statement dated Marchis attached
3, relating
to the Bonds (the "Preliminary Official Statement"), a copy of which
to this Purchase Contract as Exhibit B, for marketing the Bonds, authorizes the
preparation of a Final Official Statement (the "Final Official Statement") for the
Bonds containing such revisions and additions' to the Preliminary Official
Statement as the Seller deems necessary, and further authorizes the use of the
Final Official Statement in connection with the public offering and sale of the
Bonds.
LEHMA.N BROTHERS DMSION
SHEARSON LEHMAN BROTHERS NC. AN AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY
999THIRD AVENUE SURE 4000 SEATTLE.WA 98104 206 344 3592 F.1.Y.106 344 9073
4. The Seller represents, warrants to, and agrees with the Purchaser, as of the date
hereof and as of the date and time of Closing, that:
a. The Seller has and will have at Closing full legal right, power and authority
to enter into and perform its obligations under this Purchase Contract and
under the Bond Ordinance, to pass the Bond Ordinance and to sell and deliver
the Bonds to the Purchaser;
b. This Purchase Contract, the Bond Ordinance and the Bonds do not and will
not conflict with or create a breach of or default under any existing law,
regulation, judgment, order or decree or any agreement, lease or instrument
to which the Seller is subject or by which it is bound;
c. No governmental consent, approval or authorization other than the Bond
Ordinance is required in connection with the sale of the Bonds to the
Purchaser;
d. This Purchase Contract, the Bond Ordinance and the Bonds (when paid for by
the Purchaser) are, and shall be at the time of Closing, legal, valid and
binding obligations of the Seller enforceable in accordance with their
respective terms, subject only to applicable bankruptcy, insolvency or other
similar laws affecting creditors' rights and principles of equity if equitable
remedies are sought;
e. The Bond Ordinance shall have been duly authorized by the Seller, shall be in
full force and effect and shall not have been amended at the time of Closing
without the prior written consent of the Purchaser;
f. The Preliminary Official Statement, except as to matters corrected in the
Final Official Statement, which shall be available within seven days of the
date this Purchase Contract is approved so that the Final Official Statement
is available to accompany confirmations that. the Purchaser sends to its
customers in compliance with the requirements of Rule 15C2-12(b)(4) under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and with the requirements
of Rule G-32 of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, shall ,be
accurate and complete in all material aspects as of its date with respect to
information obtained from or utilized by officers and employees of the Seller
in the normal course of their duties, and the Final Official Statement shall
be accurate and complete in all material respects as of its date and as of the
date of Closing to the knowledge and belief of such officers and employees;
and
g. Any certificate or copy of any certificate signed by any official of the Seller
and delivered to the Purchaser pursuant to or in connection with this
Purchase Contract shall be deemed a representation by the Seller to the
Purchaser as to the truth of the statements therein made and is delivered to
the Purchaser for such purpose only.
5. As conditions to the Purchaser's obligations hereunder:
a. From the date of the Seller's acceptance of this Purchase Contract to the
date of Closing, there shall not have been any:
(1) Material adverse change in the financial condition or general affairs of
the Seller that materially affect the marketability of the Bonds;
-2-
(2) Event, court decision or proposed law, rule or regulation which may
have the effect of changing the federal income tax exclusion of the
interest on the Bonds or the transactions contemplated by this Purchase
Contract or the Preliminary and Final Official Statements;
suspension
stock exchange trading or
(3) International or banking moratorium lmateriallyonal � fmarketabilityaffecting the of he Bonds;
(4) Material adverse event with respect to the Seller which in the
reasonable judgment of the Purchaser requires or has required an
amendment, modification or supplement to the Final Official Statement
and such amendment, modification or supplement is not made;
s Investors
(5) The ServBeonds lSta lard & Poor's Corp. no less an those ave, at Closing, ratings from 'set
Service, Inc. and h forth in
Exhibit A, paragraph j; or
b. At or prior to Closing, the Purchaser shall have received the following:
(1) The Bonds, in definitive form and duly executed and authenticated;
(2) A certificate of authorized officers of the Seller, in form and substance
acceptable to the Seller and Purchaser, to the effect: (i) that the
Seller's execution of the Final Official Statement is authorized, (ii)
that, to the knowledge and belief of such officers, the Preliminary
Official Statement did not as of its date and Final Official Statement
(collectively the Official Statements") (including the financial and
statistical data contained therein) did not as of its date or as of the date
of Closing contain any untrue statement of material fact or omit to
state a material fact necessary to make such statements, in light of the
circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; and (iii)
that the representations of the Seller contained in this Purchase
Contract are true and correct when made and as of Closing;
—3—
(3) An approving opinion or opinions of the law firm identified in
paragraph k of Exhibit A as bond counsel or from another nationally
recognized firm of municipal bond lawyers (either or both of which shall
be referred to as "Bond Counsel") satisfactory to the Purchaser and
dated as of Closing, to the effect: (i) that the Seller is duly organized
and legally existing code city under the laws of the State of Washington
with full power and authority to adopt the Bond Ordinance and to issue
and sell the Bonds to the Purchaser; (ii) that the Bonds are valid, legal
and binding obligations of the Seller enforceable in accordance with
their terms, except to the extent that such enforcement may be limited
by bankruptcy, insolvency or other laws affecting creditors' rights and
principles of equity if equitable remedies are sought; (iii) the
subsections or sections of the Official Statement entitled
"Authorization," "Security," "TAX EXEMPTION" and "CERTAIN OTHER
FEDERAL TAX CONSEQUENCES," conform to the Bonds and applicable
laws; and (iv) that assuming compliance by the City with applicable
requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the
"Code"), including arbitrage and arbitrage rebate requirements, interest
on the Bonds is excluded from gross income of registered owners for
federal income tax purposes and is not an item of tax preference for
purposes of the alternative minimum tax applicable to individuals;
except that interest on the Bonds received by corporations may be
subject to an alternative minimum tax and, in the ' case of certain
corporations, an environmental and/or foreign branch profits tax, and
interest on the Bonds received by certain S corporations may be subject
to tax;
(4) A letter of Bond Counsel, dated the date of Closing and addressed to the
Purchaser, to the effect that it may rely upon the opinion in
subparagraph (3) above as if it were addressed to the Purchaser;
(5) A certificate of authorized officers of the Seller to the effect that no
litigation is. pending, or to the knowledge of the Seller threatened,
against the Seller in any court: (i) to restrain or enjoin the sale or
delivery by the Seller of the Bonds; (ii) in any manner questioning the
authority of the Seller to issue, or the issuance or validity of, the Bonds;
(iii) questioning the constitutionality of any statute, ordinance or
resolution, or the validity of any proceedings, authorizing the issuance
of the Bonds; (iv) questioning the validity or enforceability of the Bond
Ordinance; (v) contesting in any way the completeness, accuracy or
fairness of the Official Statements; (vi) questioning the titles of any
officers of the Seller to their respective offices or the legal existence
of the Seller under the laws of the State of Washington; or (vii) which
might in any material respect adversely affect the transactions
contemplated herein and in the Official Statements to be undertaken by
the Seller;
(6) A certificate signed by authorized officers of the Seller to the effect
that the officers of the Seller who signed or whose facsimile signatures
appear on the Bonds were on the date of execution of the Bonds the duly
elected or appointed, qualified and acting officers of the Seller and that
their signatures are genuine or accurate facsimiles;
A_
(7) A certificate of authorized officers of the Seller to the effect that the
Seller has not been and is not in default as to principal or interest
payments on any of its bonds or other obligations;
(8) A certificate of authorized officers of the Seller to the effect that,
from the respective dates of the Official Statements and up to and
including the date of Closing, the Seller has not incurred any material
liabilities direct or contingent, nor has there been any material adverse
change in the financial position, results of operations or condition,
financial or otherwise, of the Seller, except as described in the Official
-Statements;
(9) A certified copy of the Bond Ordinance;
(10) A definitive copy of the Final Official Statement, signed on behalf of
the Seller by an authorized officer of the Seller;
(11) A certified copy of this Purchase Contract; and
(12) Suh asc the additional
Purchaserlegal
mapym reasonablycertificates,
request instruments
evidence he documents
ruth,
accuracy and completeness, as of the date hereof and as of the date of
Closing, of the representations and warranties contained herein and of
the statements and information contained in the Official Statements
and the due performance by the Seller at or prior to Closing of all
agreements then to be performed and all conditions then to be satisfied
by the Seller.
6. The Seller shall pay the costs of bond ratings, the fees and disbursements of Bond
Counsel, and the Seller's other consultants and advisors, the cost of printing the
Official Statements, and the costs of drafting, printing and executing and
registering the Bonds. The Purchaser shall pay the costs of preparing and
distributing the Final and Preliminary Official Statements except in the
(
circumstances and to the extent set forth in paragraph 7 hereof), the Purchaser's
expenses relative to Closing, including the cost of federal funds and the
Purchaser's travel expenses.
7. If, during the period ending on June 13, 1993, any material adverse event
affecting the Seller or the Bonds shall occur which results in the Final Official
Statement containing any untrue statement of a material fact or omitting to
state any material fact necessary to make the Final Official Statement, or the
statements or information therein contained, in light of the circumstances under
which they were made, not misleading, the Seller shall notify the Purchaser and,
if in the opinion of the Seller and the Purchaser such event requires a supplement
or amendment to the Final Official Statement, the party whose omission,
misstatement or changed circumstance has resulted in the supplement or
amendment will at its expense b supplement
Seller and the Purchaser.
Final
O ficial Statement
in a form and in a manner approvedX
—5—
8. Any notice or other communication to be given to the Seller under this Purchase
Contract shall be given by delivering the same in writing to its respective address
set forth above. Any notice or other communication to be given to the Purchaser
under this Purchase Contract shall be given by delivering the same in writing to
Lehman Brothers Division of Shearson Lehman Brothers Inc., 999 Third Avenue,
Suite 4000, Seattle, Washington 98104-4021 (Attention: Richard B. King, Public
Finance).
9. Upon acceptance of this Purchase Contract, this Purchase Contract shall be
binding upon the Seller and the Purchaser. This Purchase Contract is intended to
benefit only the parties hereto. The Seller's representations and warranties shall
survive any investigation made by or for the Purchaser, delivery and payment for
the Bonds, and the termination of this Purchase Contract, except that such
representations and warranties contained in the Official Statement shall not
survive if Purchaser becomes aware that the facts contained in the Official
Statement are incorrect or misleading and Purchaser fails to advise Seller of such
incorrect or misleading statements. Should the Purchaser fail (other than for
reasons permitted in this Purchase Contract) to pay for the Bonds at the.Closing,
the amount set forth in paragraph o of Exhibit A shall be paid by the Purchaser as .
liquidated damages in full, and costs shall be borne in accordance with Section 6.
Should the Seller fail to satisfy any of the foregoing conditions or covenants, or if
Purchaser's obligations are terminated for any reason permitted under this
Purchase Contract, then neither the Purchaser nor the Seller shall have any
further obligations under this Purchase Contract, except that any expenses
incurred shall be borne in accordance with Section 6.
10. This offer expires on the date set forth in paragraph m of Exhibit A.
Respectfully submitted,
Richard B. King
Senior Vice President
Public Finance
ACCEPTED by the City of Kent, Washington, this _ day of April, 1993.
CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON
By
Dan Kelleher, Mayor
RBK:kg0114C
Enclosures
EXHIBIT A
DESCRIPTION OF BONDS
a. Pur_ chase Price: $ per $100.00 par value, or $ , plus
accrued interest from April 1, 1993 to the date of Closing.
b. Denominations: $5,000 or integral multiples thereof within a single maturity.
c. Dated Date: April 1, 1993.
d. Form: Fully registered with privileges of exchange at the expense of the Seller.
The Bonds initially will be issued in book-entry only form.
e. Interest Payable: June 1 and December 1, commencing December 1, 1993.
f. Maturity 5ghedule: Bonds shall mature serially on December 1 of each year in
the amounts and shall bear interest at the rates set forth below:
Due Interest Due Interest
Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate
1993 $ 2002 $
1994 2003
1995 2004
1996 2005
1997 2006
1998 2007
1999 2008
2000 2009
2001
g. Net Interest Cost:
h. Redemption: The Seller reserves the right to redeem the Bonds maturing on or
after December 1, 2003, in whole or in part at any time, with those maturities
selected by the City (and by lot within a maturity in such manner as the Bond
Registrar shall determine) on and after June 1, 2003, at par, plus accrued
interest to the date of redemption. -
i. Estimated Closing, Date and Location: On or about April 22, 1993 in Seattle,
Washington.
j. Required Ratings ofBonds: "Moody's — and Standard & Poor's _.
k. Bond Counsel: Foster Pepper & Shefelman, Seattle, Washington.
1. Method of Payment: Federal Funds draft or wire.
In. Offer Expires: April 6, 1993 at 11:59 p.m., Pacific Daylight Savings Time.
n. Gross Underwriting prgad: % ($ )
o. Li Damages: $2,000.
RBK:kg0114 C
-7-
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6. 1993
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: REFUNDING OF 1978 AND 1989 COUNCILMANIC BONDS -
BOND ORDINANCE AND PURCHASE CONTRACT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As recommended by the Operations
Committee, Council is requested to adopt a bond ordinance and
authorize the Mayor to sign a purchase contract with Lehman
Brothers. This will be for approximately $2 , 740, 000 to
refinance the callable portion ($2 , 495, 000) of the 1978 and
1989 Councilmanic Bonds. The issuance rate will be approxi-
mately 4 . 6 percent and will save the City approximately
$152 , 000 in present value debt service savings. The debt
service savings can be used to finance future Capital
Improvements that will be identified in the 1994-1999 Capital
Improvement Plan update.
3 . EXHIBITS: Bond ordinance and purchase contract
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Operations Committee 2-0 (Houser not present)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
to adopt Bond Ordinance No. and to authorize the Mayor to
sign a purchase contract with Lehman Brothers.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION:
Council Agenda
Item No. 4B
I �
CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of Kent, Washington,
relating to contracting indebtedness; providing for the
issuance of $ par value of Limited Tax General
obligation Refunding Bonds, 1993 , of the City to provide
funds with which to pay the cost of refunding the
callable portions of the City's outstanding Limited Tax
General Obligation Bonds, 1978 , and Limited Tax General
Obligation Bonds, 1989 , and the costs of ..issuance and
sale of the bonds; fixing the date, form, maturities,
interest rates, terms and covenants of the bonds;
establishing a bond redemption fund; providing for and
authorizing the purchase of certain obligations out of
the proceeds of the sale of the refunding bonds herein
authorized and for the use and application of the money
derived from those investments; authorizing the execution
of an agreement with Bank of
, Washington, as refunding trustee; and
approving the sale and providing for the delivery of the
bonds to Lehman Brothers Division of Shearson Lehman
Brothers Inc. of Seattle, Washington.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2092 passed March 8 , 1978 ,
the City of Kent, Washington (the "City") , heretofore issued its
Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 1978 (the 111978 Bonds") , in
the original principal amount of $1, 500, 000, and by Section 3 of
that ordinance the City reserved the right and option to redeem the
1978 Bonds maturing on or after July 1, 1989, on July 1, 1988, and
on any interest payment date thereafter, at par plus accrued
interest to the date fixed for redemption; and
WHEREAS, there are presently, outstanding $550, 000 principal
amount of 1978 Bonds maturing on July 1 of each of the years 1994
through 1998 , inclusive, bearing interest at various rates from
5 . 80% to 6. 00% (the "Refunded 1978 Bonds") ; and
0075563.01
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2835, passed February 21,
1989, the City heretofore issued its Limited Tax General Obligation
Bonds, 1989 (the 111989 Bonds") , in the original principal amount of
$2, 980, 000, and by Section 6 of that ordinance the City reserved
the right and option to redeem the 1989 Bonds maturing on or after
February 11 1997 , on February 1, 1996, at a price of 102% of par
plus accrued interest to the date fixed for redemption; and
WHEREAS, there are presently outstanding $1, 945 , 000 principal
amount of 1989 Bonds maturing on February 1 of each of the years
1997 through 2004 , inclusive, bearing interest at various rates
from 7 . 10% to 7 . 40% (the "Refunded 1989 Bonds") ; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the
Refunded 1978 Bonds and Refunded 1989 Bonds (collectively, the
"Refunded Bonds") may be refunded by the issuance and sale of the
general obligation bonds authorized herein (the "Bonds") so that a
substantial saving will be effected by the difference between the
principal and interest costs over the life of the Bonds and the
principal and interest costs over the life of the outstanding
Refunded Bonds but for such refunding, which refunding will be
effected by
(a) The issuance of the Bonds;
(b) The payment of the interest on the Refunded
1978 Bonds when due up to and including July 1, 1993 ,
and, on July 1, 1993 , the call, payment and redemption of
all the outstanding Refunded 1978 Bonds at a price of
par; and
(c) The payment of the interest on the Refunded
1989 Bonds when due up to and including February 1, 1996 ,
and, on February 1, 1996, the call, payment and
redemption of all the outstanding Refunded 1989 Bonds at
a price of 102% of par;
0075563.01
and
WHEREAS, to effect that refunding in the manner that will be
most advantageous to the City and its taxpayers, the City Council
finds it necessary and advisable that certain acquired obligations
(hereinafter defined) bearing interest and maturing at the time or
times necessary to accomplish the refunding as aforesaid be
purchased out of the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is necessary
to issue and sell $ par value of limited tax general
obligation refunding bonds to provide the funds necessary to refund
the Refunded Bonds and to pay the costs of the refunding and the
issuance and sale of the Bonds, and Lehman Brothers Division of
Shearson Lehman Brothers Inc. ("Lehman Brothers") has offered to
purchase those Bonds under the terms and conditions hereinafter set
forth; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN
as follows:
Section 1. Debt Capacity. The assessed valuation of the
taxable property within the City as ascertained by the last
preceding assessment for City purposes for the calendar year 1993
is $ The City has outstanding general indebtedness
evidenced by (a) limited tax general obligation bonds and
conditional sales contracts in the principal amount of $
incurred within the limit of up to 3/4 of 1% of the value of the
taxable property within the City permitted for general municipal
purposes without a vote of the qualified voters therein, and (b)
unlimited tax general obligation bonds in the principal amount of
0075563.01
-3-
$ incurred within the limit of up to 2-1/2% of the
value of the taxable property within the City for capital purposes
only, issued pursuant to a vote of the qualified voters of the
City. The amount of indebtedness for which the Bonds are
authorized herein to be issued is $
and the City
expects to issue simultaneously with the Bonds $
of
additional indebtedness to be evidenced by the City's Unlimited Tax
General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 1993 .
Section 2 . Authorization of Bonds . The City shall borrow
money on the credit of the City and issue negotiable limited tax
general obligation refunding bonds evidencing that indebtedness in
the amount of $ for the purpose of providing the funds
required to:
(a) Pay the interest on the Refunded 1978 Bonds
when due up to an a and redeemluding yall lof 3thend on July It
outstanding
1993 , to call, pay
Refunded 1978 Bonds at a price of par; and
(b) Pay the interest on the Refunded 1989 Bonds
when due up to and including February
11 1996,
all ofdton
February 11 1996, to call, pay and
he
outstanding Refunded 1989 Bonds at a price of 102% of
par;
(collectively, the "Refunding Plan" ) , and to pay the costs of the
refunding and the issuance and sale of the Bonds. The general
indebtedness to be incurred by the issuance of the Bonds shall be
within the limit of up to 3/4 of 1% of the value of the taxable
property within the City permitted for general municipal purposes
without a vote of the qualified voters therein.
Section 3 . Description of Bonds. The Bonds shall. be called
Limited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 1993 , of the City
(the "Bonds") ; shall be in the aggregate principal amount of
0075563.01
-4-
$ ; shall be dated April 1, 1993 ; shall be in the
denomination of $5, 000 or any integral multiple thereof within a
single maturity; shall be numbered separately in the manner and
with any additional designation as the Bond Registrar
(collectively, the fiscal agencies of the State of Washington
located in Seattle, Washington, and New York, New York) deems
necessary for purposes of identification; shall bear interest at
the rates set forth below (computed on the basis of a 360-day year
of twelve 30-day months) , payable semiannually on each February 1
and August 1, commencing August 1, 1993 ; and shall mature on
February 1 in years and amounts and bear interest at the rates per
annum as follows:
Maturity Principal Interest
Dates Amounts Rates
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Section 4 . Registration and Transfer of Bonds. . The Bonds
shall be issued only in registered form as to both principal and
interest and recorded on books or records maintained by the Bond
Registrar (the "Bond Register") . The Bond Register shall. contain
the name and mailing address of the owner of each Bond and the
principal amount and number of each of the Bonds held by each
owner.
0075563.01
-5-
Bonds surrendered to the Bond Registrar may be exchanged for
Bonds in any authorized denomination of an equal aggregate
principal amount and of the same interest rate and maturity. Bonds
may be transferred only if endorsed in the manner provided thereon
and surrendered to the Bond Registrar. Any exchange or transfer
shall be without cost to the owner or transferee. The Bond
Registrar shall not be obligated to exchange or transfer any Bond
during the 15 days preceding any principal payment or redemption
date.
Section 5 . Payment of Bonds . Both principal of and interest
on the Bonds shall be payable in lawful money of the United States
of America. Interest on the Bonds shall be paid by checks or
drafts of the Bond Registrar mailed on the interest payment date to
the registered owners at the addresses appearing on the Bond
Register on the 15th day of the month preceding the interest
payment date. Principal of the Bonds shall be payable upon
presentation and surrender of the Bonds by the registered owners at
either of the principal offices of the Bond Registrar at the option
of the owners .
Section 6 . O tional Redem tion and open Market Purchase of
Bonds. Bonds maturing in the years 1994 through , inclusive
shall be issued without the right or option of the City to redeem
those Bonds prior to their stated maturity dates. The City
reserves the right to redeem the Bonds maturing on or after
February 11 prior to their stated maturities dates as a whole
or in part (within one or more maturities selected by 'the City and
by lot within a maturity in such manner as the Bond Registrar shall
0075563.01
-6-
determine) , on February 1, or on any interest payment date
thereafter, at par plus accrued interest to the date fixed for
redemption.
Portions of the principal amount of any Bond, in installments
of $5, 000 or any integral multiple thereof, may be redeemed. If
less than all of the principal amount of any Bond is redeemed, upon
surrender of that Bond at either of the principal offices of the
Bond Registrar, there shall be issued to the registered owner,
without charge therefor, a new Bond (or Bonds, at the option of the
registered owner) of the same maturity and interest rate in any of
the denominations authorized by this ordinance in the aggregate
principal amount remaining unredeemed.
The City further reserves the right and option to purchase any -
or all of the Bonds in the open market at any time at any price
plus accrued interest to the date of purchase.
All Bonds purchased or redeemed under this section shall be
cancelled.
Section 7 . Notice of Redemption. The City shall cause notice
of any intended redemption of Bonds to be given not less than 30
nor more than 60 days prior to the date fixed for redemption by
first-class mail, postage prepaid, to the registered owner of any
Bond to be redeemed at the address appearing on the Bond Register
at the time the Bond Registrar. prepares the notice, and the
requirements of this sentence shall be deemed to have been
fulfilled when notice has been mailed as so provided, whether or
not it is actually received by the owner of any Bond. Interest on
Bonds called for redemption shall cease to accrue on the date fixed
0075563.01
-7-
for redemption unless the Bond or Bonds called are not redeemed
when presented pursuant to the call. In addition, the redemption
notice shall be mailed within the same period, postage prepaid, to
Moody's Investors Service, Inc. , and Standard & Poor's Corporation
at their offices in New York, New York, or their successors, to
Lehman Brothers at its principal office in Seattle, Washington, or
its successor, and to such other persons and with such additional
information as the City Finance Director shall determine, but these
additional mailings shall not be a condition precedent to the
redemption of Bonds.
Section 8 . Failure to Redeem Bonds . If any Bond is not
redeemed when properly presented at its maturity or call date, the
City shall be obligated to pay interest on that Bond at the same
rate provided in the Bond from and after its maturity or call date
until that Bond, both principal and interest, is paid in full or
until sufficient money for its payment in full is on deposit in the
bond redemption fund hereinafter created and the Bond has been
called for payment by giving notice of that call to the registered
owner of that unpaid Bond.
Section 9 . Pledge of Taxes. For as long as any of the Bonds
are outstanding, the City irrevocably pledges to include in its
budget and levy taxes annually within the constitutional and
statutory tax limitations provided by law without a vote of the
electors of the City on all of the taxable property within the City
in an amount sufficient, together with other money legally
available and to be used therefor, to pay when due the -principal of
and interest on the Bonds, and the full faith, credit and resources
0075563.01
-8-
of the City are pledged irrevocably for the annual levy and
collection of those taxes and the prompt payment of that principal
and interest.
Section 10. Form and Execution of Bonds. The Bonds shall be
printed or lithographed on good bond paper in a form consistent
with the provisions of this ordinance and state law, shall be
signed by the Mayor and City Clerk, either or both of whose
signatures may be manual or in facsimile, and the seal of the City
or a facsimile reproduction thereof shall be impressed or printed
thereon.
Only Bonds bearing a Certificate of Authentication in the
following form, manually signed by the Bond Registrar, shall be
valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to the benefits of
this ordinance: .
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION
This bond is one of the fully registered City of
Kent, Washington, Limited Tax General Obligation
Refunding Bonds, 1993 , described in the Bond Ordinance.
WASHINGTON STATE FISCAL AGENCY
Bond Registrar
By
Authorized Officer
The authorized signing of a Certificate of Authentication shall be
conclusive evidence that the Bonds so authenticated have been duly
executed, authenticated and delivered and are entitled to the
benefits of this ordinance.
If any officer whose facsimile signature appears 'on the Bonds
ceases to be an officer of the City authorized to sign bonds before
0075563.01
-9-
the Bonds bearing his or her facsimile signature are authenticated
or delivered by the Bond Registrar or issued by the City, those
Bonds nevertheless may be authenticated, delivered and issued and,
when authenticated, issued and delivered, shall be as binding on
the City as though that person had continued to be an officer of
the City authorized to sign bonds. Any Bond also may be signed on
behalf of the City by any person who, on the actual date of signing
of the Bond, is an officer of the City authorized to sign bonds,
although he or she did not hold the required office on the date of
issuance of the Bonds .
Section 11 . Bond Registrar. The Bond Registrar shall keep,
or cause to be kept, at its principal corporate trust office,
sufficient books for the registration and transfer of the Bonds
which shall be open to inspection by the City at all times. The
Bond Registrar is authorized, on behalf of the City, to
authenticate and deliver Bonds transferred or exchanged in
accordance with the provisions of the Bonds and this ordinance, to
serve as the city's paying agent for the Bonds and to carry out all
of the Bond Registrar's powers and duties under this ordinance and
City Ordinance No. 2418 establishing a system of registration for
the City's bonds and obligations.
The Bond Registrar shall be responsible for its
representations contained in the •Bond Registrar's Certificate of
Authentication on the Bonds. The Bond Registrar may become the
owner of Bonds with the same rights it would have if it were not
the Bond Registrar and, to the extent permitted by law, may act as
depository for and permit any of its officers or directors to act
0075563.01
-10-
as members of, or in any other capacity with respect to, any
committee formed to protect the rights of Bond owners.
Section 12 . Preservation of Tax Exemption for Interest on
Bonds. The City covenants that it will take all actions necessary
to prevent interest on the Bonds from being included in gross
income for federal income tax purposes, and it will neither take
any action nor make or permit any use of proceeds of the Bonds or
other funds of the City treated as proceeds of the Bonds at any
time during the term of the Bonds which will cause interest on the
Bonds to be included in gross income for federal income tax
purposes. . The City also covenants that, to the extent arbitrage
rebate requirements of Section 148 of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986 , as amended (the "Code") , are applicable to the Bonds, it will
take all actions necessary to comply (or to be treated as having
complied) with those requirements in connection with the Bonds,
including the calculation and payment of any penalties that the
City has elected to pay as an alternative to calculating rebatable
arbitrage, . and the payment of any other penalties if required under
Section 148 of the Code to prevent interest on the Bonds from being
included in gross income for federal income tax purposes. The City
certifies that it has not been notified of any listing or proposed
listing by the Internal Revenue Service to the effect that it is a
bond issuer whose arbitrage certifications may not be relied upon.
Section 13 . Bonds Negotiable. The Bonds shall be negotiable
instruments to the extent provided by RCW 62A. 8-102 and 62A. 8-105 .
Section 14 . Advance Refunding or Defeasance of the Bonds.
The City may issue advance refunding bonds pursuant to the laws of
0075563.01
-11-
the State of Washington or use money available from any other
lawful source to pay when due the principal of and interest on the
Bonds, or any portion thereof included in a refunding or defeasance
plan, and to redeem and retire, refund or defease all such then-
outstanding Bonds (hereinafter collectively called the "defeased
Bonds") and to pay the costs of the refunding or defeasance. if
money and/or "government obligations" (as defined in Chapter 39 . 53
RCW, as now or hereafter amended) maturing at a time or times and
bearing interest in amounts (together with money, if necessary)
sufficient to redeem and retire, refund or defease the defeased
Bonds in accordance with their terms are set aside in a special
trust fund irrevocably pledged to that redemption and retirement of
defeased Bonds (hereinafter called the "trust account") , then all
right and interest of the owners of the defeased Bonds in the
covenants of this ordinance and in the funds and accounts obligated
to the payment of the defeased Bonds shall cease and become void.
The owners of defeased Bonds shall have the right to receive
payment of the principal of and interest on the defeased Bonds from
the trust account. The defeased Bonds shall be deemed no longer
outstanding, and the City may apply any money in any other fund or
account established for the payment or redemption of the defeased
Bonds to any lawful purposes as it shall determine.
Section 15 . Bond Fund and Deposit of Bond Proceeds . There is
created. and established in the office of the Finance Director of
the City a special fund designated as the Limited Tax General
obligation Refunding Bond Fund, 1993 (the "Bond Fund") . Accrued
interest on the Bonds, if any, received from the sale and delivery
0075563.01
-12-
of the Bonds shall be paid into the Bond Fund. All principal
proceeds of the Bonds shall be deposited in accordance with the
provisions of Section 16 of this ordinance. All taxes collected
for and allocated to the payment of the principal of and interest
on the Bonds shall be deposited in the Bond Fund.
Section 16 . Refunding of the Refunded Bonds.
(a) Appointment of Refunding Trustee.
Bank is appointed the Refunding Trustee.
(b) Acquisition of Acquired Obligations. All of the proceeds
of the sale of the Bonds except for the accrued interest received,
if any, which shall be deposited in the Bond Fund, shall be
deposited immediately upon the receipt thereof with the Refunding
Trustee to discharge the obligation of the City to carry out the
Refunding Plan by providing for the payment of the amounts required
to be paid by the Refunding Plan. To the extent practicable, such
obligations shall be discharged fully by the Refunding Trustee's
simultaneous purchase of United States Treasury Certificates of
Indebtedness and/or Notes--State and Local Government Series or
other direct, noncallable obligations of the United States of
America (the "Acquired Obligations") , bearing such interest and
maturing as to principal and interest in such amounts and at such
times so as to provide, together with a beginning cash balance of
$ (which amount may be increased or decreased) , for the
payment of the amounts required to be paid by the Refunding Plan.
The Acquired Obligations are listed and more particularly described
in Schedule A attached to the Refunding Trust Agreement between the.
0075563.0I
-13-
city and the Refunding Trustee, but are subject to substitution as
set forth below.
(c) Substitution of Accuired Obligations. Prior to the
purchase of any such Acquired Obligations, the city reserves the
right to substitute other direct, noncallable obligations of the
United States of America ("Government Obligations") for any of the
Acquired Obligations and to use any savings created thereby for any
lawful city purpose "if, (a) in the opinion of Foster Pepper &
Shefelman, the city's bond counsel, the interest on the Bonds will
remain excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes
under Sections 103 , 148 and 149 (d) of the Code, and (b) such
substitution shall not impair the timely payment of the amounts
required to be paid by the Refunding Plan, so verified by a
nationally recognized firm of certified public accountants.
After the purchase of the Acquired Obligations by the
Refunding Trustee, the city reserves the right to substitute
therefor cash or Government Obligations subject to the conditions
that such money or securities held by the Refunding Trustee shall
be sufficient to carry out the Refunding Plan, that such
substitution will not cause the Bonds to be arbitrage bonds within
the meaning of Section 148. of the Code and regulations thereunder
in effect on the date of such substitution and applicable to
obligations issued on the issue date of the Bonds, and that the
city obtain, at its expense: (1) verification by a nationally
recognized firm of certified public accountants acceptable to the
Refunding Trustee confirming that the payments of principal of and
interest on the substitute Acquired Obligations, if paid when due,
0075563.01
-14-
and any other money held by the Refunding Trustee will be
sufficient to carry out the Refunding Plan; and (2) an opinion from
Foster Pepper & Shefelman, bond counsel to the City, its successor,
or other nationally recognized bond counsel to the City, to the
effect that the disposition and substitution or purchase of such
securities, under the statutes, rules and regulations then in force
and applicable to the Bonds, will not cause the interest on the
Bonds or the Refunded Bonds to be included in gross income for
federal income tax purposes and that such disposition and
substitution or purchase is in compliance with the statutes and
regulations applicable to the Bonds. Any surplus money resulting
from the sale, transfer, other disposition or redemption of the
Acquired Obligations and the substitutions therefor shall be
released from the trust estate and transferred to the City to be
used for any lawful City purpose.
(d) Administration of Refunding Plan. The Refunding Trustee
is authorized and directed to purchase the Acquired Obligations (or
substitute obligations) and to make the payments required to be
made by the Refunding Plan from the Acquired Obligations (or
substitute obligations) and money deposited with the Refunding
Trustee pursuant to this ordinance. All Acquired Obligations (or
substitute obligations) and the money deposited with the Refunding
Trustee and any income therefrom shall be held irrevocably,
invested and applied in accordance with the provisions of
Ordinances Nos. 2092 and 2835, this ordinance, Chapter 39 . 53 RCW
and other applicable statutes of the State of Washington, and the
Refunding Trust Agreement. All necessary and proper fees,
0075563.01
-15-
compensation and expenses of the Refunding Trustee for the Bonds
and all other costs incidental to establishing the escrow to
accomplish the refunding of the Refunded Bonds and costs related to
the issuance and delivery of the Bonds, including bond printing,
rating service fees, insurance premiums, verification fees, bond
counsel's fees and other related expenses, shall be paid out of the
proceeds of the Bonds.
(e) Authorization for Refunding Trust Agreement. To carry
out the Refunding Plan provided for by this ordinance, the Mayor or
Finance Director is authorized and directed to execute and deliver
to the Refunding Trustee a Refunding Trust Agreement substantially
in the form on file with the City Clerk and by this reference made
a part hereof, setting forth the duties, obligations and
responsibilities of the Refunding Trustee in connection with the
payment, redemption and retirement of the Refunded Bonds as
provided herein and stating that the provisions for payment of the
fees, compensation and expenses of the Refunding Trustee set forth
therein are satisfactory to it. Prior to executing the Refunding
Trust Agreement, the Mayor or Finance Director is authorized to
make such changes therein which do not change the substance and
purpose thereof or which assure that the escrow provided therein
and the Bonds are in compliance with the requirements of federal
law governing the exclusion of interest on the Bonds from gross
income for federal income tax purposes.
Section 17 . Call for Redemption of the Refunded Bonds. The
City calls for redemption on July 1, 1993 , all of the Refunded 1978
Bonds at par plus accrued interest, and on February 1, 1996, all of
0075563.01
-16-
the Refunded 1989 Bonds at a price of 102% of par plus accrued
interest. Such calls for redemption shall be irrevocable after the
delivery of the Bonds to the initial purchaser thereof. The dates
on which the Refunded Bonds are called for redemption are the
earliest dates, respectively, on which those Refunded Bonds may be
called for redemption at a price less than 103% of par.
The proper City officials are authorized and directed to cause
the fiscal agencies to give such notices as required, at .the times
and in the manner required by Ordinances Nos. 2092 and 2835 in
order to effect the redemption prior to their maturities of the
Refunded 1978 Bonds and Refunded 1989 Bonds, respectively.
Section 18 . City Findings with Respect to Refunding. The
City Council finds and determines that the issuance and sale of the
Bonds at this time will effect a saving to the City and its
taxpayers and is in the best interest of the City and in the public
interest. In making such finding and determination, the City
Council has given consideration to the fixed maturities of the
Bonds and the Refunded Bonds, the costs of issuance of the Bonds
and the known earned income from the investment of the proceeds of
the issuance and sale of the Bonds and other money of the City used
in the Refunding Plan pending payment and redemption of the
Refunded Bonds.
The City Council further finds and determines that the money
to be deposited with the Refunding Trustee for the Refunded Bonds
in accordance with Section 16 of this ordinance, together with
known earned income from the investments thereof, will be
sufficient to carry out the Refunding Plan and discharge and
W75563.0(
-17-
satisfy the obligations of the City under Ordinance No. 2092 with
respect to the Refunded 1978 Bonds and Ordinance No. 2835 with
respect to the Refunded 1989 Bonds and the pledges, charges,
trusts, covenants and agreements of the City therein made or
provided for as to the Refunded Bonds and that the Refunded Bonds
shall no longer be deemed to be outstanding under such ordinances
immediately upon the deposit of such money with the Refunding
Trustee.
Section 19 . Approval of Bond Purchase Contract. Lehman
Brothers of Seattle, Washington, has presented a purchase contract
dated , 1993 (the "Bond Purchase Contract") , to the
City offering to purchase the Bonds under the terms and conditions
provided in the Bond Purchase Contract, which written Bond Purchase
Contract is on file with the City Clerk and is incorporated herein
by this reference. The City Council finds that entering into the
Bond Purchase Contract is in the city's best interest and therefore
accepts the offer contained therein and authorizes its execution by
City officials .
The Bonds will be printed at City expense and will be
delivered to the purchaser in accordance with the Bond Purchase
Contract, with the approving legal opinion of Foster Pepper &
Shefelman, municipal bond counsel of Seattle, Washington, regarding
the Bonds printed on each Bond. , Except as provided in the Bond
Purchase Contract, bond counsel shall not be required to review and
shall express no opinion concerning the completeness or accuracy of
any official statement, offering circular or other sales material
0075563.01
-18-
issued or used in connection with the Bonds, and bond counsel's
opinion shall so state.
The proper City officials are authorized and directed to do
everything necessary, including reviewing and executing the final
official statement, for the prompt delivery of the Bonds to the
purchaser and for the proper application and use of the proceeds of
the sale thereof.
Section 20. Preliminary Official Statement Deemed "Final" .
The City Council has been provided with copies of a preliminary
official statement dated , 1993 (the "Preliminary
Official Statement") , prepared in connection with the sale of the
Bonds. For the sole - purpose of the purchaser's compliance with
Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12 (b) (1) , the City
"deems final" that Preliminary Official Statement as of its date,
except for the omission of information as to offering prices,
interest rates, selling compensation, aggregate principal amount,
principal amount per maturity, maturity dates, options of
redemption, delivery dates, ratings, and other terms of the Bonds
dependent on such matters.
Section 21. Temporary Bond. Pending the printing, execution
and delivery to the purchaser of definitive Bonds, the City may
cause to be executed and delivered to the purchaser a single
temporary Bond in the total principal amount of the Bonds. The
temporary Bond shall bear the same date of issuance, interest
rates, principal payment dates and terms and covenants as the
definitive Bonds, shall be issued as a fully registered Bond in the
name of the purchaser, and otherwise shall be in a form acceptable
0075563.01
-19-
to the purchaser. The temporary Bond shall be exchanged for
definitive Bonds as soon as they are printed, executed and
available for delivery.
Section 22 . Effective Date of Ordinance. This ordinance
shall take effect and be in force five (5) days from and after its
passage, approval and publication, as provided by law.
By
DAN KELLEHER, Mayor
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Special Counsel and Bond
Counsel for the City
Passed the day of 1993 .
Approved the day of 1993 .
Published the day of 1993 .
I certify that this is a true copy of Ordinance No.
passed by the City Council of the City of Kent, Washington, and
approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as hereon - indicated.
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, City Clerk
0075563.01
-20-
LEHMAN BROTHERS
$ �9
CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON
Limited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 1993
PiJRCHASE CONTRACT
April 6, 1993
Mayor and
City Council Members
City of Kent
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, Washington 98032-5895
Dear Honorable Mayor and City Council Members:
Lehman Brothers Division of Shearson Lehman Brothers Inc. (the "Purchaser"), is
pleased to offer to purchase from the City of Kent, Washington (the "Seller") all of its
$ principal amount of Limited Tax General Obligation Refunding Bonds,
1993 (the "Bonds"). This offer is based upon the terms and conditions set forth below
and in Exhibit A attached, which when accepted by the Seller shall constitute the
terms and conditions of our Purchase Contract for the Bonds. Those terms and
conditions are as follows:
1. Prior to the date of delivery and payment for the Bonds identified in paragraph i
of Exhibit A ("Closing"), the Seller shall pass an ordinance authorizing the
issuance of the Bonds (the "Bond Ordinance") in form and substance acceptable to
the Purchaser.
2. The Seller shall sell and deliver to the Purchaser, and the Purchaser shall
purchase, accept delivery of and pay for the entire $ of principal
amount of the Bonds, for a purchase price set forth in paragraph a of Exhibit A.
The Purchaser's payment to the Seller will reflect accrued interest to the date of
Closing and any underwriting discount.
3. The Seller consents to and ratifies the use by the Purchaser of the information
contained in the Preliminary Official Statement dated March , 1993, relating
to the Bonds (the "Preliminary Official Statement"), a copy of which is attached
to this Purchase Contract as Exhibit B, for marketing the Bonds, authorizes the
D� M preparation of a Final Official Statement (the "Final Official Statement") for the
I¢ Ar Bonds containing such revisions and additions to the Preliminary Official
Statement as the Seller deems necessary, and further authorizes the use of the
Final Official Statement in connection with the public offering and sale of the
Bonds.
LEH.MA.N BROTHERS DMSION
SHEARSON LEHKA�N BROTHERS INC. AN A.MERICA.N EXPRESS COMPANY
999 THIRD AVENUE SURE 4000 SEATTLE.WA 98104 206 344 2792 FAX 206 144 S077
4. The Seller represents, warrants to, and agrees with the Purchaser, as of the date
hereof and as of the date and time of Closing, that:
a. The Seller has and will have at Closing full legal right, power and authority
- to enter into and perform its obligations under this Purchase Contract and
under the Bond Ordinance, to pass the Bond Ordinance and to sell and deliver
the Bonds to the Purchaser;
b. This Purchase Contract, the Bond Ordinance and the Bonds do not and will
not conflict with or create a breach of or default under any existing law,
regulation, judgment, order or decree or any agreement, lease or instrument
to which the Seller is subject or by which it is bound;
c. No governmental consent, approval or authorization other than the Bond
Ordinance is required in connection with the sale of the Bonds to the
Purchaser;
d. This Purchase Contract, the Bond Ordinance and the Bonds (when paid for by
the Purchaser) are, and shall be at the time of Closing, legal, valid and
binding obligations of the Seller enforceable in accordance with their
respective terms, subject only to applicable bankruptcy, insolvency or other
similar laws affecting creditors' rights and principles of equity if equitable
remedies are sought;
e. The Bond Ordinance shall have been duly authorized by the Seller, shall be in
full force and effect and shall not have been amended at the time of Closing
without the prior written consent of the Purchaser;
f. The Preliminary Official Statement, except as to matters corrected in the
Final Official Statement, which shall be available within seven days of the
date this Purchase Contract is approved so that the Final Official Statement
is available to accompany confirmations that the Purchaser sends to its
customers in compliance with the requirements of Rule 15C2-12(b)(4) under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and with the requirements
of Rule G-32 of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, shall be
accurate and complete in all material aspects as of its date with respect to
information obtained from or utilized by officers and employees of the Seller
in the normal course of their duties, and the Final Official Statement shall
be accurate and complete in all material respects as of its date and as of the
date of Closing to the knowledge and belief of such officers and employees;
and
g. Any certificate or copy of any certificate signed by any official of the Seller
and delivered to the - Purchaser pursuant to or in connection with this
Purchase Contract shall be deemed a representation by the Seller to the
Purchaser as to the truth of the statements therein made and is delivered to
the Purchaser for such purpose only.
5. As conditions to the Purchaser's obligations hereunder:
a. From the date of the Seller's acceptance of this Purchase Contract to the
date of Closing, there shall not have been any:
(1) Material adverse change in the financial condition or general affairs of
the Seller that materially affect the marketability of the Bonds;
-2-
(2) Event, court decision or proposed law, rule or regulation which may
have the effect of changing the federal income tax exclusion of the
interest on the Bonds or the transactions contemplated by this Purchase
Contract or the Preliminary and Final Official Statements;
(3) International or national crisis, suspension of stock exchange trading or
banking moratorium materially affecting the marketability of the Bonds;
(4) Material adverse event with respect to the Seller which in the
reasonable judgment of the Purchaser requires or has required an
amendment, modification or supplement to the Final Official Statement
and such amendment, modification or supplement is not made;
(5) The Bonds shall have, at Closing, ratings from Moody's Investors
Service, Inc. and Standard & Poor's Corp. no less than those set forth in
Exhibit A, paragraph j; or
b. At or prior to Closing, the Purchaser shall have received the following:
(1) The Bonds, in definitive form and duly executed and authenticated;
(2) A certificate of authorized officers of the Seller, in form and substance
acceptable to the Seller and Purchaser, to the effect: (i) that the
Seller's execution of the Final Official .Statement is authorized, (ii)
that, to the knowledge and belief of such officers, the Preliminary
Official Statement did not as of its date and Final Official Statement
(collectively the "Official Statements") (including the financial and
statistical data contained therein) did not as of its date or as of the date
of Closing contain any untrue statement of material fact or omit to
state a material fact necessary to make such statements, in light of the
circumstances under which they were made, not misleading; and (iii)
that the representations of the Seller contained in this Purchase
Contract are true and correct when made and as of Closing;
-3-
(3) An approving opinion or opinions of the law firm identified in
paragraph k of Exhibit A as bond counsel or from another nationally
recognized firm of municipal bond lawyers (either or both of which shall
be referred to as "Bond Counsel") satisfactory to the Purchaser and
dated as of Closing, to the effect: (i) that the Seller is duly organized
and legally existing code city under the laws of the State of Washington
with full power and authority to adopt the Bond Ordinance and to issue
and sell the Bonds to the Purchaser; (ii) that the Bonds are valid, legal
and binding obligations of the Seller enforceable in accordance with
their terms, except to the extent that such enforcement may be limited
by bankruptcy, insolvency or other laws affecting creditors' rights and
principles of equity if equitable remedies are sought; (iii) the
subsections or sections of the Official Statement entitled
Authorization," "Security," "TAX EXEMPTION" and "CERTAIN OTHER
FEDERAL TAX CONSEQUENCES," conform to the Bonds and applicable
laws; and (iv) that assuming compliance by the City with applicable
requirements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the
"Code"), including arbitrage and arbitrage rebate requirements, interest
on the Bonds is excluded from gross income of registered owners for
federal income tax purposes and is not an item of tax preference for
purposes of the alternative minimum tax applicable to individuals;
except that interest on the Bonds received by corporations may be
subject to an alternative minimum tax and, in the case of certain
corporations, an environmental and/or foreign branch profits tax, and
interest on the Bonds received by certain S.corporations may be subject
to tax;
(4) A letter of Bond Counsel, dated the date of Closing and addressed to the
Purchaser, to the effect that it may rely upon the opinion in
subparagraph (3) above as if it were addressed to the Purchaser;
(S) A certificate of authorized officers of the Seller to the effect that no
litigation is pending, or to the knowledge of the Seller threatened,
against the Seller in any court: (i) to restrain or enjoin the sale or
delivery by the Seller of the Bonds; (ii) in any manner questioning the
authority of the Seller to issue, or the issuance or validity of, the Bonds;
(iii) questioning the constitutionality of any statute, ordinance or
resolution, or the validity of any proceedings, authorizing the issuance
of the Bonds; (iv) questioning the validity or enforceability of the Bond
Ordinance; (v) contesting in any way the completeness, accuracy or
fairness of the Official Statements; (vi) questioning the titles of any
officers of the Seller to their respective offices or the legal existence
of the Seller under the laws of the State of Washington; or (vii) which
might in any material respect adversely affect the, transactions
contemplated herein and in the Official Statements to be undertaken by
the Seller;
(6) A certificate signed by authorized officers of the Seller to the effect
that the officers of the Seller who signed or whose facsimile signatures
appear on the Bonds were on the date of execution of the Bonds the duly
elected or appointed, qualified and acting officers of the Seller and that
their signatures are genuine or accurate facsimiles;
—4—
(7) A certificate of authorized officers of the Seller to the effect that the
Seller has not been and is not in default as to principal or in
payments on any of its bonds or other obligations;
(8) A certificate of authorized officers of the Seller to the effect that,
from the respective dates of the Official Statements and up to and
including the date of Closing, the Seller has not incurred any material
liabilities direct or contingent, nor has there been any material adverse
change in the financial position, results of operations or condition,
financial or otherwise, of the Seller, except as described in the Official
Statements;
(9) A certified copy of the Bond Ordinance;
(10) A definitive copy of the Final Official Statement, signed on behalf of
the Seller by, an authorized officer of the Seller;
(11) A certified copy of this Purchase Contract; and
(12) Such additional legal opinions, certificates, instruments and documents
as the Purchaser may reasonably request to evidence the truth,
accuracy and completeness, as of the date hereof and as of the date of
Closing, of the representations and warranties contained herein and of
the statements and information contained in the Official Statements
and the due performance by the Seller at or prior to Closing of all
agreements then to be performed and all conditions then to be satisfied
by the Seller.
6. The Seller shall pay the costs of bond ratings, the fees and disbursements of Bond
Counsel, and the Seller's other consultants and advisors, the cost of printing the
Official Statements, and the costs of drafting, printing and executing and
registering the Bonds. The Purchaser shall pay the costs of preparing and
distributing the Final and Preliminary Official Statements (except in the
circumstances and to the extent set forth in paragraph 7 hereof), the Purchaser's
expenses relative to Closing, including the cost of federal funds and the
Purchaser's travel expenses.
7. If, during the period ending on June 13, 1993, any material adverse event
affecting the Seller or the Bonds shall occur which results in the Final Official
Statement containing any untrue statement of a material fact or omitting to
state any material fact necessary to make the Final Official Statement, or the
statements or information therein contained, in light of the circumstances under
which they were made, not misleading, the Seller shall notify the Purchaser and,
if in the opinion of the Seller and the Purchaser such event requires a supplement
or amendment to the Final Official Statement, the party whose omission,
misstatement or changed circumstance has resulted in the supplement or
amendment will at its expense supplement or amend the Final Official Statement
in a form and in a manner approved by the Seller and the Purchaser.
8. Any notice or other communication to be given to the Seller under this Purchase
Contract shall be given by delivering the same in writing to its respective address
set forth above. Any notice or other communication to be given-to the Purchaser
under this Purchase Contract shall be given by delivering the same in writing to
Lehman Brothers Division of Shearson Lehman Brothers Inc., 999 Third Avenue,
Suite 4000, Seattle, Washington 98104-4075 (Attention: Richard B. King, Public
Finance).
9. Upon acceptance of this Purchase Contract, this Purchase Contract shall be
binding upon the Seller and the Purchaser. This Purchase Contract is intended to
benefit only the parties hereto. The Seller's representations and warranties shall
survive any investigation made by or for the Purchaser, delivery and payment for
the Bonds, and the termination of this Purchase Contract, except that such
representations and warranties contained in the Official Statement shall not
survive if Purchaser becomes aware that the facts contained in the Official
Statement are incorrect or misleading and Purchaser fails to advise Seller of such _
incorrect or misleading statements. Should the Purchaser
the Bonds ail (ather than
Clo for
reasons permitted in this Purchase Contract) to pay
for the amount set forth in paragraph o of Exhibit A shall be paid by the Purchaser as
liquidated damages in full, and costs shall be borne in accordance with Section 6.
Should the Seller fail to satisfy any of the foregoing conditions or covenants, or if
Purchaser's obligations are terminated for any reason permitted under this
Purchase Contract, then neither the Purchaser nor the Seller shall have any
further obligations under this Purchase Contract, except that any expenses
incurred shall be borne in accordance with Section 6.
10. This offer expires on the date set forth in paragraph m of Exhibit A.
Respectfully submitted,
Richard B. King
Senior Vice President
Public Finance
ACCEPTED by the City of Kent, Washington, this — day of April, 1993.
CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON
By
Dan Kelleher, Mayor
RBK:kg0113 C
Enclosures
—6—
EXHIBIT A
DESCRIPTION OF BONDS
a. Purchase Price: $ per $100.00 par value, or $ plus
accrued interest from April 1, 1993 to the date of Closing.
b. Denominations: $5,000 or integral multiples thereof within a single maturity.
c. Dated Date: April 1, 1993.
d. Form: Fully registered with privileges of exchange at the expense of the Seller.
The Bonds initially will be issued in book—entry only form.
e. Interest Payable: February 1 and August 1, commencing August 1, 1993.
f. Maturity Schedule: Bonds shall mature serially on February 1 of each year in the
amounts and shall bear interest at the rates set forth below:
Due Interest Due Interest
Year Amount Rate Year Amount Rate
1994 $ 2000 $
1995 2001
1996 2002
1997 2003
1998 2004
1999
g. Net Interest Cost:
h. Redemption: The Bonds will not be callable prior to maturity.
i. Estimated Closing n'r' and Location: On or about April 22, 1993 in Seattle,
Washington.
j. Required Ratings of Bonds: Moody's and Standard & Poor's _.
k. Bond Counsel: Foster Pepper & Shefelman, Seattle, Washington.
1. Method of Payment: Federal Funds draft or wire.
In. Offer Expires: April 6, 1993 at 11:59 p.m., Pacific Daylight Savings Time.
n. Gross Underwriting Sped: % ($ )
p, Liqrida cd Damages: $2,000.
RBK:kg0113C
—7—
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6 , 1993
M4 Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: VENTURE 84 REZONE (RZ-92-3)
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The Hearing Examiner has recommended
approval of an application by Sound Ventures of Kent, acting on
behalf of Budget Rent A Car, to rezone 2 . 52 acres from Gateway
Commercial, GWC, to General Industrial, M3 . The property is
located on the west side of 84th Avenue S. , approximately 300
feet north of South 222nd Street.
3 . EXHIBITS: Staff report, and Findings and Recommendations
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Hearing Examiner, 2/3/93
(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 /1/ moves, Councilmember seconds
to accept/ the findings of the Hearing Examiner,
and to adopt/xej-eettmod!t-y the Hearing Examiner' s recommenda-
tion of approval of Venture 84 Rezone (RZ-92-3) with no
conditions and to direct the City Attorney to prepare the
necessary ordinance.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION. ► '
941
Council Agenda
Item No. 4C
CITY OF LULt!I
CITY OF KENT
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
(206) 859-3390 Theodore P. Hunter
Hearing Examiner
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
FILE NO: VENTURE 84 REZONE #RZ-92-3
APPLICANT: Sound Ventures
REQUEST: A request to rezone 2.52 acres from the current zoning of GWC,
Gateway Commercial, to M3, General Industrial.
LOCATION: The subject property is located on the west side of
84th Avenue S., approximately 300 feet north of S. 222nd Street.
APPLICATION FILED: December 5, 1992
DET. OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
ISSUED: June 26, 1992
MEETING DATE: February 3, 1993
RECOMMENDATION ISSUED: February 18, 1993
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL
STAFF REPRESENTATIVE: Fred N. Satterstrom, Planning Department
Laura Yeats Quilici, Planner
PUBLIC TESTIMONY: Doug Klappenbach, applicant's representative
Other
Jim Rust
Fred Bowser
Ray Moyer
WRITTEN TESTIMONY: None
EXHIBITS: Hearing Examiner File and maps
1
Findings and Recommendation
Venture 84 Rezone
#RZ-92-3
INTRODUCTION
After due consideration of all the evidence presented at public hearing on the date
indicated above, and following an unaccompanied personal inspection of the subject
property and surrounding area by the Hearing Examiner at a time prior to the public
hearing, the following findings, conclusions and recommendation are entered by the
Hearing Examiner on this application.
FINDINGS
1 . The property proposed for a rezone is located on the west side of East Valley
Highway, approximately 390 feet north of S. 222nd Street. The property is
owned by Budget Rent A Car of Lisle, Illinois. The applicant for the rezone is
Sound Ventures of Kent, acting on behalf of Budget Rent A Car.
2. The applicant proposes to rezone that portion of the property that lies more
than 195 feet west of the East Valley Highway. If the petition for a rezone is
approved as submitted, the property would be separated into two parcels with
distinct zones.' The parcel fronting on the East Valley Highway (Parcel A)
would be approximately 247 x 195 feet or about 1 .1 acres. The applicant does
not propose to rezone Parcel A. Parcel B is that portion of the property which
lies west of Parcel A. Parcel B consists of approximately 2.52 acres.
3. The applicant proposes to rezone the 2.52 acres of Parcel B from GWC,
Gateway Commercial, to M3, General Industrial, in order to construct a
warehouse building. Parcel A would retain the GWC zoning designation.
4. The City-wide Comprehensive Plan map and the Valley Floor Plan map both
designate the site as C, Commercial. The text of those plans include the
following goals within the Economic Development Element:
a. City-wide Comprehensive Plan, Goal 1 : Promote diverse industrial
development in industrially developed areas;
'The site plan submitted with this application indicates both the existing lot lines
and the proposed lot lines. The applicant will also request a lot line adjustment should
this petition for a rezone be approved. The proposed lot line adjustment would allow
more frontage for Parcel A along the East Valley Highway. These Findings refer to the
proposed lot line adjustment since the proposed lot line adjustment would establish
parcels A and B in a manner consistent with this decision.
2
Findings and Recommendation
Venture 84 Rezone
#RZ-92-3
b. Valley Floor Plan, Goal 1 : Promote fill-in development of industrially
developed areas.
Other goals, objectives and policies that are relevant to this application are
detailed on pages 4 and 5 of the staff report for this application and are
incorporated herein by reference.
5. The applicant proposes to construct a 11,700 square foot commercial building
on Parcel A, which fronts 84th Avenue South and East Valley Highway, and a
46,080 square foot warehouse building on Parcel B, which is that land
proposed for the M3 zoning designation. Surrounding land uses include the
Budget truck lot and Salmon Bay Steel to the north, a vacant lot to the west,
Motor and Control Co. and a vacant house to the south and several small
industrial/commercial businesses across 84th Avenue South to the east.
Property to the west and north of the proposed rezone site is zoned M3.
Property to the east and south of the proposed rezone site is zoned GWC.
6. A. Potential traffic impacts as a consequence of the rezone were examined
during the environmental review process. The Mitigated Determination
of Nonsignificance issued for the proposal includes several conditions
related to traffic including the requirement of a traffic impact study or
execution of a traffic mitigation agreement, execution of a signal
participation covenant, execution of no-protest LID covenants and
dedication of right-of-way. See, ENV-91-53.
B. The Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) also included
conditions related to dust control, water run-off, wetland protection, tree
preservation and suggested site plan improvements to improve access
to the site. The MDNS was issued on June 26, 1992. It was not
appealed.
7. The GWC zone was applied to the subject property in 1989. Prior to the
present zoning designation of GWC for the subject property, the property was
zoned CM, Commercial Manufacturing. Properties around the subject property
were zoned either CM or M3 prior to the 1989 zoning changes. The purpose
of the GWC zone is to provide "retail commercial uses appropriate along major
vehicular corridors." The GWC designation is designed to encourage mixed-use
developments. The goal of the GWC zone is to "promote a viable, unique and
recognizable commercial area along East Valley Highway." Section 15.04.195
of the Kent Zoning Code.
3
Findings and Recommendation
Venture 84 Rezone
#RZ-92-3
8. A. Several citizens with property interests nearby the proposed rezone
appeared at the public hearing to ask questions and voice concerns
about the GWC zoning designation. The concerns ranged from process
for identification of wetland areas to the need for predictability in
requests to change the GWC designation. Some citizens stated that the
GWC designation could become an impediment to reasonable
development of property.
B. The City Planning Department staff responded to each citizen. Staff
noted that a 1991 wetland delineation study had been completed by the
applicant and offered to share it with the person concerned about
wetland designations. Staff also noted that when the GWC designation
was put in place four years ago, it was believed that commercial
development would take place on lots as deep as this one (640 feet).
In fact, commercial development has not gone as deep as originally
believed. Staff cited several examples of development within the GWC
zone and noted that the developments were typically shallow lot
developments with the exception of two hotels. Staff noted that while
it may be appropriate to change the application of the GWC to only
shallow lots, realistically it will be many months before a general area-
wide rezone could be processed. In the meantime, property owners are
able to petition for a quasi-judicial rezone (such as this one) where the
entire process can be completed in a few months.
10. No one spoke in opposition to this request for a rezone.
CONCLUSIONS
1 . The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to conduct public hearings and make a
recommendation on a rezone petition as provided in Section 15.09.050 of the
Kent Zoning Code.
2. Notice of the public hearing on this application was published, posted and
.-mailed in accordance with Section 15.09.050(A)(2) of the Kent Zoning Code.
3. The Examiner has determined that this is a quasi-judicial rezone because,
among other reasons, this zoning application was applied for by one property
owner and affects only one parcel of property.
4. In order to evaluate a request for rezone, the Examiner must apply the following
standards and criteria and conclude that:
4
Findings and Recommendation
Venture 84 Rezone
#RZ-92-3
A. The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan;
B. The proposed rezone and subsequent development of the site would be
compatible with development in the vicinity;
C. The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the transportation system
in the vicinity of the property with significant adverse impacts which
cannot be mitigated;
D. Circumstances have changed substantially since the establishment of the
current zoning district to warrant the proposed rezone;
E. The proposed rezone will not adversely affect the health, safety, and
general welfare of the citizens of the City of Kent.
Based on the Findings detailed above and the Conclusions stated below, the
proposed rezone will meet these standards and criteria and should be
APPROVED.
2. Although the map designations in the Comprehensive Plan are for Commercial
development, the written goals of the comprehensive plan support a rezone of
the subject property to ensure that retail and commercial developments take
place in suitable locations and to promote fill-in development of an industrially
developed area.
3. The proposed use of the rezoned property is for the construction of a
warehouse. This use is compatible with land use developments in the vicinity.
4. The proposed use would not present a burden on traffic in the area as traffic
mitigation conditions were applied during the environmental review process.
5. Circumstances have changed since the property was zoned GWC in 1989.
Parcel A will retain the GWC zoning designation and only Parcel B (the western
415 feet of the site) would be rezoned to M3. That section of the site
proposed for a rezone is not suitable for commercial development because
access to Parcel B would be difficult to develop in a way that facilitates
commercial use of the site and effective commercial signs would not be
possible.
6. Since no one spoke in opposition to the proposed rezone, there is no evidence
that the proposed rezone would in any way be adverse to the public health,
welfare or safety of the citizens of Kent.
5
Findings and Recommendation
Venture 84 Rezone
#RZ-92-3
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the Findings and Conclusions specified above, the Examiner recommends
that the application for a rezone of property now designated as GWC, Gateway
Commercial, to M3, General Industrial, be APPROVED.
The applicant is also aware that any change in the proposed use of the subject
property will be subject to a new traffic analysis to determine appropriate mitigation
and may also be subject to other environmental reviews at the time a change in use
is proposed.
Dated this 18th day of February, 1993.
THEODORE PAUL HUNTER
Hearing Examiner
APPEALS FROM HEARING EXAMINER DECISIONS.
Request of Reconsideration
Any aggrieved person may request a reconsideration of a decision by the Hearing
Examiner if either (a) a specific error of fact, law, or judgment can be identified or (b)
new evidence is available which was not available at the time of the hearing.
Reconsideration requests should be addressed to: Hearing Examiner,
220 Fourth Avenue S., Kent, WA 98032. Reconsiderations are answered in writing
by the Hearing Examiner.
Notice of Right to Appeal
The decision of the Hearing Examiner is final unless a written appeal to the Council
is filed by a party within 14 days of the decision. The appeal must be filed with the
City. Clerk. Usually, new information cannot be raised on appeal. All relevant
information and arguments should be presented at the public hearing before the City
Council.
A recommendation by the Hearing Examiner to the City Council can also be appealed.
A recommendation is sent to the City Council for a final decision; however, a public
hearing is not held unless an appeal is filed.
c:rz923.fin
6
CITY OF Q\L22��
CITY OF KENT
KENT PLANNING AGENCY
(206) 859-3390
STAFF REPORT
®¢ � FOR HEARING EXAMINER MEETING OF FEBRUARY 3 , 1993
FILE NO: VENTURE 84 REZONE #RZ-92-3
APPLICANT: Bob Fadden, agent for Sound Ventures
REQUEST: A request to rezone 2 . 52 acres from the
current zoning of GWC, Gateway
Commercial, to M3 , General Industrial.
STAFF
REPRESENTATIVE: Laura Yeats Quilici, Planner
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL with one condition
I . GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Description of the Proposal
The applicant proposes to rezone 2. 52 acres from the
current zoning of GWC, Gateway Commercial, to M3 , General
Industrial, in order to construct a 46, 080 square foot,
speculative warehouse building.
B. Location
The subject property is located on the west side of
84th Avenue S. approximately 390 feet north of S. 222nd
Street. The rezone proposal consists of the western 445
feet of Parcel B of the subject property (parcel
#7759800040) . The remaining portion of Parcel B and
Parcel A, which fronts on 84th Avenue S. , will remain GWC
zoning.
C. Size of Property
The rezone proposal is 2 . 52 acres. The applicant has
also proposed a lot line adjustment to make the parcel
lines and zoning boundaries consistent.
D. zoning
Property to the west and north of the proposed site is
zoned M3, General Industrial. Property to the east and
south of the proposed site is zoned GWC, Gateway
Commercial.
1
Staff Report
Venture 84 Rezone
#RZ-92-3
E. Land Use
The area proposed for the rezone, Parcel B, is currently
vacant. Parcel A has an abandoned single family
structure and outbuilding. Surrounding land uses
include: Budget truck lot and Salmon Bay Steel to the
north, a vacant lot to the west, Motor and Control Co.
and a vacant single family structure to the south, and
several small industrial/commercial businesses across
84th Avenue S. to the east.
F. History
The subject property was annexed in the City of Kent on
August 31, 1955 as part of a 900 acre annexation. The
subject property and adjacent properties along 84th
Avenue South were rezoned to Gateway Commercial in 1989,
as part of a Comprehensive Plan Zoning Amendment
(#CPZ-89-1) .
II. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
A. Environmental Assessment
A final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS)
(#ENV-91-53) for the rezone proposal was issued on
June 26, 1992 subject to 11 conditions.
B. Significant Physical Features
Topography and Vegetation
The site is generally flat with two emergent wetlands.
The applicant has agreed to off-site mitigation for the
impacts associated with of filling . 49 acres of wetlands.
C. Significant Social Features
1. Street System
The subject property has access to 84th Avenue S. ,
(East Valley Highway) which is classified as a
principal arterial. The street has a public right-
of-way width of 82 feet while the actual width of
paving is 56 feet. The street is improved with
asphalt paving, curb and gutter and street
lighting. A widening strip will be required to be
deeded to the city as indicated in the of the
mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance
2
Staff Report
Venture 84 Rezone
#RZ-92-3
(#ENV-91-53) . The average daily traffic count on
the street is 21,400 vehicle trips per day.
2 . Water System
The site is served by a 16-inch water main located
adjacent to the property.
3 . Sanitary Sewer System
An 24-inch sanitary sewer main is located adjacent
to the site is available to serve the site.
4 . Stormwater System
A stormwater system is necessary to accommodate the
proposed development.
5 . LIDs
No Local Improvement Districts exist at this time.
III. CONSULTED DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
The following departments and agencies were advised of this
application:
City Administrator City Attorney
Director of Public Works Chief of Police
Parks & Recreation Director Fire Chief
Building Official City Clerk
In addition to the above, all persons owning property which
lies within 200 feet of the site were notified of the
application and of the public hearing.
Staff comments have been incorporated in the staff report
where applicable.
IV. PLANNING DEPARTMENT REVIEW
A. Comprehensive Plan
The following is a review of the City-wide Comprehensive
Plan and the Valley Floor Subarea Plan as they relate to
the subject property.
3
Staff Report
Venture 84 Rezone
#RZ-92-3
CITY-WIDE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The City-wide Comprehensive Plan is made up of two
entities, the Comprehensive Plan Map and the written
goals, objectives and policies. The Comprehensive Plan
Map designates that project site as C, Commercial.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
OVERALL GOAL: PROMOTE CONTROLLED ECONOMIC GROWTH WITH
ORDERLY PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT, RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND
PRESERVATION.
GOAL 1: Promote diverse industrial development in
industrially developed areas.
Goal 2 : Assure retail and commercial developments are
in suitable locations.
Planning Department Comment:
Prior to being zoned GWC, Gateway Commercial, the subject
site was zoned CM, Commercial Manufacturing. Properties
located to the north, south, and west were zoned either
CM or M3 , General Industrial. In general, the land uses
surrounding the proposed site were developed as
industrial prior to implementation of the GWC zone.
In the East Valley Study (#CPZ-89-1) , a generalized
commercial area was designated which bordered both sides
of 84th Avenue S. The exact boundaries for the
commercial district were established after a lengthy
analysis of the properties fronting 84th Avenue S. and
considerable input from the property owners. The
resultant zoning boundary was a compromise between
property dimensions and individual owners intentions .
The purpose of the GWC district, as outlined in Section
15 . 04 . 195 of the Kent Zoning Code, is to provide "retail
commercial uses appropriate along major vehicular
corridors. " The proposed rezone does not impact the
intent of the GWC zone because approximately 195 east -
west lineal feet of property fronting 84th Avenue S. will
remain available for commercial development. The portion
of land east of the proposed rezone site, which fronts
84th Avenue S. is more suitable for commercial
development. Because of signage requirements and the
need for visibility from passing traffic, a commercial
strip as deep as the existing lot (640 feet) creates some
portions undesirable for commercial development.
4
Staff Report
Venture 84 Rezone
#RZ-92-3
VALLEY FLOOR PLAN
The Valley Floor Plan Map designates the project site as
C. Commercial.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
OVERALL GOAL: PROMOTE CONTROLLED ECONOMIC GROWTH WITH
ORDERLY PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT, RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND
PRESERVATION.
GOAL 1: Promote fill-in development of industrially
developed area.
Objective 1: Minimize unnecessary public
improvements and provide efficient
municipal services.
Policy 7 : Areas rezoned for urban development
shall be compact rather than
scattered or strung out in linear
patterns along arterial streets
which would interfere with the
utility and integrity of lands that
are separated by the strip
development. Strip developments
also typically interfere with the
capacity and safety of arterial
streets serving them if each land
use has separate access.
Planning Department Comment
The proposed rezone is requested for a new industrial
building of approximately 46, 080 square feet. Approval
of the rezone would not result in separation of land or
strip development.
B. Standards and Criteria for a Rezone Request
The following standards and criteria (Kent Zoning Code,
Section 15. 09 . 050) are used by the Hearing Examiner and
City Council to evaluate a request for a rezone. Such an
amendment shall only be granted if the City Council
determines that the request is consistent with these
standards and criteria.
1. The proposed rezone is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
5
Staff Report
Venture 84 Rezone
#RZ-92-3
Planning Department Comment
The proposed rezone is not precisely consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and Valley Floor Plan map
designations; however, it is consistent with goals and
policies outlined in both (as discussed in Section IV. A.
of this report) .
2 . The proposed rezone and subsequent development of
the site would be compatible with development in
the vicinity.
Planning Department Comment
The proposed rezone would not have a negative impact on
future development consistent with the GWC zone purpose
because a portion of land suitable for commercial
development will remain along 84th Avenue S. The
applicant has proposed an 11, 700 square foot commercial
building on Parcel A, which fronts on 84th Avenue South.
The proposed lot sizes are adequate for future commercial
development, however, the details of site design,
including parking will be reviewed during the permitting
process.
3 . The proposed rezone will not unduly burden the
transportation system in the vicinity of the
property with significant adverse impacts which
cannot be mitigated.
Planning Department Comment
If the property is developed at a more intensive use
further review of the traffic impacts would be required.
Traffic impacts at proposed levels were addressed through
the SEPA process.
4 . Circumstances have changed substantially since the
establishment of the current zoning district to
warrant the proposed rezone.
Planning Department Comment
It is the intent of the GWC, Gateway Commercial, zoning
district to " . . promote flexibility in appropriate
areas of site design and to encourage mixed-use
developments. " The proposed rezone boundaries more
accurately reflect the needs of future users of the
remaining commercial area and allows additional
industrial use compatible with surrounding land uses.
6
Staff Report
Venture 84 Rezone
#RZ-92-3
5 . The proposed rezone will not adversely affect the
health, safety and general welfare of the citizens
of the City of Kent.
Planning Department Comment
The proposed rezone is consistent with the intent of the
City-wide Comprehensive Plan, the Valley Floor Plan and
meets the standards of other City Codes and Ordinances.
As a result the rezone proposal will not adversely affect
the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of
the City of Kent. The subsequent development will be
reviewed during the permitting process to ensure
compliance with applicable development standards.
V. CITY STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Upon review of the merits of this request and the Code
criteria for granting a rezone, the City staff recommends
APPROVAL of the Venture 84 Rezone request subject to the
following condition:
1. Any subsequent change in the use of the proposed site
shall be subject to a new traffic impact analysis to
determine appropriate mitigation.
KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT
January 21, 1993
c:rz923.rpt
7
City of Kent - Planning Department
S. 2 Ll ST /--
Nj
'Ar
d p
,oam'
�a o Q�Q
p o
oQ
y4y Y,3.
o� 1�n
N .
S. 222N0. 9T.
4w
III o
IS. 224TN. 5T. C�
APPLICATION NAME: venture 84
NUMBER: #RZ-92-3 DATE: February 3, 1993
REQUEST: Rezone ifth-
LEGEND
Application site
Zoning/Topography Map — Zoning boundary
Kent City Limits
City of Kent - Planning Department
S 216TH ST
w
L S
¢ 218TH ST
x
ca
r
m
rn
222ND ST
S 228TH ST a S 228TH ST
O w
2
0
z
N
Z
APPLICATION NAME: Venture 84
NUMBER: #RZ-92-3 DATE: February 3, 1993
REQUEST: Rezone -1-
LEGEND
Application site
Vicinity Map —i i Railroad tracks
Kent City Limits
City of Kent - Planning Department
_ n 3r 3r of•w s_ro•— 640.20' _ ._ ..—�—-- I
N
F/ PARCEL
PARCEL 'B' — t
v • RET.Wn LLB I n �— _� C
T.wn C
T LINE TO SE ADJUTT£O BLDG. 'A'
LDG. 'B' O .;. .W
B46.080 F.
= 11.700 S.r. —
RET.'w LL..
�I t
256'
F WI
N fl•J]'31'v' ... 6Z 20'
S I T E P L A N S LEP
a fo• 2s�sr���oo'
APPLICATION NAME: venture 84
NUMBER: #RZ-92-3 DATE: February 3, 1993
REQUEST: Rezone
LEGEND
Application site
Site Plan
City of Kent - Planning Department
t+n 640,29'
i
PARCEL A '
DUMPER ENCLOSURE PARCEL 'B' WE
� C RiT Y'1LL I LL ; O
ART.vTLL I= I u
c
BLDG. 'B' LOTLNETOREnO1V5E0 'BLDG. 'A'
o _ IL700 s.r. :d�wufrw i:u lr w
.a.oso s.r. � a I
I
e• - nR av W
-' NurlY sr ... 610.20'
S I T E P L A N x.LE I.
On
APPLICATION NAME: venture 84
NUMBER: #RZ-92-3 DATE: February 3, 1993
REQUEST: Rezone -�-
LEGEND
Application site
Site Plan
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6 . 1993
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF DISASTER MANAGER TO RECEIVE DISASTER
REIMBURSEMENT FUNDS
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The proposed resolution will provide the
mechanism for the City of Kent to receive funds to help defray
the costs incurred as a result of the January 20, 1993
Windstorm. This resolution is required under Federal Emergency
Management regulations.
3 . EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Resolution provided by the State Office
of Emergency Management
4. RECOMMENDED BY: Public Safety Committee (2-0 Mann & Orr.
Johnson not present)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO \ YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ N/A
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember-n�l/ Y moves, Councilmember seconds
to adopt Resolution No. l� appointing Chief Angelo as the
agent for the City of Kent to receive Disaster Reimbursement
funds.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION:—
Council Agenda
Item No. 4D
DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S AGENT
RESOLUTION
Be it resolved by of
(Governing Body) (Public Agency)
That NORM ANGELO FIRE CHIEF
(Name) (Title)
is hereby authorized to execute for and in behalf of THE CITY of KENT
, a public agency established under
the laws of the state of Washington. The purpose of this designation is to be the
authorized representative for obtaining federal and/or emergency or disaster
assistance funds.
Passed and approved this day of 1 9
(Name) (Title)
(Name) (Title)
(Name) (Title)
(Name) (Title)
(Name) (Title)
CERTIFICATION
l duly appointed and
(Name) (Title)
of do hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy
{Public Agency)
of a resolution passed and approved by the of
(Governing Body) (Public Agency)
on the day of , 19 _
Date:
(Official Position) (Signature)
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6. 1993
Category other Business
1. SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF SALE OF 800 MHz RADIO/MDT SYSTEM
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: Authority to negotiate the sale of the
backbone of the 800 MHz Radio and MDT System was previously
granted by the Council. Negotiations have resulted in a
tentative agreement which has been approved by Valley
Communication's Administrative Board. In accordance with
previous Council direction two capital accounts will be
established, one for police and one for fire. As funds from
the sale are received over the next four years, they will be
divided equally between police and fire for completion of
public safety bond related needs. The determination of
specific expenditures would be made through the Capital
Improvement Program or through future individual requests of
the respective departments. A market value lease of the land
of the Cambridge site would be executed.
3 . EXHIBITS: Executive Summary and agreement
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Fire and Police Administration, Public Safety
Committee (2-0 vote - Johnson not present)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ N/A
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember]LU" moves, Councilmember fifv-�J seconds
that the Mayor be authorized to execute an agreement -inaform-
SL1bS agreement- for the sale of
the 800 MHz Radio and MDT Systems and that two separate capital
accounts be established for completion of needs related to the
recently approved public safety bond issue.
DISCUSSION• y""
ACTION.
Council Agenda
Item No. 4E
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
MARCH 10, 1993
TO: KENT CITY COUNCIL
CHAIRPERSON JUDY WOODS
MEMBERS - JON JOHNSON, JIM WHITE, PAUL MANN, LEONA ORR,
JIM BENNETT, CHRISTI HOUSE-R�
FROM: NORM ANGELO, FIRE CHIEF
SUBJECT: 800 MHz TRUNKING RADIO SYSTEM
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
introduction/Background: In 1986, a Public Safety Bond Issue was passed. A key element in
that Bond Issue was the implementation of a Public Safety 800 MHz Trunked Radio System and
Mobile Data Terminal System. At the time, these items were proposed for the Bond Issue, it
was identified that the design and intent would be aimed at creating a system that could be
expanded sub-regionally and possibly regionally to truly integrate emergency police and fire
communications for daily as well as disaster interaction. It was also identified that from a long
term standpoint, it would be desirable to share the benefits and costs of sustaining such a system.
The expressed desire at that time was to get out of the radio system business and yet be part of
some joint venture.
Through the dedication and talents of Assistant Chief Kearns, we secured frequencies and the
successful implementation of the first Public Safety 800 MHz Trunldng Radio System in the
State of Washington. We implemented an equally successful Mobile Data Terminal System
which increased the Public Safety efficiency and effectiveness of both the Police and Fire
Departments.
Subsequently, our Department,again through the efforts of Assistant Chief Kevin Kearns had
a major impact in the setting of parameters, initial discussion and eventual development of a
County-wide regional approach. In conjunction with him, myself and the Director of Valley
Communications, we played a significant role in helping to develop a regional approach to
Public Safety communication. Valley Com was and is identified as a key sub-regional player.
Valley Com and it's principal owners have an immediate need for the systems Kent has
developed. More significantly, they have a need for control of the frequencies in Kent's system
to solidify Valley Com's role as a major player at the regional level. This role benefits
ourselves, as well as the other principals and subscribers to Valley Com, all of whom interact
frequently in cooperative emergency response.
On March 3, 1993, Council gave the Fire Department authorization to negotiate a contract for
sale of the Public Safety 800 MHz Trunking and MDT systems to Valley Com. A tentative
agreement for sale has been reached and approval by the Valley Com Administrative Board.
Funds for the purchase of the MDT system were already budgeted for in the Valley Com
Budget. Valley Com anticipates funding for the 800 MHz Trunking Radio System will be fully
covered by the recent 800 MHz County-wide levy. The net result will be no anticipated
additional budget adjustments to the principal owners of Valley Com. Kent will maintain
ownership and maintenance responsibilities for portable and mobile communication units already
owned. We would keep current levels of service, access and eventually benefit from enhanced
levels of service and access.
Payments would be made over the next four (4) years for the agreed amount of sale of
$1,172,827.84.
Recommended Action: In accordance with Council direction at the March 3, 1992, and August
15, 1989 Council meetings, two Public Safety capital accounts (one for Police and one for Fire)
would be established and funds split equally for completion of needs related to the original 1986
Public Safety Bond Issue needs. Expenditures from these accounts and their accrued interest
would be determined through the Capital Improvement process and/or by individual programs
by the respective departments with Council approval.
The team that negotiated the contract with Valley Com included Tony McCarthy, City Attorney
Roger Lubovich, Assistant City Attorney Laurie Evezich, Assistant Chief Kevin Kearns, Captain
Jim Miller and myself. The final contract and agreement have been reviewed and all personnel
concur that it should be recommended for your approval.
Additional parts of the agreement include entering into a land lease for the land under the
Cambridge Radio Site at a fair market value, assignment of control of frequencies to Valley Com
Principal agencies, assignment of existing leases such as the agreement with the Port of Seattle
and assignment or continuance of the lease with the County at the Squak Mountain Site.
Significance: This will allow us to complete needed emergency communication and other related
Public Safety Bond needs of both departments. Simultaneously, it enables us to maintain and
eventually enhance our functionality in emergency communication. It also meets the original
goal of remaining influential in a partnership to guide our best interests as a sub-regional player
in a comprehensive regional radio system. Doing this while spreading the financial cost and
overall responsibility with entities with whom we have common interests. The total agreement
is a fair and equitable solution.
Budget/Economic Impact: Future costs will be equitably shared and the fiscal load distributed
regionally. Funds received over time will allow Police and Fire to complete emergency
communication needs and parts of other incomplete projects identified in the Public Safety Bond
Issue.
Alternatives: None that would serve the community better.
AGREEMENT BETWEEN VALLEY COMMUNICATIONS CENTER AND THE CITY OF
KENT FOR PURCHASE BY VALLEY COMMUNICATIONS CENTER FROM THE CITY
OF KENT OF 800 MEGAHERTZ TRUNKED RADIO SYSTEM AND MOBILE DATA
TERMINAL COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of
February, 1993 , by and between Valley Communications Center, an
administrative agency formed and existing pursuant to RCW
39 . 34 . 030 ( 3 ) (b) ( hereinafter "Valley Coin" ) , and the City of Kent,
a municipal corporation, formed and existing under the laws of
the state of Washington (hereinafter "Kent" ) .
WHEREAS, Kent has purchased and developed an 800 megahertz
trunked radio system (hereinafter " 800 MHZ " system) , a mobile
data terminal communications system (hereinafter "MDT" ) and site
facilities to support both systems; and
WHEREAS, Valley Com has budgeted for and has need of the MDT
system; and
WHEREAS, the public has passed a levy for regional purchase
and coordination of an 800 MHZ system; and
WHEREAS, the 800 MHZ system involves the right to use
certain frequency licenses including several 806-821/851-866
( " 806 " ) frequencies that have unique regulations and which are
very valuable to the regional system; and
WHEREAS, Valley Com would be in a more advantageous
bargaining position as a subregion with respect to the use of the
800 MHZ system and the use of the " 806" frequencies as well as
the NPSPAC frequencies ( 821-824/866-869 ) ; and
WHEREAS, the regional levy has provided adequate funds to
either purchase the 800 MHZ system and use it, or, if the
Interlocal Agreement Between Vallee
Com and the City of Kent - I
technology is outdated, to pay the owner of the 800 MHZ system
for its initial investment; and
WHEREAS, monies have been preliminary budgeted for the
purpose of buying and using the 800 MHZ system or compensating
the owner thereof for the system should the technology by
outdated.
NOW, THEREFORE, in mutual consideration of the covenants set
forth below, the seller, City of Kent, and the purchaser, Valley
Communications Center, do hereby agree to the purchase and sale
of the 800 MHZ radio system and MDT system as follows .
1 . Bill of Sale: Kent does hereby bargain, sell and
convey unto Valley Com all right, title and interest to the 800
MHZ and MDT communications systems including frequency channels
assigned and licensed thereto, as more particularly described in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein as if fully
set forth.
2 . Assignment of Frequencies : Kent does hereby agree to
and does assign to Valley Com all frequencies licensed or
controlled by Kent for the 800 MHZ and MDT systems and Kent
agrees to take all necessary steps , except the payment of
relicensing fees , to see that the licenses are properly
transferred to Valley Com.
3 . Payment for 800 Trunked Radio System: Valley Com will
pay $850, 000 . 00 for the system. It is understood that the money
may come to Valley Com piecemeal and without any set time frame .
Once the money becomes available to Valley Com it will be paid
over to Kent . No interest will be charged . All payments must be
Intcrlocal Agreement Between Vallc}
Com and the Cit}-of Kent- 2
made by the end of 1996 . However, if the full $850 , 000 . 00 is not
obtained from the levy or through sale of pieces of equipment
through the levy, then the terms of payment will be renegotiated
between Kent and Valley Com.
4 . MDT System and Site Development Payments: Valley Com
will pay $322 , 827 . 84 for the MDT system and site development
costs to be paid over the years 1993 through 1996 . Kent will
receive the first payment of $125 , 000 . 00 in 1993 , with three
equal payments thereafter without interest . Kent and Valley Com
have agreed to assign the purchase price under this paragraph,
with $135, 885 . 59 being assigned to site development costs and
$186 , 942 . 25 being assigned to MDT systems costs .
S . 800 and MDT Service Levels: Valley Com will set
functional standards and enforce them so that the service levels
of the 800 MHZ and MDT systems will not degrade . If the
functional standards are violated, then Valley Com must upgrade
the systems , expand the systems , or allow no further users of the
systems . In the event there is degradation of the service levels
without adequate funding to upgrade or expand the systems , then
this issue shall be reopened for further negotiation .
6 . Talk Groups : Valley Com will set standards for the
use of talk groups and enforce them. To the extent that the
standards allow discretionary use of talk groups, Kent will have
the discretion to use the talk groups assigned to them in the
fashion that it wishes, subject to Valley Com operational rules .
The standard shall be designed so that there will be no
degradation of existing communications systems service or
Interlocal Agreement Between Valley
Corn and the Cite of Kent - 3
capacity in talk groups . It is realized that the regional rules
may alter this portion of the agreement, and this portion of the
agreement is intended to be in effect until regional rules are
adopted.
7 . Leases: Kent will assign the Port of Seattle
equipment space lease to Valley Com and will use its best efforts
to assign the Squak Mountain lease to Valley Com. If undue
problems occur in assigning the Squak Mountain lease to Valley
Com, then it will be kept in Kent ' s name and Kent will allow
Valley Com to use its lease with reimbursement to Kent for the
direct costs of such a lease .
Kent is presently using its Cambridge tank site as a
part of the 800 MHZ system and agrees to enter into a lease of
that portion of that property presently necessary for continued
use of the equipment necessary for the 800 MHZ . The parties
agree to pay and accept fair market rental for the property.
There is presently a proposal from Kent pending and Valley Com is
reviewing that offer. If the parties cannot agree on a lease
price or term, then the parties will appoint an arbitrator whose
decision on all lease terms including price and duration of lease
shall be final and binding upon both parties . If the parties
cannot agree on an arbitrator then each party shall appoint their
own arbitrator and the arbitrators shall appoint a third
arbitrator . The majority decision of the arbitrators will be
binding on the parties . The procedure on arbitration shall be
controlled by the Superior Court Mandatory Arbitration Rules
(MAR) and Local Rules (LRMAR) as much as is practical . The costs
Intcrlocal Agreement Between Valley
Com and the City of Kent-4
of arbitration, whether one person or three person arbitration,
will be split between the parties . Valley Com and Kent agree to
sign a lease document, whether arrived at through negotiation or
arbitration .
8 . Maintenance and Upgrade: Valley Com will become
responsible for the maintenance and necessary upgrades of the 800
MHZ and MDT systems upon signature of this agreement .
9 . Future Access: Valley Com will hereafter assume
Kent ' s responsibilities for dealing with the Port of Seattle over
any proposal to merge communication systems hereinafter .
Likewise, Valley Com will be responsible for entertaining any
other proposals for access to, use or merger with the Valley Com
MDT and 800 MHZ systems following signature of this agreement .
VALLEY COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS CITY OF KENT
By: By:
Its : Dan Kelleher, Mayor
ATTEST
By:
City Clerk
Approved as to form: Approved as to form:
By: By:
Lawrence J. Warren Roger A. Lubovich
City Attorney
City11:02.
lnterlocal Agrcement Between Valley
Com and the Cite of Kent- 5
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6 , 1993
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: LINDENTAL DEVELOPER AGREEMENT (272nd/277th
CORRIDOR)
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The Lindental Development is a plat
abutting the 277th Corridor at 116th Avenue SE. The Public
Works Committee recommends that the Public Works Director be
authorized to sign the Lindental developer agreement. By this
agreement, the City would be an agent acting on behalf of the
developer and the City would build a minimum road during the
plat development, that would later fit into alignment with the
corridor project.
3 . EXHIBITS: Public Works Committee Minutes, memorandum from
Public Works Director, vicinity map and developer
agreement
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (2-1 vote)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7. CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
that the Public Works Director be authorized to sign the
Lindental Plat Developer/City Agreement.
DISCUSSION:
w
ACTION: _ I�
V
Council Agenda
Item No. 4F
Wickstrom requested that a public hearing be set for the April 20th
Council meeting. If there are no major reactions or major
concerns, that it would be adopted at that time. If there were
major concerns, than it would come back to Public Works Committee
for further input.
Committee unanimously agreed recommendation of a public hearing for
May 4th.
Lindental Plat Development Agreement/277th St Corridor
Wickstrom explained that Lindental is one of many plats there were
approved by the County that abut the 277th Corridor project. These
plats are on 116th Ave SE. Wickstrom said that in the County ' s
approval, they approved various right of way widths, and grades and
as a result, were the developers to build their individual sections
of 116th Ave. , they wouldn ' t match vertically or horizontally with
each other. Wickstrom stated that the City was working with
Lindental, which is a major plat off of Kent Kangley and 116th; the
final plat had already been recorded and our approach was that we
wanted to get something that would fit with the future road, versus
various miscellaneous sections that didn 't fit. Wickstrom said,
under the agreement we would be an agent acting on behalf of the
developer; the City would build a minimum road that would fit with
the corridor project and the developer would pay the City what it
would have cost him for his original road section. Additionally,
the City would buy two lots from the development for future
detention facilities, which we would need as part of our widening
process per the corridor project. Wickstrom stated that the total
package will cost us about one-quarter million dollars, but we save
that in terms of having to re-work the area when we actually build
the corridor. Wickstrom stated that the developer has signed all
the necessary agreements . Wickstrom requested the Committee to
recommend the Public Works Director to be authorized to sign this
agreement.
Committee voted 2 - 1 to recommend authorization for the Public
Works Director to sign the Lindental Plat Development Agreement.
Street Cleaning
Linda Johnson of the Downtown Partnership, stated they would like
to use the work release prisoners to keep the streets clean, until
the new contract is written. Committee reviewed a memo received
from Human Resources Dept. regarding the use of prisoners for
street cleaning, which stated that the use of prisoners for street
cleaning could cause some major problems with the Teamsters Union
who normally perform this job function for the City. Wickstrom
suggested contacting the street sweeping contractor and try to work
out a different schedule for the downtown area. Jim White
directed staff to review this contract and bring this issue back to
Committee with recommendations.
2
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
MARCH 12, 1993
TO: PUBLIC WORKS COMM TTEE
FROM: DON WICKSTROM
RE: LINDENTAL PLAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT/
277TH STREET CORRIDOR PROJECT
There are several new plats that are in final design or
construction stages that border 116th Ave. S.E. within the City's
water/sewer area but just outside of the current City limits.
These developments have been in the platting process for several
years and were thus vested before the current moratorium took
affect. The plat of Lindental is one of the oldest and is- recorded
with the improvements bonded.
Other such plats which have received preliminary approval from King
County include Julie ' s Addition, Lindental Meadows, Lexington
Square and Little Bend.
Unfortunately, because of the timing of the plat applications and
the years between them, King County BALD approved a road alignment
for 116th Ave. S.E. , which was neither horizontally or vertically
consistent. .For example, the road right-of-way had several jogs in
it and the vertical profile required of one plat was significantly
different of the plat fronting the street on the opposite side.
After the City Council directed Engineering staff to prepare the
road establishment plans for submittal to King County last
September, our staff reviewed the King County plat requirements in
this vicinity. After many meetings and much negotiation with the
plat property owners and King County, a coordinated alignment of
116th Ave. was drawn with the concurrence of the County Roads
Division and Building and Land Development.
This coordinated alignment will allow the 277th Street Corridor
Project to be built with essentially no reconstruction and removal
of the plat improvements.
If this was not coordinated and each plat owner built their portion
of 116th Ave. , it would all would end up being torn up and
completely reconstructed when the Corridor was built.
In summary, this agreement for the coordinated road provides the
County and the City with the option of widening and overlaying the
road in the future with very minimal reconstruction costs and
eliminates the possibility of having to tear up and remove the
newly constructed improvements.
The key points of the agreement are as follows:
o The plat owners will have their engineer redesign the plans
for a coordinated 116th Ave. alignment.
o The City will pay the extra costs of the engineering.
o The owners will pay the City the costs for the 116th Ave. S.E.
road improvements fronting their plat that they would have had
to pay on their own. Then the City will build the coordinated
road for them.
o The City will pay the additional costs of the higher road
alignment with the wider shoulders.
o The owners are also agreeing to sell two lots to the City
which are at lowest point of the road profile, thereby
preserving an area for storm drainage, biofiltration/detention
should this be necessary for the widened roadway. If this is
not done, there is a high probability that the City would have
to condemn residentually developed property at a significant
expence later for these storm drainage improvements associated
with the Corridor Project.
Action requested: Authorize the Pubic Works Director to sign the
agreement with the owners of the plat of Lindental after agreement
details are completed and after signature by the owners of the plat
of Lindental.
D201
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this / 7 day of
/�jqV c L1 1993 , by and between the City of Kent, a
5 Fe oligvt i?, 6 +h/, c
Washington municipal corpora ion ("City") , and �
�4ttd.r,tt is 1=ac f i sr i?al i1 Q. lr«yvxcll B,
a Y corporation ("Owners") , who are the owners and
developers of certain real property located in unincorporated King
County, Washington (the "Plat of Lindental") , which property is
legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference.
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS, Owners received plat approval for their subdivision
from King County Building and Land Development ("County") on or
about December 24 , 1991 ; and
WHEREAS, as a condition to receiving final approval from King
County, the County required Owners to dedicate a southerly
extension of 116th Street SE , along the West border of their
property, which street extension is delineated on the Plat of
Lindental, as recorded in Volume 159 of Plats, Pages 33 through 40,
records of King County, Washington; and
WHEREAS, this same condition also required Owners to improve
the 116th Street SE extension to County standards; and
WHEREAS, the City has plans to construct a roadway (the
11272/277 Corridor") in King County that will encompass the same
alignment of 116th Street SE that the County required the Owners to
dedicate and improve; and
WHEREAS, the County' s road improvement requirements for 116th
Avenue S.E. were originally designed for a minor access street with
a low speed limit; and
LINDENTAL/277 CORRIDOR CONTRACT--Page 1 of 7
WHEREAS, the City has planned its 272/277 Corridor to
accommodate a forty-five (45) mile per hour design speed; and
WHEREAS, the City, the Owners and the County all agree that
the least disruptive and most cost efficient approach to developing
the 116th Street SE extension would be to construct the extension
in a manner and at a grade consistent with the City's design
standards for the 272/277 Corridor; and
WHEREAS, the City has agreed to pay for those 116th Street SE
extension improvements, to the extent they exceed the requirements
of the Owner' s approved 116th road plan, that will enable the
street to be built in a manner and at a grade consistent with the
City's 272/277 Corridor design; and
WHEREAS, the City, as a financial participant, must adhere to
local and state laws pertaining to public works projects; and
WHEREAS, the Owners and the City have determined that the
Owners will prepare construction plans and obtain permits and
approvals for the 116th Street SE project; and
WHEREAS, the Owners and •. the City have determined that the
City, because of its familiarity with applicable public works laws,
ordinances and regulations, should administer and construct the SE
116th Street extension project and should have the authority to act
for the Owners and make decisions for the Owners subject to the
terms and conditions expressed below.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1. Scope of Work. The work contemplated for this project is
to construct an extension of 116th Street SE from the north border
LINDENTAL/277 CORRIDOR CONTRACT--Page 2 of 7
of the Lindental Plat to its south border, as shown in Exhibit C,
which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
2 . Contract Administration. (a) The City shall utilize the
Owner's 116th Street SE extension contract drawings, plans,
specifications, estimates, contract documents, studies and all
other necessary documents. The City shall advertise the project
for public bids and the City shall enter into a construction
contract between the City and the lowest, responsible bidder. The
contract shall be administered under the direction of the City and
at the expense of the City and the Owners in the manner and in the
amounts hereinafter set forth in this agreement.
(b) All plans, drawings, specifications, estimates of
costs, contract documents and special provisions for the project
work, including any amendments thereto, shall be subject to the
prior written approval of the parties as set forth in this
agreement.
3 . Engineering. (a) Certain engineering costs, including
plans, drawings and special provisions for the project shall be
paid for by the City in the manner set forth in Exhibit D, which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. The
amounts due Owner described in Exhibit D are provided on a "total
cost not to exceed" basis, and the City shall not be liable for any
costs that exceed the amounts indicated in Exhibit D.
4 . Construction. (a) The City shall construct or cause to
be constructed the project in accordance with the plans, drawings,
specifications and special provisions referred to above. All
design and construction costs, as well as the performance of all
other work required in connection with the project, shall be paid
for by the City and Owners in the manner and in the proportions set
forth in this agreement.
LINDENTAL/277 CORRIDOR CONTRACT--Page 3 of 7
(b) To the extent allowed by applicable law or
ordinance, all plans and contracts relating to this agreement shall
be subject to the approval of the parties.
(c) The construction contract shall be limited to a
maximum of sixty (60) working days after issuance of the Notice to
Proceed.
5. Costs and Expenses. The costs and expenses of the
project construction shall be based on the quantities set forth in
Exhibit E. attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference; actual unit prices shall be determined upon award of the
project bid to the lowest responsible bidder. The determination of
project 'construction costs and expenses, upon award to the lowest
responsible bidder, shall also determine the total amounts to be
paid by the Owner for project construction, and the Owner shall not
be liable for any amounts in excess of those determined costs and
expenses, except as set forth in Exhibit E.
6. Permits and Approvals. The Owners shall obtain all
necessary permits and other approvals from the County and all other
regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over the project.
7. Easements and Property Acquisition. (a) The Owner
agrees to dedicate, by separate document in a form to be approved
by the City, a ten foot (101 ) wide sidewalk, slope and utility
easement along 116th Street SE as described in Exhibit B, which is
attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
(b) The Owner agrees to sell, by separate document in a
form to be approved by the City, Lots 58 , 59 and the west half of
Lot 60 of the Plat of Lindental to the City for appraised fair
market value. The City shall hire an appraiser to determine fair
market value. Owner represents that all lots affected by this sale
have had all utility stubs properly installed, and the appraiser's
LINDENTAL/277 CORRIDOR CONTRACT--Page 4 of 7
fair market valuation shall reflect same. Owner further represents
and agrees that, upon completion of the Plat of Lindental, all road
and plat improvements as planned in the Plat of Lindental shall
serve the lots affected by this sale, and the appraiser' s fair
market valuation shall reflect same.
The City agrees to pay for the cost of the appraisal and
for all recording fees. The cost of escrow, if utilized, shall be
evenly divided between the City and Owner. Real estate excise
taxes shall be prorated as of the date of closing of the sale.
Owner °shall pay all real estate commissions and fees, if any are
due as a result of this sale. Owner shall pay all liens and
assessments, including, but not limited to, water meter charges,
traffic mitigation fees and utility charges, prior to closing date
of the sale.
(c) Owner shall reserve an easement for monument signs
at the southwest corner of Lot 59 and the northwest corner of lot
58. The specific location of these easements shall be determined
prior to closing, and Owner may not so locate or determine these
reserved easements without first obtaining the City' s prior
approval. In any event, the maximum height of the signs shall be
six feet (61 ) , and the maximum width shall be fifteen feet (151 ) .
Further, Owner shall structurally design the signs to be integrated
into the roadway fill section. Finally, Owner agrees that the
existence of these signs on these easements shall diminish the
affected lots ' values, and the appraiser' s fair market valuation
shall reflect same.
8 . Indemnification. (a) Each party shall defend, indemnify
and hold the other party harmless from any and all claims,
injuries, damages, losses or suits, including all legal costs and
attorney fees, arising out of or in connection with the performance
of this agreement to the extent such claim, injury, loss or suit is
attributable to the comparative fault or negligence of that party.
LINDENTAL/277 CORRIDOR CONTRACT--Page 5 of 7
(b) IT IS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD
THAT THE INDEMNIFICATION PROVIDED HEREIN CONSTITUTES EACH PARTY'S
WAIVER OF IMMUNITY UNDER INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE, TITLE 51 RCW, SOLELY
FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS INDEMNIFICATION. THE PARTIES FURTHER
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE MUTUALLY NEGOTIATED THIS WAIVER.
(c) The provisions of this section shall survive the
expiration or termination of this Agreement.
9. Records. The City shall keep detailed records during the
performance of the contract work and all applicable warranty
periods that substantiate all project costs and shall make them
available to Owners, during regular business hours, in the event
that Owners should request to audit the project.
10. Disputes/Applicable Law. This agreement shall be
construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State
of Washington. In the event of any dispute between the parties
herein which cannot first be settled by the decision of the City,
both parties agree to resolve such dispute exclusively under the
jurisdiction, venue and rules of the Superior Court of King County,
Washington.
11. Severability. If any term, provision, condition or other
portion of this agreement, or its application to any person, is
held to be inoperative, invalid or void, then the same shall not
affect any other term, provision, condition or other portion of
this agreement or its application to any person.
12 . Notices. All notices given by either party to the other
party shall be in writing and may either be delivered personally or
may be deposited in the United States Mail, postage prepaid,
Certified mail, addressed as specified in the signature page
hereof, or to such other respective addresses that either party may
from time to time designate in writing. Notices sent by mail shall
LINDENTAL/277 CORRIDOR CONTRACT--Page 6 of 7 _
be deemed to have been delivered when properly mailed; the postmark
affixed by the United States Post Office shall be conclusive
evidence of the date of mailing. If delivered by mail, an
additional three (3) post office business days shall be added to
any applicable notice period.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have caused this
agreement to be executed the day and year first hereinabove
written.
CITY OF KENT OWNERS
<< h 0. h�,
by
by DON E. WICKSTROM - t�� ^�-
its Public Works Director =fie- 70, t-
«,s
L' it KG1 O 4�":-1 r/1✓1 by uw r -
-�s
NOTICES SHALL BE DELIVERED TO:
City of Kent
Director of Public Works
220 Fourth Avenue South
Kent, Washington 98032-5895
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, City Attorney
PUBPRIVK.Lin
LINDENTAL/277 CORRIDOR CONTRACT--Page 7 of 7
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PLAT OF LINDENTAL
The North half of the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of
Section 28, Township 22 North, Range 5 East, W.M;
Together with that portion of said Section 28 described as follows:
Beginning at a point where the section line running North and South
between Sections 28 and 29 in Township 22 North, intersects the
centerline of the Kent-Black Diamond Road No. 173 , (Kent-Kangley
Highway) ; THENCE Southeasterly along the centerline of said road,
652 feet, to the true point of beginning; THENCE due South 345
feet; to the quarter section line running East and West in said
Section 28; THENCE East along said quarter section line 675 feet to
its intersection with the centerline of said road; THENCE
northwesterly along the centerline of said road 735 feet to the
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
EXCEPT the West 20 feet thereof for Charles Raymond Road as
established in volume 13 of Commissioners Records, Pages 28 and 29;
AND EXCEPT THE FOLLOWING:
Beginning at the true point of beginning of the above described
main tract; THENCE due South 345 feet to the quarter section line
running East and West in said Section 28 ; thence East along said
quarter section line, 100 feet; THENCE Northeasterly to a point on
centerline of Kent-Black Diamond Road which is 240 feet
Southeasterly from the true point of beginning; THENCE
Northwesterly along said centerline 240 feet to the true point of
beginning of this exception; and EXCEPT that portion of said North
half of the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section
28, described as follows:
Beginning at the point of intersection on the previous South margin
of said Kent-Kangley Road (said South margin being 30 feet
Southerly of centerline of said Kent-Kangley Road) with the East
line of said Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of said
Section 28 , THENCE South along the East line 55 feet; THENCE
Westerly parallel with said South margin 50 feet; THENCE North at
right angles to the last described line 50 feet, more or less, to
said South margin; THENCE Easterly along said South margin 25 feet,
more or less, to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING of this exception as
conveyed to the City of Kent under Recording No. 7704110025;
AND EXCEPT that portion thereof, as conveyed to the State of
Washington under Recording No. 8202240645, lying Northeasterly of
a line drawn parallel with and 50 feet Southwesterly of, when
measured at right angles to, the SR 516 line survey of SR 516
(Secondary State Highway No. 5A) also known as the Kent-Kangley
Highway;
Situate in the County of King, State of Washington.
E)=1T "B"
PLAT OF LINDENTAL
SIDEWALK SLOPE AND UTILITY EASEMENT
ALONG 116TH AVENUE SE
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
The East 10 feet of the West 50 feet of the North half of the
Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 28, Township
22 North, Range 5 East, W.M. lying within Lots 43 , 44 , 55, 58 and
59 of the Plat of Lindental, as recorded in Volume 159 of Plats,
pages 33 through 40, records of King County, Washington.
\ p _
N N 3
Sr N S
Qp
1`to
bk3 �N I Win
' u I an0
Ia
'wb k3 ".r°'h D x a
41
O
O
N \
I x \
I o \
I Z
1 O `\ \
r
n ¢ W
x
W `a0 �1t W IW
W I I ^I p
3 a
: y
d N
a , r
N
I �
1 �
O I I P Dial
� I I � lW
Y
F
I I wEn
/
a Q
_ U
/n o 4. :.... :: _ w x w
/ ,. A.. �J w Lj O
LLJ
=a
W J
-___-_______ a fn
LJ a r
I w F_-___ .'i z a O d S Q V)
X O
K
tl'
as
0 i Ia„N W U
O / \ Q
Z W T�! L:1 3-;0.as
L£l0
O n I
� 1 � WP Pr ?
o O W R�Fw O
co N LO W{YW N
00 O TVI
O
Z)
\ � I
1 \ \ I
EXffiBIT "D"
RE-DESIGN COST ESTIMATE FOR 116TH AVE S.E. FOR PLAT OF LINDENTAL
The City shall reimburse the Owners for the following engineering
costs of their Engineer, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. :
1. Redesign of the plans, profile and $9, 500. 00
specifications for the City ' s road
section across the Plat of Lindental.
The redesign shall include bioswales,
ditches, storm drainage, rock walls
8 feet or less in height, pavement
sections and other pertinent items.
Plans and specifications shall be
complete and stamped by a registered
professional engineer.
The City will provide the retaining
wall detail designed by a structural
engineer for retaining walls in excess
of 8 feet.
2 . Meeting with County and City officials for $780. 00
review of the redesign work.
3 . Obtain and coordinate with agencies for $700. 00
revised permits as required.
Items 1 thru 3 above will be done on a
time and materials basis and shall not
exceed the amounts shown without prior
written City approval. See attached
schedule for billing rates.
Total (Not to Exceed) $10, 980. 00
The City shall reimburse Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. /R.
Guthrie Co. within 30 days after receipt of an invoice for
engineering services.
BARGHAUSEN CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC.
STANDARD INVOICING PROCEDURES
Contract Addendum
Engineer shall submit its invoices on a monthly basis on or about the last week of each month, and each invoice
shall be due and payable within 15 days of receipt by the client. Each invoice will reflect the billing as outlinec
in the contract Letter of Agreement. Retainers received will be deducted from final invoice at completion of
contract services. Lump-sum contracts will be billed monthly on a percentage of completion, or upon
completion of the project, at the Engineer's discretion, if the project can be completed within a 30-day period.
We reserve the right to increase contract prices at a rate equal to our average annual fee increase, if the
contract/work extends over 12 months (I year), and adjust time and materials contracts with a maximum budget,
based on our average rate increases. Projects that are set up on a time and materials basis or on the basis of
a maximum budget will be billed monthly with an itemization of the services provided, per the following fee
schedules (as of January 1993).
Washington:
Principal Engineer $ 80.00 per hour
Senior Project Engineer $ 68.00 per hour
Project Engineer $ 60.00 per hour
Building/Permit Engineer $ 60.00 per hour
Design Engineer $ 50.00 per hour
Engineering Technician $ 40.00 per hour
Senior Project Architect $ 68.00 per hour
Project Architect $ 60.00 per hour
Landscape Architect $ 50.00 per hour
Senior Drafter $ 48.00 per hour
Drafter $ 40.00 per hour
Senior CADD Technician $ 55.00 per hour
CADD Technician $ 45.00 per hour
Two-Man Survey Crew $ 88.00 per hour
Three-Man Survey Crew $102.00 per hour
Survey Manager $ 60.00 per hour
Professional Land Surveyor $ 60.00 per hour
Survey Technician $ 46.00 per hour
Planning Manager $ 65.00 per hour
Senior Planner $ 58.00 per hour
Staff Planner $ 50.00 per hour
Planning Technician $ 46.00 per hour
Support Services $ 20.00 per hour
Expert Witness $125.00 per hour
Computer Time $ 25.00 per hour
All reimbursable fees and expenses, including subconsultants retained by the Engineer on behalf of the client,
shall be billed to the client on a monthly basis, together with the professional engineering service fees. Such
expenses shall be due and payable by the owner each month, along with the professional service fees outlined.
Engineer reserves the right to assess a "late payment" charge on all invoices past due by 30 days or more. -The
late payment charge may be assessed at a maximum of 1 1/2 percent computed monthly (18% per annum), and
client hereby agrees that such interest charges will be acceptable. Engineer reserves the sole right to waive
these interest charges.
In order to preserve our lien rights, the laws of the State of Washington require that we advise you that we are
furnishing services and materials for use upon your property, and that we may claim a lien for the value of those
services and materials. We certainly have no reason to anticipate the necessity of making such a claim of lien,
and trust that you will not construe this notification as any reflection upon you. It is sent only because we are
required by statute (R.C.W. 60.04.020) to do so.
In case of suit or if this account is placed in attorney's hands for collection, undersigned shall pay all costs of
suit and of collection, including any and all attorney's fees actually incurred by the Engineer to the particular
attorneys involved at such attorneys' then normal hourly rates and this paragraph shall constitute an instruction
to any court involved in such suit or collection that such rate or rates shall be deemed reasonable.
BCE/AF.085 (rcv. 12/9/92) Client's Initials
EX11 Br "Ell
CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FOR 116TH AVE S.E. FOR PLAT OF LINDENTAL
The following cost estimate is based on a 35mph design speed and
the previous planned improvement approved by King County:
Item Estimated Estimated
No. Description Ouantity Unit Price* Cost
1 Gravel Borrow 6500 tons** 8 . 00 $52 , 000
2 Crushed Surfacing 387 tons 10. 00 3 , 870
3 A.C. Pavement Cl. "B" 325 tons 32 . 00 10, 400
4 Remove Ex. Pavement 400 s.y. 4 . 00 1, 600
5 C.B. Type I 2 each 750. 00 11500
6 C.B. Type II 3 each 1400. 00 4 , 200
7 12" CMP Pipe 425 l. f. 15 . 00 61375
8 Road Side Ditch 600 l. f. 3 . 00 11800
9 5 ' Wide Sidewalk 600 l. f. 9 . 00 51400
10 Vertical Curb & Gutter 600 l. f. 7 . 50 41500
11 36" CMP Culvert 70 l . f. 70. 00 4 , 900
12 Roadway Excavation ,
Including Haul 1200 c.y. ** 2 . 00 2 , 400
Subtotal Construction $98 , 945
13 . Construction staking for 116th Ave. S. E.
(Barghausen Consulting Engineers estimate) 31500
14 . Soils testing for excavated material
to be used as roadway fill. 500
Total $102 , 945
* Unit prices are estimated. Actual costs shall be based on
the lowest responsible bid. The estimated prices listed above
shall be used for any items which are not included in the
construction contract.
** This quantity assumes that 1200 c.y. of roadway excavation
(item 12) will be used as roadway fill.
The Owner hereby agrees to reimburse the City for the additional
costs for the extra gravel borrow and removal of the unsuitable
material if it is determined that the roadway excavation is not
suitable to be used as roadway fill. The additional amount is
estimated at $24 , 960 . 00 (which is 1200 c.y. of item 1 x 1. 85 tons
per c.y. x $8 . 00 = $17, 760 for gravel borrow plus 1200 c.y. x $6. 00
_ $7, 200 for removal of unsuitable material)
Exhibit "E" Cont 'd
The Owner agrees to pay the City the full amount of the actual
construction costs based on the quantity figures above and the unit
bid prices of the lowest responsible bidder.
For items which will not be bid for the City interim road section,
(i.e. items 5, 6, 71 91 10, 13 and 14) the Owner agrees to pay the
cost shown above for the quantities listed, for each of these
items.
The Owner agrees to pay the total of this amount (which shall be
re-calculated after bid opening using the actual bid prices) within
2 weeks after notification of the final amount by the City.
For purposes of this agreement the following constitutes
definitions of the listed bid items:
1. Gravel Borrow: Supply and compaction of imported bankrun
material meeting City Standard Specification Section 4-02
compacted to 95% of the maximum dry density including
hauling and watering.
2 . Crushed surfacing: Supply and compaction of crushed
surfacing top course and base course meeting section 9-
03 . 9 (3) of the 1991 WSDOT/APWA Standard Specifications
compacted to 95% of the maximum dry density.
3 . A. C. Pavement, Class "B" : The grade of paving asphalt
shall be AR-4000. Tack coat shall be Emulsified Asphalt
SS-1. Paving work shall meet the requirements of Section
5-04 . 3 of the 1991 WSDOT/APWA Standard Specifications .
4 . Remove Existing Pavement: Remove, haul, and dispose of
r existing asphalt or concrete pavement for a depth of up
to 6" .
8 . Road Side Ditch: Excavate, grade and shape the ditch to
the required elevations. Maximum side slope shall be 2
to 1. - --
11. 36" CMP Culvert: Furnish and install corrugated steel
culvert pipe, gage to be determined by design engineer.
The pipe shall be coated with protective treatment 1.
Pipe and treatment shall meet the requirements of Section
9-05. 4 of the 1991 WSDOT/APWA Standard Specifications.
12 . Roadway Excavation, Including Haul: This item shall
include excavating, hauling, placing and compacting
material to 95% of the maximum dry density.
U
7
W N
> N —C: 0
Z
_ m
W
On
W w c 0
cr z E
co W o N O 0
tu w ° ' N Z La C2
5r`
LL a
J
IL
9 °
3S 3Atl 419E c ��
a LO
CN
3Atl 41YLL
c I-a
N
Q
s° 7
C3
h 9
3S 34V 41901
°
e
I N
I
m o v c
al % �° oi
3S 3Atl 41170E
P I
� a I
I
• I
1
' d J
U
1 ao
G1ag°��e
0�
b
O
I
I N
00 O o
I and ,I�°
I m N
$ c
P�
$ B
'A'MH A°OeA 1003 o
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6. 1993
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: RESTRICTED PARKING ZONES
444 2. SUMMARY STATEMENT: Submitted for Council consideration and
adoption is an enabling ordinance providing authority to create
restricted parking zones and issue parking permits. Once
adopted, the City may designate, by separate ordinance, certain
areas restricted parking and issue permits for the same.
k
.1
i
3 . EXHIBITS: Ordinance
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee 2-0 (White not present)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: N0 YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6 . EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS•
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
to adopt Ordinance No. relating to restricted parking
zones.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 4G
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City
Council of the City of Kent,
Washington, relating to restricted
parking zones: amending Kent City
Code Chapter 9 . 38 by adding
Sections 9 . 38 . 200, 9 . 38 . 210, and
9 . 38 . 220.
WHEREAS, the parking of vehicles on City streets in
high traffic areas poses a risk and hazard to the public safety
and welfare, including but not limited to the safety and repose
of certain neighborhoods, noise disturbance and obstruction of
vehicular traffic;
WHEREAS , the City Council seeks to establish a
procedure to implement restricted parking zones; NOW THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS ;
Section 1 . Kent City Code Chapter 9 . 38 is amended by
adding thereto a new section 9 . 38 . 200 to read as follows:
9 . 38 . 200 AUTHORITY FOR, ADMINISTRATION OF, RESTRICTED
PARKING ZONES .
A. The City by ordinance may establish restricted parking
zones on City streets and other right-of-ways as follows:
1. Street parking may be reserved for
exclusive use by the owners of the properties
directly abutting the street parking area or,
alternatively, by the residents in a
prescribed vicinity.
2 . The Public Works Director or his/her
designee, in his/her discretion, may expand
the restricted use to allow adjacent or
vicinity parking for vehicles used by
visitors or may expand the restricted use to
allow adjacent or vicinity parking for
service vehicles of persons or entities so
long as such parking is necessary to conduct
business.
3 . Parking restriction created under this
Section may be implemented on a full or part-
time basis, so long as the restrictions apply
on a regular, predictable schedule. If the
restrictions are implemented on a part-time
basis, the applicable street parking
regulations that would otherwise be in effect
shall apply during all nonrestricted times.
B. In any restricted parking zone, the Public Works
Director or his/her designee may issue permits or other means of
identification, maintain lists of vehicles owned or used by
residents, or adopt any other reasonable means of distinguishing,
from other vehicles, vehicles that can validly be parked in any
restricted parking zone. Permits or other means of
identification showing resident parking privileges shall be valid
2
for a one (1) year period. The establishment of restricted
parking zones shall not limit parking of vehicles displaying a
card or decal issued pursuant to RCW 46. 16. 381-Special Parking
for Disabled Persons. Restricted parking zones shall be
appropriately signed and/or marked.
C. Any violation of a restricted parking zone established
under authority of this section shall be an infraction and
punishable by a monetary penalty of twenty-five dollars .
Vehicles in violation are subject to impoundment as provided in
Kent City Code Section 9 . 39 . 030 .
Section 2 . Kent City Code Chapter 9 . 38 is amended by
adding thereto a new Section 9 . 38 . 210 to read as follows:
9 . 38 . 210 ESTABLISHING RESTRICTED PARKING ZONES .
A. Upon receipt of a petition by two-thirds (2/3) of the
residents living on properties directly abutting the requested
restricted area, the Public Works Committee shall hold a public
meeting. The public meeting shall be held within sixty (60) days
of receipt of the petition. Thereafter, the Public Works
Committee shall forward the petition and its recommendations
thereon, to the City Council for consideration.
B. Based upon the above criteria, a request for a
restricted parking zone may be denied.
C. Restricted parking zones shall be established by
ordinance.
D. The Public Works Committee shall determine after review
by the Public Works Directof or his/her designee, based upon
population density and available space, the number of permits
that shall be available for applicants in each zone.
3
E. A parking restriction shall first take effect on a
street segment when it is signed or posted, and shall cease when
the signs or posting are removed pursuant to lawful order;
provided, that vandalism or destruction of parking control signs
shall not effect the validity of a restriction upon parking on
any street segment, if other signs or traffic control devices
give notice that parking in the street segment is restricted.
F. City Council by ordinance may, in its discretion,
revoke permits issued under this section and/or eliminate
restricted parking zones established under this section. Permits
shall become null and void from the date of revocation or
elimination of the restricted parking zone.
Section 3 . Kent City Code Chapter 9 . 38 . is amended
thereto by adding a new Section 9 . 38 . 220 to read as follows:
9 . 38 . 220 FEES FOR RESIDENT IDENTIFICATION PERMITS .
The Engineering Department shall collect from the
recipient a fee of twenty dollars ($20) for each regular resident
identification permit sticker issued for a one (1) year period,
or for each identification of preferential parking privilege
using other means except for fees stated below:
TYPE OF PERMIT FEE
Elderly/Low Income Permanent Permit $ 5 . 00
4
Section 4 . Sever ability. The provisions of this
ordinance are declared to be separate and severable. The
invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision,
section or portion of this ordinance, or the invalidity of the
application thereof to any person or circumstance shall not
affect the validity of the remainder of this ordinance, or the
validity of its applications to other persons or circumstances.
Section 5. 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
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED day of 1993 .
APPROVED day of 1993 .
PUBLISHED day of 1993 .
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, CITY CLERK
prkrstr.ord
5
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6. 1993
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: HEATH TECHNA FRANCHISE
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: The date has been set for the first
reading of the Heath Techna Franchise agreement relating to the
use of communication line duct bank facilities under and across
S. 200th Street. Because this is a franchise, state law
requires at least two Council readings of the ordinance before
formal action is taken. -T---se. d r-�
3 . EXHIBITS: Excerpt from Public Works Committee minutes and
ordinance
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Public Works Committee (3-0 vote)
(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-L4.8 moves, Councilmember seconds
that the second reading of the Heath Techna Franchise be set
for April 20, 1993 .
DISCUSSION: V/�/"� (�
ACTION: r C "
Council Agenda
Item No. 4H
Heath Techna Franchise
Brubaker stated that Heath Techna Corporation wants to place a data
communication transmission line under the street between two of
their warehouses . The City has required a franchise from them
because it goes across public right of way. Brubaker explained
that this franchise is for one isolated line. Jim White asked if
a franchise fee is required. Brubaker responded that no fee is
required and the bond requirement has also been eliminated.
Essentially, this gives the City some control in the future and in
the event we want to widen the street, Heath Techna will remove the
line at their expense and relocate it.
Committee unanimously agreed to recommend approval of the Heath
Techna Franchise.
Brubaker commented that the legal descriptions will be attached
when the Franchise comes before Council. Brubaker also noted two
readings are required; it will go before Council for a first
reading on January 19th and then passed under the Consent calendar
on February 2nd.
Cable T.V. Franchise
Brubaker explained that the current Cable T.V. Franchise is up for
renewal with TCI Cablevision. The City has been in negotiations
thru Brubaker and Don Olson for well over a year and have put
together two ordinances; a master ordinance which sets the general
parameters for any cable operator who comes into the City of Kent
and the franchise ordinance which will specifically apply to TCI.
Brubaker said that essentially the longer a franchise we grant, the
more the cable company will be willing to cooperate with the City
and provide additional services; the shorter the franchise term the
less they are going to be willing to do. In this situation, there
are some services the City wants to be able to provide and in an
attempt to obtain those services Brubaker stated that he has
negotiated at this point, a 15 year franchise; if we shorten the
franchise term they will start to bargain away some of the
services .
Brubaker explained that the cable T.V. industry is controlled by
Federal' Law and the cable T.V. lobby has been powerful in the past.
We do not have rate-setting authority; we cannot cancel their
franchise without a strong showing of basically a poor operation.
The main bargaining tool is the term of the franchise. With the
new cable law that was passed, it will give us potentially some
rate-setting authority but we have to wait until the FCC issues
some rules and regulations. Brubaker said the bargaining has
resulted in the following - they will provide us with a live
broadcast ability out of City Hall. They will install three remote
control cameras in City Hall Chambers for live broadcasts of all
Council meetings, Committee meetings, Hearing Examiner and any open
2
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE of the City of
Kent, Washington, granting unto
Heath Techna, Inc. , a Delaware
corporation, its successors and
assigns, the right, privilege,
authority and franchise for ten
years, to construct, attach,
maintain, repair, replace, operate
and use communication line duct bank
facilities under and across South
200th Street within the City Of
Kent.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON
DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Franchise Granted
1. 1 Pursuant to the laws of the State of Washington
(including, but not limited to, RCW 35A. 47 . 040 and RCW
80 . 32 . 010) , the City of Kent, a Washington municipal corporation
("City") , hereby grants to Heath Techna Corporation, a Delaware
corporation ("Heath Techna") , subject to the terms and conditions
set forth hereinafter, a franchise for a period of ten years,
commencing on the effective date of this ordinance.
1. 2 This Franchise grants Heath Techna the right,
privilege and authority to install a casing pipe as reflected in
the attached map, attached hereto and incorporated herein as
Exhibit A, for the specific purpose to insert a communication and
data transmission wire under, across and through a portion of South
200 St. in the City of Kent (the "Franchise Area") , which Franchise
1
Area is legally described in Exhibit B, attached hereto and
incorporated herein by this reference, and which shall serve to
link two properties owned or controlled by Heath Techna, which
properties are described in Exhibits C and D, attached hereto- and
incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2 . Nonexclusive Franchise Grant
2 . 1 This Franchise is granted upon the express condition
that it shall not in any manner prevent the City from granting
other or further franchises which do not interfere with Heath
Techna ' s rights under this Franchise. This Franchise shall in no
way prevent or prohibit the City from using the Franchise Area in
a manner consistent with this Franchise or affect its jurisdiction
over the Franchise Area. The City shall retain power to make all
necessary changes, relocations, repairs, maintenance, and
improvements in, of or to South 200th Street, including the
Franchise Area, as the City may deem fit.
Section 3 . Relocation of Heath Techna' s Facilities
3 . 1 Whenever the City undertakes (or causes to be
undertaken at City expense) public improvements (e.g. , improvements
to City streets and/or City utilities) and such public improvements
require the relocation of Heath Techna' s then existing facilities
within the Franchise Area, the City shall:
3 . 1. 1 provide Heath Techna, at least thirty (30)
days prior to the city' s commencement of activities
requiring such relocation, written notice requesting such
relocation; and
2
3 . 1. 2 provide Heath Techna with copies of pertinent
portions of the City' s plans and specifications for such
public improvements and a proposed location for Heath
Techna' s facilities so that Heath Techna may relocate its
facilities to another location in order to accommodate
the City' s project.
After receipt of such notice and such other information, Heath
Techna shall relocate such facilities within the Franchise Area at
no charge to the City. Heath Techna shall make every reasonable
effort, subject to matters beyond its control, to complete the
relocation of such Facilities so as not to delay the City' s public
improvement project.
3 . 2 In connection with the relocation of Heath Techna ' s
Facilities in accordance with subsection 3 . 1 above, Heath Techna
may, after receipt of written notice requesting a relocation of its
Facilities within the Franchise Area, submit to the City written
alternatives to such relocation. The City shall evaluate such
alternatives and advise Heath Techna in writing if one or more of
the alternatives is suitable to accommodate the work which would
otherwise necessitate relocation of the Facilities. In the event
the City ultimately determines that there is no other reasonable
alternative, Heath Techna shall relocate its Facilities within the
Franchise Area as otherwise provided in subsection 3 . 1.
3 . 3 Any condition or requirement imposed by the City
upon any person or entity other than Heath Techna (including,
without limitation, any condition or requirement imposed pursuant
to any contract or in conjunction with approvals or permits for
zoning, land use, construction or development) that requires the
relocation of Heath Techna ' s Facilities shall be deemed to be a
relocation within the purview of this subsection 3 . 3 .
3
Section 4 . Placement of Facilities, Permits, Coordination of
Activities, Excavations
4 . 1 Heath Techna shall at all times maintain its
Facilities within the Franchise Area so as not to unreasonably
interfere with the free passage of traffic or the use and enjoyment
of adjoining property. Heath Techna shall at all times post and
maintain proper barricades and comply with all applicable safety
regulations during such period of construction as required by the
ordinances of the City or the laws of the State of Washington.
4 . 2 Heath Techna shall, in carrying out any authorized
activities within the Franchise Area, comply with all applicable
City ordinances, codes, regulations, standards and procedures as
now or hereafter amended, and shall obtain all necessary permits or
approvals ; provided, however, that if any term or condition of this
Franchise and any term or condition of such ordinances, codes,
regulations, standards, procedures, permits or approvals are in
conflict, the term or condition of this Franchise shall govern and
control .
4 . 3 Heath Techna and the City shall each exercise best
efforts to coordinate construction work either may undertake within
the Franchise Area so as to promote the orderly and expeditious
performance and completion of such work as a whole.
4 . 4 If, at any time or from time to time, either Heath
Techna or the City shall cause excavations to be made within the
Franchise Area, the party causing such excavation to be made shall
afford the other, upon receipt of a written request to do so, an
opportunity to use such excavation, provided that: (a) such joint
use shall not unreasonably delay the work of the party causing the
excavation to be made; and (b) such joint use shall be arranged and
accomplished on terms and conditions satisfactory to both parties.
4
Section 5. Restoration after Construction
Whenever it shall be necessary for Heath Techna, in the
exercise of its rights under this Franchise, to disturb the surface
of the Franchise Area, Heath Techna shall restore the surface of
the Franchise Area to at least a condition the same as it was in
immediately prior to any such disturbance. All concrete encased
monuments which have been disturbed or displaced by such work shall
be restored pursuant to all federal, state and local standards and
specifications. Heath Techna agrees to promptly complete all such
restoration work at its sole cost and expense.
Section 6 . Lateral Support
6. 1 Whenever construction, installation or excavation of
Facilities within the Franchise Area have caused or contribute to
a condition that appears to substantially impair the lateral
support of the Franchise Area, the Public Works Director may direct
Heath Techna, at Heath Techna ' s own expense, to take such actions
with respect to its Facilities within the Franchise Area so as not
to impair the lateral support thereof.
Section 7 . Indemnification
7 . 1 Heath Techna shall defend, indemnify and hold the
City, its officers, officials, employees, agents and volunteers
harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses or
suits, including all legal costs and attorney fees, arising out of
or in connection with the performance of this Franchise agreement,
except for injuries and damages caused by the sole negligence of
the City.
5
7 . 2 The City's inspection or acceptance of any of Heath
Techna ' s work when completed shall not be grounds to avoid any of
these covenants of indemnification.
7 . 3 Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine
that this Franchise agreement is subject to RCW 4 . 24 . 115, then, in
the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to
persons or damages to property caused by or resulting from the
concurrent negligence of Heath Techna and the City, its officers,
officials, employees, agents and volunteers, Heath Techna ' s
liability hereunder shall be only to the extent of Heath Techna ' s
negligence.
7 . 4 IT IS FURTHER SPECIFICALLY AND EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD
THAT THE INDEMNIFICATION PROVIDED HEREIN CONSTITUTES HEATH TECHNA'S
WAIVER OF IMMUNITY UNDER INDUSTRIAL INSURANCE, TITLE 51 RCW, SOLELY
FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS INDEMNIFICATION. THE PARTIES FURTHER
ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE MUTUALLY NEGOTIATED THIS WAIVER.
7 . 5 The provisions of this section shall survive the
expiration or termination of this Agreement.
Section 8. Insurance
8 . 1 Heath Techna shall procure and maintain for the
duration of this Franchise agreement, insurance against claims for
injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or
in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by Heath
Techna, its agents, representatives, employees, subconsultants or
subcontractors.
8 . 2 Prior to the adoption of this Franchise ordinance,
Heath Techna shall provide a Certificate of Insurance evidencing:
6
8 . 2 . 1 Automobile Liability insurance with limits
no less than $1, 000, o00 combined single limit per
accident for bodily injury and property damage; and
8 . 2 . 2 Commercial General Liability insurance
written on an occurrence basis with limits no less than
$1, 00o, 00o combined single limit per occurrence and
$2 , o00, 000 aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury
and property damage. Coverage shall include but not be
limited to: blanket contractual ; products/completed
operations/broad form property damage; explosion,
collapse and underground (XCu) if applicable; and
employer' s liability.
8 . 3 Any payment of deductible or self insured retention
shall be the sole responsibility of Heath Techna.
8 . 4 The City, its officers, officials, employees, agents
and volunteers shall be named as an additional insured on the
insurance policy, as respects work performed by or on behalf of
Heath Techna and a copy of the endorsement naming the City as
additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of
Insurance.
8 . 5 Heath Techna ' s insurance shall contain a clause
stating that coverage shall apply separately to each insured
against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respects
to the limits of the insurer' s liability.
8 . 6 Heath Techna ' s insurance shall be primary insurance
as respects the City, and the City shall be given thirty (30)
calendar days prior written notice by certified mail, return
receipt requested, of any cancellation, suspension or material
change in coverage.
Section 9. Abandonment of Heath Techna' s Facilities
9 . 1 Any plan for abandonment or removal of Heath
Techna 's Facilities within the Franchise Area must be first
approved by the Public Works Director, and all necessary permits
must be obtained prior to such work.
Section 10 . Modification
10. 1 This Franchise may be amended only by written
instrument, signed by both parties, which specifically states that
it is an amendment to this Franchise and is approved and executed
in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Without
limiting the generality of the foregoing, this Franchise
(including, without limitation, subsection 4 . 2 above) shall govern
and supersede any permit, approval , license, agreement or other
document required by or obtained from the City in, conjunction with
the exercise (or failure to exercise) by Heath Techna of any and
all rights, benefits, privileges , obligations or duties in and
under this Franchise, unless such permit, approval , license,
agreement or other document specifically:
10 . 1. 1 references this Franchise; and
10. 1. 2 states that it supersedes this Franchise to
the extent it contains terms and conditions which change,
modify, delete, add to, supplement or otherwise amend the
terms and conditions of this Franchise.
In the event of any conflict or inconsistency between the
provisions of this Franchise and the provisions of any such permit,
approval , license, agreement or other document, the provisions of
this Franchise shall control .
8
Section 11. Forfeiture and other Remedies
11. 1 If Heath Techna willfully violates or fails to
comply with any of the provisions of this Franchise, or through
willful or unreasonable negligence fails to heed or comply with any
notice given Heath Techna by the City under the provisions of this
Franchise, then Heath Techna shall , at the election of the Kent
City Council, forfeit all rights conferred hereunder and this
Franchise may be revoked or annulled by the council after a hearing
held upon reasonable notice to Heath Techna.
11. 2 The right of the City to declare a forfeiture
pursuant to subsection 12 . 1 is a remedy in addition to, and is not
a limitation of, the rights, remedies or actions available to
either party by reason of the other party ' s noncompliance with the
terms and conditions of this Franchise.
Section 12 . City Ordinances and Regulations
12 . 1 Nothing herein shall be deemed to direct or
restrict the city ' s ability to adopt and enforce all necessary and
appropriate ordinances regulating the performance of the conditions
of this Franchise, including any reasonable ordinance made in the
exercise of its police powers in the interest of public safety and
for the welfare of the public.
Section 13 . Publication, Plan Review and Inspection Costs
13 . 1 The cost of the publication of this Ordinance shall
be borne by Heath Techna. Additionally, all the city' s plan review
and inspection costs arising from or connected with the
construction of the facilities contemplated to be built as a result
of this franchise shall be borne by Heath Techna.
9
Section 14 . Acceptance
14 . 1 After the passage and approval of this ordinance
and within sixty (60) days after such approval, this Franchise
shall, if accepted by Heath Techna, be accepted by Heath Techna by
its filing with the City Clerk an unconditional written acceptance
thereof. Failure of Heath Techna to so accept this franchise
within said period of time shall be deemed a rejection thereof by
Heath Techna, and the rights and privileges herein granted shall ,
after the expiration of the sixty-day period, absolutely cease,
unless the time period is extended by ordinance duly passed for
that purpose.
Section 15. Survival
15. 1 With respect only to matters arising during the
period of time this Franchise is in effect, the parties intend that
any term or condition applicable to such matters shall survive the
expiration or termination of this Franchise to the extent such
survival can be reasonably inferred under the circumstances
presented and to the extent such an inference is necessary to
prevent substantial injustice to an injured party.
15. 2 The terms and conditions of this Franchise shall be
binding upon the parties ' respective successors and assigns.
Section 16. Severability
16. 1 If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
Franchise should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a
court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or
constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase
of this Franchise.
10
Section 17 . Assignment
17 . 1 Heath Techna may not assign or transfer this
Franchise without the written consent of the City Council of the
City, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld.
Section 18. Notice
18 . 1 Any notice or information required or permitted to
be given to the parties under this Franchise agreement may be sent
to the following addresses unless otherwise specified:
City of Kent
Director of Public Works
300 West Gowe
Kent, WA 98032
Heath Techna Corp.
Attn: Richard Klug, Vice-President of Finance
Heath Tecna Aerospace Co.
19819 84th Avenue South
Kent, Washington 98032
Section 25. Effective Date
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after
its execution; having first been submitted to the Kent City
Attorney for approval ; after one introduction by the City Council
at a regular meeting; after having been published at least once in
a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Kent; and
finally, having been granted an approving vote of at least a
majority of the City Council at a regular meeting.
11
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ROGER A. LUBOVICH, CITY ATTORNEY
PASSED the day of 1993 .
APPROVED the day of 1993 .
PUBLISHED the day of 1993 .
I hereby certify that this is a true copy of
Ordinance No. passed by the City Council of the City of
Kent, Washington, and approved by the Mayor of the City of Kent as
hereon indicated.
(SEAL) BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
HTHTEKNA.UPF
12
zi
n .2s0
Tti y� .
�-..,
� r
ern
11
• k a � � / — _—__�
�,.•. i r w
Irw L C_ "^, odu
nfr 1 i= _
< �1 - -
EXHIBIT A
-1\ �.J lJ 1VL V1 •JV 1L•l..I ILI I ..,�'� JLI"Ii -' 1 -
HEATH TECNA AEROSPACE COMPANY
COMMUNICATIONS LINES CROSSING ACROSS SOUTH 2O0th STREET
BETWEEN PLANT No-1 and PLANT No_ 3
Three �-inch conduits located in a strip of land 3.0 feet wide and
1 .5 feet on either side of the following described line:
A line perpendicular to the center line of South 200th Street ,
extending 30 feet each side of center line and being 280.68 feet
West of the East one quarter-'-corri61-• of Section 1 , • Township 22
North, Range 4 East, Willamette Meridian, City of Kent, Wash-
ington, containing lee square feet, more or less.
EXHIBIT B
�a HEATH TECNA �00=
Legal Description of Heath Tecna Property
after Let Line Adius;mant
Y ,
THAT PORTION OF TEE SOUTP-EAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QU:Ft- R OF SECTION 1
TOWNSHIP 22 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WTLAMETTE FER'DTAN, IN RING COUNTY, FASHINGTON,
LYING SOUTH OF TEE SOUTH y 2AARGIN OF SOUTH 196TI. STREET AND EASTERi`-' OF THE
EAST HARGIN OF 81ST AVENUE SOUTH AS THEY WERE ESTASLISEED BY THAT DEED RC-CORDED
UNDER RECORDING NUMBER S345763;
EXCEPT THE- SOUTH 280 Fr.ET OF T-;� WEST 263.19 FZET THEREOF;
EXCEPT THE SOUTH 30 FEET THEREOF;
EXCEPT THOSE PORTIONS LYING WITHIN PRIMARY STATE EIC;a Y NIIt ER 5;
EXCEPT THOSE PORTIONS DEEDED To TB_- CITY OF iuNT BY DEEDS. RECORD D Q'JJEa
RECORDING NU23BERS 7812220012, 7905290355 AND E£08150073; AND
EXCEPT THAT PORTION DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WEST MARGIN OF Plz?JYARY STATE HIGGYZAY S, SAID
NPOINT BEING 179.06 Fr..BT SOUTH OF T NORTH L11a OF SAID SOUTr A.ST QU;u OF TEE
NORTEEEASST QUARTER OF SECTION 1;
Q TFD+NCE WEST ALONG THE SOUTF"'RLY MARGIN OF SOUTH 196M STREET TO A PO
Ih= WHICH IS
N 411.11 FEET EAST OF .TE— EASTERLY YARGTIN OF £SS•= AV—I uc SOUTH;
THENCE SOUTH PARAIIZL TO SAID EASTVRLY MA-RGIN 365 FEET;
THENCE EAST PARMZL= TO SAID SOUTrrR2Y 2MRGFN TO l^'-_ F+?S = MARGIN OF SAID
STATE HIGHWAY;
THENCE NORTY_ ALONG SAID WESTF-�-LY MARGIN TO THr POINT OF BEGINNING.
S
o
S
a
o
cJ
W
GC
S
f
L7
Y
e
Ol
EXHIBIT
11 2U-:1_' 11:511 FAX _'UG 873 3413 r d .•. .:: l\-= SOUS
- . • � 1. .l --• ' a _ _�_- �-• __.• ... _
-LEGAL DESCRIPTIOIT-- —
PLANT ,-:3 ..
Parcel A:
That portion of the North half of the Northeast quarter of the
Southeast quaxzer of Section 1, Tovnship 22 North, Range 4 East,
W.Mv, in K.i-no County, Washington described as follows:
Beginning at the Northeast corner of said subdivision: .
Thence South along the East line of said subdivision 219 . 82 feet;
thence North 89*24 ,44" west 990.05 feet ;
thence :forth parallel to the East line of said subdivision to .
the-'North line of said subdivision;
north line 990 . 11 feet,Fere or Less ,
thence Easterly along said
to the point of beginning;
EXCEPT those portions conveyed to Ring County and to the City of
Kent for streets by deeds recorded ender King. County Recording
Nos. 749615 . 5999070, 7305070013, 7903090116 and 790309113.
Parcel. B:
That portion of the North half of the Northeast quarter of the
Southeast quarter, Section 1, To>A-nship 22 North, Range 4 East ,
W.M. in King County, Washington described as follows:
^Ommanri,ng at the Northeast corner of said subdivision:
thence South.along- the . East line of said subdivision 219.82 feet
to the true point of beginning:.
thence North 89024"44' West 990.05 feet;
thence South parallel to the East line of said subdivision
224.18 feet;
thence South 89°39 ` 52* East 990 .02 feet • to East line of said
subdivision; = I
thence North along said East line 219. 32 feet to the True Poirt
nf Se inning: .
EXCEPT those portions conveyed to King county and the City of
' Kent for streets by deeds recorded under King County recording--- —:
_Noa. 749615. ' 7901290124-, ,and 7901290125-
HI
t�; ,ems - - _ — __ ..
ON
• Y•- .•LS T •''�•t1::t/�' �•tea! ..�;r •.L- .4 . I -•' . � .. _ _
. ?"?�`'i•••�1'Y'�--:�2'4' 'ii' ,f•v'. L•-•~'r'. '..F';�S:� :�'�-.x �j s-`: „ _ ; ' � .. _ ...-- �•
•.�a.CiT� ♦. �(:..:`_.. ti ..15" _-ill •'] 'a' '_}" .ter.p.�' '..'�'• tr:�..+i
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6, 1993
Category Other Business
1. SUBJECT: FUNDING FOR YOUTH CENTER STUDY
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: As requested by the Youth Center Task
Force Committee and recommended by the Council Budget Committee
on March 22 , 1993 , authorization is requested for the approval
of a resolution authorizing the expenditure of funds to retain
a consultant to study the establishment of a youth center
facility in Kent. $30, 000 is requested and would come from
Unencumbered Capital Improvement Funds. The Budget Committee
requested that the study consider the Kent School District's
O'Brien Elementary site and that the study be coordinated with
the Kent School District.
3 . EXHIBITS: Resolution
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Budget Committee (3-0)
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO YES X
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended ZLIA Not Recommended
7-1177
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $
SOURCE OF FUNDS: Unencumbered Capital Improvement Fund funds
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
to adopt Resolution No. authorizing the expenditure of
funds to retain a consultant to study the establishment of a
youth center facility in Kent.
DISCUSSION•
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 4I
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington, authorizing the
expenditure of funds to retain a consultant to
study the establishment of a youth center
facility in Kent.
WHEREAS, the City Council , by Resolution 1336, created a
Task Force Committee to study the feasibility of establishing a
youth center facility in the City of Kent; and
WHEREAS, by said Resolution, the Committee was asked to
consider an appropriate location for such a facility, the type of
programs and activities the youth center should provide, the
estimated cost of creating and maintaining such a facility, and the
potential funding sources for the same; and
WHEREAS, as part of its review, the Task Force Committee
has determined that it would be appropriate to retain a consultant
to perform a needs assessment study for establishment of a youth
center facility; and
WHEREAS, the Kent School District is discussing the use
of O'Brien Elementary for night school and other youth purposes ;
and
WHEREAS , following consideration, the Committee, at its
February 24 , 1993 meeting, moved to ask the City Council for
authorization to spend up to $30, 000 to retain a consultant for
said study, NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF KENT, WASHINGTON DOES
HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the study consider the applicability of
the O'Brien site and be coordinated with the Kent School District' s
efforts.
Section 2 . That City Administration is authorized to
establish a budget of $30, 000 out of the City' s Capital Improvement
Fund for the purpose of retaining a consultant to perform a
feasibility and needs assessment study for establishment of a youth
center facility in the City of Kent.
Section 3 . That the Task Force Committee, with the
assistance of City staff, is authorized to retain a consultant and
spend the funds from the budget for the purpose and as established
herein.
Passed at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Kent, Washington this day of , 1993 .
Concurred in by the Mayor of the City of Kent, this
day of 1993 .
DAN KELLEHER, MAYOR
ATTEST:
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
2
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 1993 .
(SEAL)
BRENDA JACOBER, CITY CLERK
youthctr.res
3
Kent City Council Meeting
Date April 6, 1993
g� Category Bids
u 1. SUBJECT: 1965 CROWN FIRE COACH PUMPER AND MISCELLANEOUS
EQUIPMENT
2 . SUMMARY STATEMENT: A 1965 Crown Fire Coach Pumper including
some miscellaneous equipment has been declared surplus to the
needs of the Kent Fire Department. A call for bids was adver-
tised and two bids were received as follows: first bid, Fire
Protection District No. 5 Mason County, $10, 359; second bid,
Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 7 , $10, 502 . 65.
Fire Administration recommends that the 1965 Crown Fire Coach
Pumper including some miscellaneous equipment be awarded to the
highest bidder, Whitman County Fire Protection District No. 7,
for the purchase price of $10, 502 . 65,a•_'%_�edAe —a=a-
MA 0 /AOVED Johv\50n 5fcornd_ed ancq ++,e mofl'orl
3 . EXHIBITS: Bid letters C U►'r(ed .
4 . RECOMMENDED BY: Fire Administration
(Committee, Staff, Examiner, Commission, etc. )
5. UNBUDGETED FISCAL/PERSONNEL IMPACT: NO X YES
FISCAL/PERSONNEL NOTE: Recommended Not Recommended
6. EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ N/A
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
7 . CITY COUNCIL ACTION:
Councilmember moves, Councilmember seconds
that the 1965 Crown Fire Coach Pumper, includi g some miscel-
laneous equipment, be awarded to the highest bi der, Whitman
County Fire Protection District No. 7 , for the purchase price
of $10, 502 . 65, as quoted in their bid.
DISCUSSION:
ACTION•
Council Agenda
Item No. 5A
WHITMAN COUNTY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT # 7
P.O. BOX 291
ROSALIA, WA. 99170
Ed Hereford
Gerald Naught
Gene Van Dyke
(Commissioners)
Pat Brown
(Chief)
March 1 , 1993
"Bid for 1965 Crown Pumper"
Office of the City Clerk
City Of Kent
220 4th Ave. S.
Kent , Wa. 98032-5895
Good Day,
Enclosed is our bid for $10,502 . 65 , (ten thousand five
hundred two dollars and sixty five cents) , for the 1965
Crown Pumper with miscellaneous equipment listed in the Call
for Bids let by the City Of Kent February 12 , 1993 .
Thank You for Your consideration.
Sincerely,
=���.
Steve Van Dyke, V
Whitman Co. F.D. #7
P.O. Box 291
Rosalia, Wa. 99170
Fax 509-523-2302 �„ Q
Ed Hereford (Comm. )
Gerald Nau t/(Comm. )
/-
Gene Van ke (Comm. )
- 9pi�cs
Fire Protection District 5 Mason County
Post office Box 127 Allyn, Washington 98524
275-2889 • 426-5533
2/19/93
FROM: R.A. Knight, Chief
TO: City of Kent
Kent Fire Department
RE: Equipment bid
Please accept this letter as a bid on the following
equipment.
One (1) 1965 Crown Fire Coach Pumper, including some
miscellaneous equipment. (List attached showing the
equipment included. )
Amount of bid: $10, 359
CONTINUED COMMUNICATIONS
A.
R' ,Ef n �
P O R T S
A. COUNCIL PRESIDENT_ VV Qb� Q A
B. OPERATIONS COMMITTEE /
C. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
D. PLANNING COMMITTEE Vw�
E. PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE
F. PARKS COMMITTEE
G. BUDGET COMMITTEE
xf
H. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS_
MCCARTHY,TONY / KENT70/AD - HPDesk print.
-----------------------------------------
!bject: 4/6 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
Creator: Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/AD Dated: 01/06/93 at 0949 .
TO: MAYOR KELLEHER, COUNCIL PRESIDENT WOODS AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
ON SATURDAY APRIL 3RD, THE GOLF SELECTION COMMITTEE WILL INTERVIEW THE TOP
CANDIDATES FOR THE CITY'S GOLF DIRECTOR POSITION. ON MONDAY APRIL 4TH THE
COMMITTEE WILL MEET AGAIN TO RANK THEIR TOP CHOICES. WITH SELECTION OF A
TOP CHOICE, THE REFERENCE CHECK AND NEGOTIATION PROCESS WILL BEGIN. SINCE
THIS PROCESS WON'T BE COMPLETED BY THE PARK COMMITTEE MEETING OF APRIL 6TH,
A SPECIAL PARK COMMITTEE MEETING MAY NEED TO BE SET TO GET A RECOMMENDATION
TO COUNCIL FOR THEIR APRIL 20TH MEETING.
THE ATTACHED SHEET PROVIDES A LIST OF PROCESS ISSUES THAT ALANA AND I
NOTED FROM THE RETREAT. NEXT TO EACH ITEM WE HAVE IDENTIFIED ANY ACTIVITY
TO DATE. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THESE ITEMS , PLEASE LET ME KNOW.
UPCOMING EVENTS
4/12 , 13 , 14 WH FIRE STA COUNCIL / DEPARTMENT HEAD RETREAT
4/14 7PM SPEC POPS ADA PUBLIC MEETING - TRANSITION PLAN
4/22 CHAMBERS KING COUNTY REDISTRICTING MEETING
APR/MAY CHAMBERS WETLANDS WORKSHOPS
5/1 OPENING OF SATURDAY MARKET
6-17 KM/PAR3 BALLOON CLASSIC
7716-18 CORNUCOPIA DAYS FESTIVAL
8/21-22 MILL CRK CANTERBURY FAIRE
11/18 SNR CNTR 8TH ANNUAL TOWN HALL MEETING
12/4 WINTERFEST PARADE & HOLIDAY LIGHTING CEREMONY
MCCARTHY,TONY / KENT70/AD - HPDesk print.
-----------------------------------------
Subject: COUNCIL PROCESS ISSUES FROM RETREAT
Creator: Tony MCCARTHY / KENT70/AD Dated: 03/25/93 at 1042 .
BETTER COMMUNICATION, COUNCIL ON E MAIL, COSTS IN PROCESS
MORE WORKSHOPS FOR MAJOR ISSUES WETLANDS IN APRIL
ADMIN TO REVIEW RAUL'S WORK INFO TO PW COM, MONTHLY
MORE TEAM BUILDING MID MGT STAFF TO RETREAT?
COUNCIL MEET WITH DEPARTMENT HEADS 4/12 MTG WITH SUMAK
SEND BACKUP MATERIAL TO ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS DISCUSSED WITH DEPT HEADS
PAUL MANN WANTS PUBLIC SAFTY MINUTES CITY CLERK DOING
TALK TO DOWNTOWN PARTNERSHIP ABOUT THEME
PROVIDE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WITH PROS AND CONS
PROVIDE MICROPHONES FOR COUNCIL COMMITTEE MTGS
WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT BANKRUPCT MOTEL ACROSS FROM BOEING?
REQUEST $30, 000 FROM CIP FOR YOUTH FACILITY BUDGET COM APPROVED 3/22
COMMITTEE CHAIR & DEPT HEAD COORDINATE AGENDAS DISCUSSED WITH DEPT HEADS
BACKUP GENERATOR FOR TELEPHONES HAVE, NEED FUNDS TO IMPRVE
DON'T PUT COUNCIL STUFF IN LARGE ENVELOPES DISCUSSED WITH STAFF
COORDINATE DELIVERY OF COUNCIL MATERIAL DISCUSSED WITH STAFF
SET UP COUNCIL CHAMBERS AS TV STUDIO FRANCHISE TO COUNCIL 4/93
GET INFORMATION ON YARD WASTE PICKUP COST OFFERED INFO @ 3/16 MTG
ARRANGE MEETING WITH SCHOOL BOARD ADM MTG W DR HAGER ON 4/2
ARTICLE ON KENT MOST LIVABLE TO COUNCIL ALANA PROVIDED
HAVE FUTURE COUNCIL MEETINGS ON HILLS
HAVE QUARTERLY REPORTS FROM / MTGS WITH DEPT HEADS
HAVE DISCUSSIONS ON RJC MITIGATION
GET CONTRACTING ORDINANCE TO COUNCIL ROGER WORKING WITH JOHNSON
CHECK CITY OF ARVADA PERFORMING ARTS CENTER
CHECK OUT CITY OF KIRKLAND PERFORMING ARTS CENTER
COPY OF 272ND REPORT ON ROAD NEED TO PAUL DON W TO PROVIDE
BUDGET COMMITTEE MINUTES
March 22, 1993
PRESENT: Jon Johnson - Chair, Leona Orr, Jim White, Paul Mann, Tony McCarthy, May Miller, Cliff Craig,
Chief Angelo, Barney Wilson, Helen Wickstrom, Rose Nelson, Alana Mclalwain, Don McDaniel, Jean Parietti,
and Bill Doolittle.
Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m.
FEBRUARY FINANCIAL REPORT
Acting Finance Director Miller distributed and reviewed the summary financial report for the period ending
February 28, 1993.
STATUS OF VACANT POSITIONS
McCarthy updated the Committee on the status of vacant positions in the City. He noted that there were 33.8
total vacancies as of March 17, 1993 which were fully funded positions with money in the budget for the whole
year. He explained that the Executive Committee has authorized the rehiring of 13 positions because of safety
issues and worse case scenarios. He noted that the City staff is currently at 520. Upon White's question,
McCarthy explained how target levels were established to determine when a department reached a critical stage.
White expressed that he felt each department should be looked at individually to determine what the staffing levels
should be at a given level of service. McCarthy noted that several options are being reviewed to avoid layoffs
which include a possible reorganization, job rotations, and internal shifting of employees. White stressed that
the public is going to have to be willing to buy off on a different level of service, except in the public safety
areas, as determinations are made as to what happens in the City based upon what there is to work with inside
the City.
FUNDING FOR YOUTH CENTER STUDY
Paul Mann, Chairman of the Youth Center Committee, noted that the Resolution in the packet has been to the
Operations Committee, and voted upon unanimously at the Youth Center Committee meeting of February 24,
1993 to be sent to the Council for approval. He noted that the Resolution requests authorization of up to $30,000
to retain a consultant to perform a feasibility and needs assessment study for the establishment of a Youth Center
facility in Kent. Upon White's question, Helen Wickstrom, Parks Admin. Supv., explained that the Kent
Commons is a community-oriented facility with scheduled activities and that the youth can't just drop in to use
the gym, hang out, have dances, play games, or do recreational activities any time they desire. Mann clarified
for Orr that the Youth Center would include ages 6-12 years as well as teenagers. He noted that the feasibility
study will include a whole range of ages, determine whether the O'Brien site can be adapted for a youth center,
as well as the possibility of looking at the purchase of two locations for the different age groups. Mann noted
that the City will work hand-in-hand with the School District to make sure no duplication of study is done and
that the $30,000 will come out of the CIP fund. Johnson and Orr stated for Doolittle that they have definitely
seen a demand for this type of project. White requested that before the RFP's are sent out, the Council be given
the opportunity to review. ORR MOVED to recommend approval of this resolution and send it on to the full
Council. White seconded and the motion carried 3-0.
KOREAN WAR MEMORIAL FUNDING
McCarthy noted that this item was brought to the full Council on April 21, 1992, granting approval of $1,500
based upon whether funds were available. Jean Belcher, TRADEC, passed out an updated corporate contributions
list and noted that no funds have been received from the City of Kent because of budget shortfalls and unavailable
funds. She noted that they have been in contact with the Mayor for the past few months and he had suggested
they come back to the City to see if funds are available now. She noted that the original request was for $1,250,
but that the Council raised it to $1,500. Upon White's question, McCarthy clarified that these are the same funds
that were approved. Orr expressed concern because she was not kept informed of the fact that the money was
never distributed. SHE THEN MOVED that funds in the amount of$1,500 be made available for the Korean
War Memorial. White seconded and the motion carried 3-0.
BUDGET CHANGE FOR CORRECTION FACILITY SECURITY
Lorna Rufener, PD Lieutenant, noted that this item was brought before the Executive Committee on February 17,
1993, regarding an attempted break out at the Corrections Facility on January 6th involving a US Marshall
inmate. She noted that the Police Department has been working with US Marshalis and Gilbert Security to look
at the overall security of the facility. She explained that because the Facility is doing 76% more bookings, has
an increased workload and activity, and the types of prisoners that are being housed, security improvements are
needed as follows: 1) Two cameras on east side of building exterior; 2) Interior cameras in laundry area, A and
B units; 3) One additional monitor in control; 4) High security roll bars installed in the vents; 5) Roof
lighting beacon; and 6) Security Tool Chest, for a total cost of$21,000. She clarified for White that the funds
will be taken out of the Criminal Justice Fund. WHITE MOVED for approval to use $21,000 from the Criminal
Justice Fund to make security improvements to the Kent Corrections Facility as listed above. Orr seconded and
the motion carried 3-0.
ACCEPTANCE OF TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANT
Lorna Rufener, PD Lieutenant, noted that a letter was received from the Washington Traffic Safety Commission,
dated February 22, 1993, explaining that$2,348 are available in the DWI Traffic Safety Grant funds because of
underruns during fiscal year 1992. She requested the Committee's acceptance of these funds to be used for
programs and costs of purchasing supplies for the Drinking Driver Task Force. WHITE MOVED for acceptance
of $2,348 from the Washington Traffic Safety Commission to be used for the Drinking Driver Task Force
supplies and programs. Orr seconded and the motion carried 3-0.
1994-1999 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Acting Finance Director Miller explained that each department had prepared a draft summary listing their CIP
priorities in the order of importance and trying to stay within the budget. She noted that each department has
gone back to see if any new items should be added and that this mini-update is provided just to show the
Committee and Council what is being done. She stated, however, that the primary concentration will be on the
1994 CIP and that department heads will go over the detailed backup pages to make sure everything agrees before
being sent to Council for review. McCarthy clarified for White that $300,000 has been set aside under
"Sidewalks Rehabilitation for the next five years and that this update shows how much money is available for
those items. Miller noted that in the next month the detailed lists will be mailed out, revenue projections will
be put together, and the Planning Department will be consulted to make sure that everything is in compliance with
the Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management Act.
DEPARTMENT HEAD PAY PLAN PROPOSAL
McCarthy stated that the department head pay plan proposal was discussed last year during the Budget process
and that the Committee was told it would come back to them before the plan was implemented. He noted that
the Committee, at this time, is being presented with a modification to the plan to see if it is something the Council
desires and then will be presented back to the Mayor for adjustments, if any, to be made. He explained how this
plan works as follows: 1) Department head pay will be within range on the department head salary schedule
which defines the minimum, control point and maximum; 2) Department head salary schedule will be updated
at the beginning of each fiscal year based on the Seattle CPI-W for the previous July to June; 3) New department
head positions will be paid an amount between the minimum and the control point; 4) The control point will be
considered the maximum base pay, with pay above the control point being considered merit pay; 5) Department
heads being paid below the control point will be eligible for annual cost of living increases and step increases 0
to the control point. Cost of living will be up to that provided to the non-represented employees. Step increases
will be up to 5%. The amount will be determined by Budget availability and the department head's performance
evaluation; 6) All department heads are eligible for merit pay. The amount will represent a percent above the
control point. The amount will be determined by Budget availability and the department head's performance
evaluation. Merit pay will be shown as a separate line on the pay stub. Merit pay is above the base pay and the
amount will be reevaluated each year; 7) All department head pay adjustments will take effect on 4/1 of each
year. McCarthy noted, however, that the Mayor has asked that this plan be deferred until substantial progress
is made with the union contracts.
ADDED ITEM
Chief Angelo noted, as an information item only, that the City has received an increase in the Public Safety
Emergency Medical Services/King Country Contract based upon the number of calls and population. He stated
that the Public Safety Committee will also be informed of this item.
The meeting adjourned at 5:50 p.m.
OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MINUTES
March 16, 1993
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Christi Houser
Leona Orr
Jim White
STAFF PRESENT: Ken Chatwin
Laurie Evezich
Roger Lubovich
Tony McCarthy
May Miller
Kelli O'Donnell
Bob Olson
Ron Spang
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC: Steve Burpee
Vern Dwight
Barbara Simpson
The meeting was called to order at 2:35 p.m. by Chairperson Houser.
Approval of Vouchers
All claims for the period ending February 26, 1993, in the amount of $1,304,938.23 were approved for
payment.
International Trade Exchange - Chamber Presentation
Kent City Chamber President-elect Steve Burpee and Chamber Member Vern Dwight updated the Committee
on the progress of the International Trade Exchange noting that the program has already exceeded the
required $50,000 match with commitments from King County, the Port of Seattle, Keybank and Boeing for
$25,000 each. The Chamber is meeting with the surrounding cities Mayors and Chambers for support of
a private/public trade exchange as well as developing a list of potential sponsors at $5,000 each. Burpee
reported on the progress of the resource guide, the Sister City Committee, Foreign Trade Zone and contact
with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Council Home Access to City E-Mail System
Information Services Director Spang distributed a summary of implementation considerations for home
computer access. He noted that there is a question whether the additional phone line would be considered
residential or business. After further discussion, McCarthy suggested that under Administrative Reports he
would inform the Council that Spang would speak with the Council members individually to arrange
installation within the next month. Committeemember White so moved, Orr seconded and the motion
passed 3-0.
Added Item
Chatwin informed the committee that a public meeting will be held on April 14th to gather public input
on the transition plan. He noted that the City would probably expand current programs depending on the
type of input received.
Chairperson Houser asked for an update on increases on garbage rates, yardwaste costs and rental fees on
garbage cans. McCarthy stated that he would ask Wickstrom to update the Committee.
Chairperson Houser adjourned the meeting at 3:30 P.M.
1
Parks Committee Minutes
March 16, 1993
Councilmembers Present: Jim Bennett, Chair; Jon Johnson and Christi Houser.
Staff Present: Tony McCarthy, Barney Wilson, May Miller, Roger Lubovich, Lori
Hogan, Jack Ball , Patrice Thorell , and Pam Rumer.
Others Present: Wayne McDonald, 9915 S 213th, Kent; Mike Miller, 26005 142nd
Ave. SE, Kent; R.A. Liechty, 17303 SE 238th, Kent 98042, Steve
Pedegana, 13503 SE 251st Place, Kent 98042; and Doug Schwab,
Auburn.
KENT AMERICAN LEGION BASEBALL COMMERCIAL SIGNS PROPOSAL FOR KENT MEMORIAL PARK
Mr. Mike Miller and Mr. Rick Liechty of the Kent American Legion Baseball program
requested authorization to install outfield wall signs on the outfield fence at
Kent Memorial Park. The signs would be professionally prepared and displayed
during the summer baseball season from May through August.
The cost to each business to purchase a sign is $500. Although none of the money
goes to the City, Mr. Miller said the American Legion Baseball organization is
committed to putting their time and money resources into improving Kent Memorial
Park. He noted that American Legion Baseball made a contribution of $5,000 for
sod and turf material for the Kent Memorial field and purchased a wind screen for
center field at a cost of $250. In addition, Mr. Miller said they have offered
to paint the concession stand and bleachers, and to install an improved
ventilation system and a scorer's booth.
Mr. Miller said that the Kent American Legion Baseball program appreciates the
City of Kent Parks Department's support of their program, and feels that the
signs will enhance community support of the program, contribute to the financial
strength of the association, and give Kent Memorial field a professional look.
Councilmember Houser questioned if these signs will meet the City's sign
ordinance regulations. Roger Lubovich said that he will review the ordinance but
did not think there would be a problem.
Councilmember Johnson moved to approve Kent American Legion Baseball 's request
to install signs on the outfield fence at Kent Memorial Park subject to
compliance with the City of Kent's sign ordinance. Councilmember Houser seconded
the motion.
The motion passed unanimously (3-0) .
It was decided that if there are any changes or modifications to this
arrangement, the American Legion Baseball organization will meet with the Parks
Committee to obtain their approval .
CHANGE IN PARKS COMMITTEE MEETING TIME
Because Councilmember Bennett cannot meet at 5:30 PM, he requested that the
2
- meeting time be changed from 5:30 PM to 5:45 PM on a permanent basis.
Councilmember Johnson moved to change the meeting time of the Parks Committee
from 5:30 PM to 5:45 PM on a permanent basis. Councilmember Houser seconded the
motion.
The motion passed unanimously (3-0) .
KENT LITTLE LEAGUE FIELD USE REPORT
Lori Hogan reported that staff has reached an agreement with the Kent Little
League organization regarding field use of Uplands Playfield.
An agreement was reached on a five year use contract which will cover insurance
and warranty issues for the fencing project. Little League will also continue
payment of field use fees.
Hogan said that installation of the fencing will be done by Little League
volunteers, and Little League has agreed to take full responsibility for project
expenses. Jack Ball has offered to be project inspector.
Councilmember Johnson moved to authorize the City Attorney's office to draft a
field use contract with Kent Little League to be taken to full Council for
approval . Councilmember Houser seconded the motion.
The motion passed unanimously (3-0) .
ADDED ITEM - DOUG SCHWAB COMMENTS
Doug Schwab was unable to make his comments regarding the Turf Advisory Service
report before the meeting was adjourned, but requested that a portion of the
report appear on record. This report is a result of an evaluation done by Mr.
Larry Gilhuly of the USGA Greens Section.
It reads:
"Since the visit in 1992, this position has been left open with
Assistant Superintendent Owen performing the function of two
managerial positions. Despite being placed in this extremely
difficult situation, it was good to hear that improvements have been
achieved within current fiscal limitations. Mr. Owen and his staff
deserve a well done from the City and players at Riverbend.
While the staff and Mr. Owen have performed yeomen duties, it is not
recommended to continue maintaining the golf course in the current
manner. A golf course superintendent is needed to fulfill the
communication requirements, paperwork, walking the golf course daily
and making scheduling requirements that cannot be adequately
completed by Mr. Owen. When the responsibilities of other facility
maintenance are also added to golf course maintenance, the
requirement for an additional managerial position becomes even more
important. The position of golf course superintendent should again
be filled for the sake of the City, players, and most importantly,
the maintenance staff."
CITY OF )Wr�\-1612fflx
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE
March 16, 1993 4 : 00 PM
Committee Members Present City Attorney's Office
Leona Orr, Chair Roger Lubovich
Jon Johnson Laurie Evezich
Judy Woods
Planning Staff Other City Staff
Lin Ball Tony McCarthy
Jim Harris
Margaret Porter Guests
Fred Satterstrom
List available upon request
GROWTH MANAGEMENT UPDATE - (F. Satterstrom)
Planning Manager Fred Satterstrom informed the Committee of the Planning
Commission's recommendations on the wetlands ordinance. On March 8,
1993, the Planning Commission held a final public hearing on the proposed
wetlands ordinance reviewing the Citizens Advisory Committee's
recommendations. The Citizens Advisory Committee called the wetlands
draft ordinance the "Subcommittee Discussion Draft ordinance dated
January 1993" . It was assumed that the Subcommittee's draft with
revisions would be coming to the City Council. However, the Planning
Commission made a motion to forward to the City Council the
Subcommittee's draft as amended as well as the original draft ordinance
dated September 1992 . The two draft ordinances will be forwarded to the
City Council on April 20, 1993 . If neither of the two draft ordinances
are approved that night, the Planning Committee council members discussed
holding several workshops to do a more intensive review on these two
draft ordinances, preferably, on a non-Council night with zero public
input except for the last workshop.
Next, Mr. Satterstrom reported on two bills in the Legislature, SHB 1761
and SHB 5230. Both would provide a one-year extension on the Growth
Management Plan deadline with a six-month time extension if a City
requested it and if approved by DCD for an extension on the regulation
part. The Phasing bill that was before the Legislature is no longer up
for consideration.
At a future date, Mr. Satterstrom stated he will bring a revised Work
Program back to the Committee after the two new hires come on board and
things are settled internally. The update will include the issue of
staffing levels and the Planning Department's ability to perform under
the Growth Management Act on the mandated items.
CITY COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE MINUTES
MARCH 16, 1993
PAGE 2
SHORT PLAT PROCEDURES - (J. Harris)
Planning Director Jim Harris stated the main point on the Short Plat
procedures is to streamline the process. The procedure changes would be
to eliminate the Short Plat Committee, change the Appeal process so
appeals will be heard by the Hearing Examiner, and add a 200 ' radius
notification to the surrounding property owners and a public response
time. When the property to be subdivided abuts parcels greater than
two (2) acres in size which in turn have other properties abutting them,
then the residents and owners of these additional properties shall also
be notified. Action on this item will be taken on April 10, 1993 .
POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREAS (PAA) - (J. Harris)
Planning Director Jim Harris distributed and reviewed City of Kent
Potential Annexation Area (PAA) map. He said the City Council needs to
give an informal approval of the Potential Annexation map in order for
Planning staff to go out into the community to talk with citizens,
special interest districts, and any other interested citizens. Mr.
Harris read to the Committee a section in the Model Interlocal Agreement
about the public process . This agreement would need to be done by
December 1993 . Mr. Harris plans on contacting citizens by working with
the Public Works Department to gather public input about the potential
PAA by mid May or June.
STAFFING LEVELS IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT - (L. Orr)
Chair Orr expressed extreme concern about the staffing levels in the
Planning Department. She requested information on what would be the
lowest level of staffing for the Planning Department. Chief
Administrative Office Tony McCarthy distributed an E-mail memo on a plan
for staffing in the Planning Department. He reported that two Planners
have been authorized to be hired and for one employee to transfer into
the Planning Department from the Finance Department. Mr. McCarthy said
that it may be possible for the top three applicants to be hired instead
of the top two depending upon where the City stands financially. The
Council members present and Planning Director Jim Harris requested that
the question be answered by Administration as to what is to be the
ultimate size of the Planning Department.
CHESTNUT RIDGE ANNEXATION - R. Lubovich
City Attorney Roger Lubovich reported that the City has received the 60
percent petition to annex the Chestnut Ridge area into the City. Chair
Orr MOVED and Councilmember Johnson SECONDED a motion to set a hearing
date for April 6th and prepare the necessary ordinances to proceed with
this annexation, subject to the Boundary Review Board' s approval.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 5: 35 p.m.
PC0316 .MIN
THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS NOT HAD A MEETING SINCE MARCH 8, 1993;
THEREFORE, THESE MINUTES HAVE NOT BEEN APPROVED.
FOR INFORMATION ONLY
KENT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
March 8, 1993
The meeting of the Kent Planning Commission was called to order by
Chair Martinez at 7 : 00 pm on March 8, 1993 in the Kent City Hall,
Chambers West.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:
Linda Martinez, Chair
Gwen Dahle
Albert Haylor
Edward Heineman, Jr.
Kent Morrill
Kenneth Dozier
Raymond Ward
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER ABSENT:
Christopher Grant
PLANNING STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
James P. Harris, Planning Director
Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager
Chris Holden, Recording Secretary
APPROVAL OF FEBRUARY 22 , 1993 MINUTES
MOTION MADE and SECONDED to accept the February 22 , 1993 minutes as
presented. MOTION CARRIED.
CRITICAL AREAS #CPA-91-1 AND #ZCA-91-3 (continuation of hearing
from February 22 , 1993 .
Chair Martinez briefly reviewed the hearing of February 22 , 1993 .
Commissioner Morrill mentioned that his motion of February 22 , 1993
was to go through the subcommittee's document and vote on it
section by section. He felt it was a duplication of effort after
having voted on the document section by section to vote on it in
its entirety. Chair Martinez explained it was her understanding
that after voting for each section, the Commission would then have
an opportunity to look at the entire document and approve it to go
to City Council.
1
Planning Commission Minutes
March 8, 1992
Commissioner Haylor understood that there were two documents still
being considered; the original wetland document (September 1992)
and the subcommittee document (January 1993) now under
consideration.
Chair Martinez stated Section 12 is now under consideration.
MOTION made and SECONDED that Version B be approved as written. A
request was made for an explanation of the subcommittee' s draft.
Commissioner Heineman briefly summarized the major points of
Section 12 . Both A and B recognize low-quality wetlands which
would be classified as Category 3 except they are larger than one
acre in size. Version A would allow filling, with mitigation, of
up to 10, 000 square feet including any fill that has been placed
since January 1, 1991. It also allows fill of up to 2 , 000 square
feet before development of a single family residence with
mitigation by fee if a City of Kent mitigation bank exists.
Version B would allow up to 20, 000 square feet of fill with
mitigation which does not include any previous fill. In addition,
it would need to be demonstrated that the basic purpose of the
project cannot be accomplished with less adverse impact AND a
Department of Ecology Water Quality Certificate allowing filling
from 20, 000 square feet to 1.99 acres with mitigation.
Commissioner Heineman commented he preferred the smaller fill.
However, he is opposed to the allowing of fill of up to almost two
acres. In addition, the part of Version B showing, "upon
demonstration that the basic purpose of the project cannot be
accomplished with less adverse impact, " does not make sense,
because any project could show that. Therefore, he was opposed to
Version B.
MOTION DEFEATED, four to three.
MOTION made and SECONDED to approve Version A as written. MOTION
CARRIED. Two abstentions.
Commissioner Heineman commented that Section 13 , the committee had
felt it was appropriate to simplify the percentage formulas and
adjusted the density credit accordingly.
MOTION made and SECONDED to approve Section 13 as submitted.
MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION made and SECONDED to approve Section 14 as submitted.
MOTION CARRIED.
2
Planning Commission Minutes
March 8, 1992
MOTION made and SECONDED to approve Section 15 as submitted.
MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION made and SECONDED to approve Section 16 as submitted.
MOTION AMENDED to approve Section 16, A, B and C only. MOTION
CARRIED.
MOTION made and SECONDED to approve the rest of Section 16 as
submitted. A request for explanation of Section 16 D was made.
Commissioner Heineman briefly explained the intent of the ratios.
He expounded that giving the different combinations would allow
more flexibility and combinations in the creation of wetlands for
different sites. Furthermore, the developer would have an option
in creating the combination.
Chair Martinez thought that Category 1 wetlands could not be
altered.
Commissioner Heineman replied that was correct. The 3 : 1 refers to
the enhancement of existing wetlands of lower quality; two' s and
three's.
Chair Martinez stated that the draft says, " . . .compensation for
alteration of Category 1 wetlands shall be accomplished as
follows: . . . " . She repeated that she thought that Category 1 could
not be altered.
Commissioner Heineman commented that it was probably an error.
He believed that it does say elsewhere that Category I wetlands
shall not be altered.
Chair Martinez commented she would be adamantly opposed to any
alteration of Category 1 wetland as shown in Section D. a. 1
through 3 .
Mr. Satterstrom commented it was his understanding that this
section was placed in the ordinance in case Category 1 wetlands
were allowed to be altered.
It was pointed out there was only one Category 1 wetland in the
Kent area and that was the Lagoons. Furthermore, the Ordinance
does allow the filling of Type 1 wetlands but it would be very
difficult. Version A, which was just adopted, states, "regulated
activities shall not be authorized in a wetland except as can be
demonstrated that the impact is both unavoidable and necessary", as
well as listing other criteria that must be met. In the event that
3
Planning Commission Minutes
March 8, 1992
someone did complete the requirements, the ratios in this section
would be used.
MOTION MADE and SECONDED to Table Section 16 D. MOTION TO TABLE IS
DEFEATED. MAIN MOTION TO APPROVE REST OF SECTION 16 FAILS FOR LACK
OF MAJORITY. THREE FOR/THREE AGAINST/ONE ABSTENTION
MOTION MADE and SECONDED to accept Section 17 as it appears.
MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION MADE and SECONDED to accept Section 18 with Section B
stricken. MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION MADE and SECONDED to accept Section 19 as it appears.
MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION MADE and SECONDED to accept the recommended deletion of
Sections 20, 21 and 22 AND accept Section 23 which will be
renumbered to Section 20 as it appears. MOTION CARRIES.
MOTION MADE and SECONDED to accept Section 24 to be renumbered as
Section 21 as it appears. A friendly amendment to Section B of 24,
was made to read, the Director 's delineation decision MAY be
appealed. MOTION CARRIES WITH AMENDMENT.
MOTION MADE and SECONDED to accept new Section 22 as it appears.
MOTION CARRIES.
MADE and SECONDED to accept new Section 23 , Effective Date, as it
appears. MOTION CARRIES.
Chair Martinez commented the document that has been approved by the
Planning Commission has no mitigation and very little direction
given to the Planning Department. A motion is needed to accept
this document.
Commissioner Dahle made a MOTION to make no decision and submit
both drafts to the City Council. Motion SECONDED. MOTION
DEFEATED.
MOTION MADE and SECONDED to consider the second part of Section 16
D that was defeated. MOTION WITHDRAWN.
MOTION MADE and SECONDED to accept draft document as revised in
it's entirety as voted on section by section. MOTION CARRIED.
4
Planning Commission Minutes
March 8, 1992
MOTION MADE and SECONDED to have original document (September 1992)
be submitted to the City Council for consideration. MOTION
CARRIED.
Commissioner Ward asked that a resolution go to City Council with
the history of the wetland drafts. MOTION MADE and SECONDED to
have a resolution sent to the City Council to give the history of
the wetland regulations drafts. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION MADE and SECONDED TO CLOSE THE HEARING. MOTION CARRIED.
The hearing was closed at 8: 30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
�r�
James P. Harris, Secretary
pca:pcmin3.8
5
KENT PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES
February 22 , 1993
The meeting of the Kent Planning Commission was called to order by
Chair Martinez at 7 : 00 pm on February 22 , 1993 in the Kent City
Hall, Chambers West.
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:
Linda Martinez, Chair
Gwen Dahle
Albert Haylor
Edward Heineman, Jr.
Kent Morrill
Kenneth Dozier
Raymond Ward
PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBER ABSENT:
Christopher Grant
PLANNING STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
James P. Harris, Planning Director
Fred Satterstrom, Planning Manager
Chris Holden, Recording Secretary
APPROVAL OF_ JANUARY 25 , 1993 MINUTES
The MOTION was made to accept the January 25, 1993 minutes as
presented. The motion was SECONDED. Motion CARRIED.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENT - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO
OFFICE #CPA-93-1
Fred Satterstrom, Kent Planning Department, explained the
Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment request. Mr. Satterstrom
displayed view foils depicting 1) the Comprehensive Plan Map zoning
for the area and 2) the actual zoning in the area. Mr. Satterstrom
further explained that the requested amendment area is also in the
single family zoning overlay. The widening of the street to
accommodate increased traffic volumes affected the properties also.
The City staff is recommending that the Comprehensive Plan Map be
amended from single family to office and that the single-family
designated overlay zone be eliminated for these properties.
Mr. Rob Hamlin, Vice-President of the Masonic Hall Association and
Mr. James Keck, applicant, supported the Comprehensive Plan
Amendment request.
1
Planning Commission Minutes
February 22 , 1993
MOTION made to close the public hearing. The motion was SECONDED
and APPROVED.
Commissioner Haylor MOVED to amend the Comprehensive Plan Map from
single family to office and that the single-family designated
overlay zoned be eliminated for these properties. MOTION was
SECONDED AND APPROVED.
Chairman Martinez informed Mr. Keck that this Comprehensive Plan
Map amendment would be presented to the City Council on March 23
for their consideration.
CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS #CPA-91-1 AND #ZCA-91-3
Chair Martinez briefly reviewed the background of the critical
areas ordinance. Chair Martinez commented the sub-committee's
proposal would be considered this evening. She requested a report
from City staff.
Fred Satterstrom, Planning Department, succinctly explained the
need for a timely but well-considered ordinance.
Tom Brubaker, Assistant City Attorney, stated the City is mandated
under the Growth Management Act to have a wetland ordinance.
Failure to comply with the Growth Management Act requirements could
cause mandated serious penalties to occur if determined by the
Growth Planning Hearings Board that the City has violated the
Growth Management Act. The Act stated that on or before
September 1, 1991, each City must designate and develop regulations
that protect critical areas which includes wetlands. An extension
was granted to March 1992 . The State can determine to withhold any
one or more of the following state revenues: the motor vehicle
fuel tax, the transportation improvement account, the urban
arterial trust account, the rural arterial trust account, the sales
and use tax, the liquor profit tax and the liquor excise tax.
Theoretically, our violation of the Growth Management Act could
subject the City to the loss of its revenue from any one or all of
those taxes. The RCW on extension states, the Department of
Ecology may extend the date by which the City's is required to
designate critical areas including wetlands or the date by which
the City' s required to protect such wetlands, if the City
demonstrates its proceeding in an orderly fashion and is making a
good faith effort to meet these requirements. An extension may be
up for to an additional 180 days. The length of the extension
shall be based on the difficulty of the effort to conform with
these requirements.
2
Planning Commission Minutes
February 22 , 1993
In terms of other authority, under the Shoreline Management Act, it
regulates shorelines and associated wetlands and that Act has
determined that all wetlands on the Green River Valley Floor have
been designated associated wetlands. The King County Planning
Policies that have been recently adopted encourage and in some
instances, require wetland delineation and require consistency from
local to county levels. Lastly, the City has received grant
funding from the Department of Ecology Coastal Zoning Management
funding source and there is an implied aspect of those contracts
that the funds were granted so that we would adopted wetland
regulations.
Commissioner Heineman chaired the wetlands subcommittee. He
briefly stated the draft shows all the changes and deletions made
to the Planning Commission draft ordinance. Commissioner Heineman
succinctly described some of the changes in the draft ordinance.
Chair Martinez requested public comment.
Bruce Harpham, Rainier Chapter of the Audobon Society, expressed
concerns about the decline in wetlands and felt the original
proposal should be kept.
Gary Volchok, 1320 Fifth Avenue, Seattle, 98101, briefly talked
about the loss of buildable acreage and revenue by adopting a
strict wetland policy. Mr. Volchok commented he didn't agree
entirely with either document. He remarked he would use his verbal
aspects with the Council.
Commissioner Haley asked Mr. Volchok if he knew about the Chamber' s
plans to submit a draft document to the Council. Commissioner
Haley stated that the time to request changes or comments should
have been at the time the original document was before the
Commission prior to being recommended to the City Council.
Mr. Volchok commented exception was taken to the final draft from
the Commissioners and, thus, the Chambers did their own draft.
Jack Nelson, 601 W. Gowe, recommended that on page 12 , Section 6,
Subsection A, that repair and maintenance definition be used in
place of maintenance and upkeep. In addition, on the same page, it
should be owner or occupant rather than owner occupier. Further,
he suggested, on page 13 , section 7 , under Allowed Activities,
Section B, Subsection 1, that the underlined language be stricken.
Rita Bailey, 20607 101st Avenue SE, was in favor in retaining
version A of Section 12 in the Critical Areas regulation.
3
Planning Commission Minutes
February 22 , 1993
Sharon Rodman, 14138 SE 238th, commented she is a professional
biologist and served for a short time on the Commission' s
subcommittee regarding the critical areas. Ms. Rodman read into
the record a commentary regarding the need for firm critical areas
regulations.
Michael Williams, Professional Planetacologist, commented on the
need for natural wetlands. Mr. Williams mentioned that with the
loss of natural wetlands, the taxpayers will be needing to pay more
and more for clean water. He felt that developers were heavily
against the original document and, furthermore, were not interested
in creating a viable wetland ordinance. Mr. Williams stated that
he attended some of the subcommittee' s meetings; however, when it
became clear that some of the members of the committee did not feel
that scientific input was desired, he resigned in protest and
submitted a letter with Sharon Rodman. Mr. Williams mentioned that
he had tried to present a Department of Ecology document that was
recently published relating to buffers and replacement ratios for
wetlands and some of the committee members were very unreceptive to
it. In addition there was quite a bit of hostility in the
committee towards the scientific community.
Steve Babbitt, 945 E. Maple Street, commented that EPA agreed that
the use of the 1987 manual should be used. He commented he would
like to know how many acres are available in Kent and in what
development class. However, he felt property owners should be
given some monetary value for wetlands. Mr. Babbitt felt the
original Commission document should be kept.
Paula Gilmore, 1102 E. Hemlock, urges the Commission to consider
the importance of protecting the wetlands for water quality and
wildlife habitat. Ms. Gilmore supports the first version of the
Commission' s ordinance.
Joe Miles, 24639 156th Avenue SE, was on the Mayor's Task Force
that examined the Kent lagoon and the subcommittee for the current
critical area draft. He felt the revised ordinance protects the
wetlands, provides flexibility to developers and provides
exemptions for the small residential homeowner. Mr. Miles
commented it does provide that any filling of a wetland will
require mitigation. He commented Version A which allows up to
10, 000 square feet to be filled and replaced is feasible. However,
he expressed concerns about Version B. He urged that Version A of
the revised ordinance be adopted.
Steve Burpee, 1048 James, representing Kent Chamber of Commerce,
commented the Chamber represents all types of businesses including
developers. Mr. Burpee stated a healthy environment helps deliver
4
Planning Commission Minutes
February 22 , 1993
a quality of life for everyone. However, jobs mean a quality of
life. Mr. Burpee felt what was needed is a balance; something,
that recognizes all factors involved. This wetland issue has been
worked on for many years. The Chamber has felt they have
continually put forth their concerns and brought forth what they
felt would be a compromise or balanced approach. He commented
they felt they were constantly ignored and not listened to. When
it became clear that most of their concerns were not going to be
addressed, they came up with their own version. Mr. Burpee
continued saying that when they disagree they reserve the right to
present their concerns on issues prior to the final adoption of the
regulations. Further, the Planning Commission's step is only one
step in the process of writing and developing new regulations.
Commissioner Dahle asked why the Chambers did not present their
report to the Planning Commission rather than the City Council.
Mr. Burpee felt the Chambers concerns and recommendations weren't
going to be considered and they wanted their concerns to be heard.
The report was finished prior to the Commission voting on the
recommended draft to City Council . He commented it was not brought
to the Commission because the Chambers felt their concerns were not
addressed during the process.
Commissioner Haylor pointed out the rules were made to be followed.
He commented the original draft wasn 't completely to his liking;
however, he attempted to change it at the Commission level. He
felt that Mr. Burpee has shown that if he doesn't like something he
can go around the Commission. Commission Haylor resented that the
Chamber's proposed changes weren' t presented to the Commission
first.
Mr. Burpee asserted that Commissioner Haylor was entitled to his
opinion and the Chambers can have theirs. It was his understanding
that when a project is sent to the City Council, additional
comments could be made. Mr. Burpee supported the draft B.
A. J. Fisher, 26029 119th Drive SE, has resided for 25 years in
Kent. He commented that he has seen the development over the
years. Further, since the valley has been rapidly constructed, it
now floods every time it rains. Mr. Fisher contended that there
must be controls over development. He recommends that the original
draft be sent to the Council.
Ted Knapp, 612 Bellevue Way NE #201, Bellevue, chaired the
subcommittee and was also involved with preparing the original
draft as well as the Chamber ' s draft. Mr. Knapp felt that on all
issues except for Section 12 , a consensus was reached. Mr. Knapp
5
Planning Commission Minutes
February 22 , 1993
felt draft B is very workable. Mr. Knapp submitted a position
paper to the Commission supporting the draft ordinance and the
language in draft B for Section 12 . Further, the area figure shown
in Section 12 which is 20, 000 square feet should be changed to one
acre. He suggested that the area shown in Section 12 B 2 d be
changed from 2 , 000 square feet to 10, 000 square feet. This would
allow the filling of up to one acre of wetland without doing an
alternative analysis but would require full mitigation pursuant to
the other provisions of the ordinance. The second change affects
the mitigation bank if a mitigation bank were to be established.
In addition, in that section, it should be for all zones not just
residential. Mr. Knapp stated the changes were Section 12 B 2 E
for 2 , 000 to 10, 000 square feet and Section 12 B 2 C and Section 12
B 2 D is changed to from 20, 000 square feet to one acre.
Joyce Farnier, 22815 68th Avenue S. , strongly commented on the
effect of development on her land.
John Kiefer, 11048 SE 274th, felt the flooding problem was created
by developers, the City of Kent and everyone who lives here. He
commented there are probably ways to correct this injustice.
Mr. Kiefer supports the original Planning Commission ' s proposal.
Laurie Johnston, PO Box 161, Renton, 98057 , commented she has been
on various environmental task force committees and has followed
this issue for a number of years. Ms. Johnston supports the
original draft ordinance.
IT WAS MOVED, SECOND AND CARRIED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
Chair Martinez distributed a communication from Mark Stiefel.
Further, the discussion will continue to 10: 00 pm and if a decision
has not been reached, the meeting will be continued to March 8,
1993 as a special meeting to consider the critical areas draft
ordinance only.
Commissioner Heineman MOVED that the Subcommittee draft be accepted
through the WHEREAS section, pages 1 and 2 .
Commissioner Haylor asked for clarification on proceeding on how
the ordinance is to be accepted or changed.
Chair Martinez explained that the Commission voted on the critical
area draft and sent it to City Council for their consideration.
City Council remanded the draft back to the Commission with new
information that should be considered. A subcommittee was formed.
The subcommittee considered the new information and recommended
changes to the critical area draft ordinance. The Commission then
6
Planning Commission Minutes
February 22 , 1993
re-opened the public hearing to provide the public with an
opportunity to comment on the revised critical area ordinance. The
public hearing has been closed and the Commission will now vote on
the amended critical area ordinance and recommend the amended
ordinance to the City Council.
Mr. Brubaker commented that is correct. Further, the City Council
specifically asked the Planning Commission to consider the Chamber
of Commerce ' s input. Mr. Brubaker stated the Commission has the
subcommittee' s draft dated January 1993 to consider tonight.
However, the Commission can reaffirm the original draft or accept
the amended critical area ordinance or modify both. Mr. Brubaker
stated the City Council remanded the ordinance back to the
Commission to reconsider new information. No specific action has
to be taken concerning an earlier vote since discussion was re-
opened and now the Commission has closed the discussion and they
can either reaffirm or modify the decision. The amendments to the
ordinance, if any, would then go back to the City Council for
determination. Mr. Brubaker clarified that the Commission can void
or repeal the previous ordinance, the Commission can reaffirm the
earlier decision or the Commission can accept modifications as
shown on the draft document. Mr. Brubaker stated that the draft
document is the original document showing the modifications or
deletions as recommended to the Commission by the subcommittee.
Chair Martinez commented the Commission can either adhere to the
original document or the original document can be changed.
A MOTION was made and SECONDED that the Commission vote again to
accept what was originally recommended. MOTION WAS DEFEATED.
MOTION made and SECONDED that the Commission go through section by
section and consider the recommendations made in the Subcommittee
Discussion Draft dated January 1993 to the original City of Kent
Wetlands Regulations (Draft) . A friendly amendment was made that
the Commission vote on the draft in its entirety.
Mr. Brubaker commented the easiest way to consider this matter is
to make a motion to vote to approve the modifications and then all
the modifications would come under discussion and the Commission
could approach modification item by item and make a final decision.
That way the entire document would come under discussion or it
could be discussed section by section and then after a
determination is made, the motion could be defeated, friendly
amendments could be made, or new amendments could be made.
Commissioner Morrill repeated his motion: that the Commission go
through the recommended amendments section by section and adopt
7
Planning Commission Minutes
February 22 , 1993
each section as it finishes each section. SECONDED. MOTION
CARRIED.
MOTION MADE TO ACCEPT THE WHEREAS SECTION, PAGES 1 AND 2, SECONDED
AND CARRIED.
MOTION MADE AND SECONDED to accept Section 1 as it appears. MOTION
CARRIED.
MOTION MADE AND SECONDED to accept Section 2 as it appears.
Friendly amendment made to amend section to include priority
habitats. Friendly amendment approved. MOTION with amendment
CARRIED.
MOTION MADE AND SECONDED to accept Section 3 as it appears. MOTION
CARRIED.
MOTION MADE AND SECONDED to accept Section 4 as it appears. MOTION
CARRIED.
MOTION MADE AND SECONDED to accept Section 5 as it appears. MOTION
CARRIED.
MOTION WAS MADE AND SECONDED to amend Section 5 to include
Section A. 1. A. , species identified in Kent as needing special
protection. MOTION DEFEATED.
MOTION MADE AND SECONDED to accept Section 6 with note as it
appears with the following exception: Section 6 .A. to stated owner
OR occupant. MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION MADE AND SECONDED to accept Section 7 as it appears. MOTION
CARRIED.
MOTION MADE AND SECONDED to accept Section 8 as it appears. MOTION
CARRIED.
MOTION MADE AND SECONDED to accept Section 9 as it appears. MOTION
CARRIED.
MOTION MADE AND SECONDED to accept Section 10 as it appears.
MOTION CARRIED.
MOTION MADE AND SECONDED to accept Section 11 with the following
amendment. Commissioner Martinez asked for a friendly amendment
to include the following language: enhanced wetland buffers made be
used to satisfy landscaping requirements where the City determines
that the buffer, as enhanced by the applicant, will provide greater
8
Planning Commission Minutes
February 22 , 1993
protection of wetlands. . . . , to the end of that section and then
add, approved landscaping vegetation must meet wetland buffer
vegetation requirements. COMMISSIONERS APPROVED AMENDMENT.
Commissioner Dahle thought paths and trails had to be 50 feet from
wetlands and shorelines.
Mr. Harris commented the 50 foot requirement only applied to the
Green River and not a wetland.
Mr. Brubaker commented that if there were more than one ordinance
applied to a section of land, the more restrictive ordinance would
apply.
MOTION CARRIED ACCEPTING SECTION 11 AS AMENDED.
MOTION and SECONDED to continue the meeting to March 8 at 7 : 00 pm.
MOTION CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
4Jame . Harris, Secretary
JPH/ch: a:pcmin2 . 22
9
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES
March 15, 1993
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Paul Mann, Chairman
Leona Orr
STAFF PRESENT: Chief Crawford
Roger Lubovich
Dave Haenel
Laurie Evezich
Chief Angelo
Mary Berg
Bob Hutchinson
Tony McCarthy
May Miller
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC: Tom Pinches
Mary Pinches
The meeting was called to order at 5:30 p.m. by Chairman Mann.
CITIZEN CONCERNS REGARDING THE OMNI
Tom and Mary Pinches, owners of the Beanery Restaurant at 19611 East Valley Highway, noted that
their business is located right next to the Omni - a teenage night club. They identified the problems with
Omni patrons in the parking lot as follows: 1) cars are being stolen; 2) guns are being pulled on Beanery
customers; 3) drinking and driving; 4) drugs are being sold and taken; 5) customers of the Beanery are
being harassed, and; 6) urinating in a public place. Mary Pinches noted that the Police Department is
called regularly on the weekends but that nothing seems to be getting done. Chief Crawford explained
that one of the problems is that these patrons are minors who are covered by the juvenile laws but that
the City Attorney's Office has been asked to help by looking into some issues concerning business
licenses and explore other options to help resolve the problem. After considerable discussion, it was
agreed upon that Chief Crawford work the issue and report back to the Committee on April 19th.
ORR MOVED to make the letters submitted by the Pinches a part of the record. Mann seconded and
the motion carried.
NUISANCE ORDINANCE
City Attorney Lubovich updated the Committee regarding the Nuisance Ordinance and noted that a
committee has been established to come up with a plan to enforce issues concerning junk in yards,
garbage, vehicles, etc. He noted that draft procedures would be coming to this Committee, as well as
the Planning and Public Works Committees, shortly with a process for dealing with civil violations and
a penalty for non-compliance. He explained that this ordinance needs to be updated to include litter
control, noise control, weeds and vegetation, junk vehicles, and political signs and banners. Mann
expressed his support of this action.
RESTRICTED PARKING ZONES
Dave Haenel, Asst. City Attorney, explained that this ordinance regarding the restricted parking zones
was presented and created because of some citizens who attended the last Public Works Committee
meeting. He noted that it is basically just an enabling ordinance that gives the City the authority to create
certain restricted parking zones and that once the zones were determined, it would come back to the
Committee for approval. Chief Crawford expressed concern regarding the enforcement of such an
ordinance and staff limitations. Lubovich agreed that there would be spot zones with restricted parking
permits which would be difficult to cite. Upon further discussion, Mann and Orr agreed that more
consideration should be given before adoption of this ordinance.
INAUGURAL DAY STORM
Chief Berg informed the Committee that late last week they were notified that the January windstorm was
formally declared a disaster. He noted that a contact agent, usually the Emergency Management Director
which is Chief Angelo, has to be identified by resolution so that funds can be disbursed. ORR MOVED
to accept Chief Angelo as the contact agent to disburse funds received by the Federal and State
governments for the Inaugural Day Storm disaster; and to bring a resolution to the full Council stating
that Chief Angelo has been chosen as the contact agent. Mann seconded and the motion carried 2-0. Orr
requested that this item be placed under Other Business on the agenda for the City Council Meeting of
April 6th. Mann agreed and it was so ordered.
800 MHz RADIO/MDT SYSTEM
Chief Angelo distributed an executive summary and noted that on March 3, 1993, the City Council gave
the Fire Department authorization to negotiate a contract for the sale of the Public Safety 800 MHz
Trunking and MDT systems to Valley Com. He explained that a tentative agreement for the sale has
been reached and approved by the Valley Com Administrative Board. He noted that the final contract
and agreement have been reviewed and all personnel concur that it should be recommended for the
Committee's approval. Chief Angelo clarified that two separate capital accounts will be set up from the
sale of these systems; one for the Police Department and one for the Fire Department to establish the
completion and needs related to the Public Safety Bond Issue.
ORR MOVED for approval to authorize the Mayor to sign the agreement for the sale of the 800 MHz
Radio/MDT System to Valley Com. Mann seconded and the motion carried 2-0.
VALLEY DAILY NEWS EDITORIAL RE: NEW SAFEWAY
Mann noted that the Valley Daily News had written an editorial a while back relating to the new Safeway
exiting on to Washington and that making a left turn the way it is set up is a real hazard and very
dangerous. Chief Crawford agreed to do some research and come back with data.
McCarthy noted that he would talk to Don Wickstrom about having this item added to the Public Works
Committee meeting for discussion on Thursday, March 18th.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:10 p.m.
PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE
MARCH 18, 1993
PRESENT: JIM WHITE ED WHITE
JIM BENNETT JOHN BOND
PAUL MANN RAUL RAMOS
DON WICKSTROM LINDA JOHNSON
TOM BRUBAKER JOHN KIEFER
GARY GILL BILL DOOLITTLE
BILL WOLINSKI MR & MRS' RUST
STAN WADE
Resolution - Creating the City Transit Advisory Board
Jim White stated that this is patterned after the Bicycle Advisory
Board placing greater emphasis on transit as was established in the
Council ' s goals and objectives.
Committee unanimously agreed to recommend adoption of this
Resolution.
Lake Plaza Condominiums Master Meter
Wickstrom stated that under City ordinance, in order to obtain a
master meter to service more than one complex, Council approval is
required. Wickstrom stated that Lake Plaza Condominiums wants two
master meters to service two complexes .
Committee unanimously agreed to recommend approval of two master
meters at Lake Plaza Condominiums .
Construction Standards
Wickstrom stated that this has been a long awaited process in
developing these Construction Standards. We have developed them
through our own in-house staff, while working with the Planning
Dept. and Maintenance and have developed what we felt was
appropriate. A review committee was selected made up primarily of
the development community. Wickstrom stated that we received names
thru the Master Builders, the Chamber and the Association of
General Contractors. We placed advertisements in the newspapers
advising that copies were available for input to the committee.
1
Wickstrom requested that a public hearing be set for the April 20th
Council meeting. If there are no major reactions or major
concerns, that it would be adopted at that time. If there were
major concerns, than it would come back to Public Works Committee
for further input.
Committee unanimously agreed recommendation of a public hearing for
May 4th.
Lindental Plat Development Agreement/277th St Corridor
Wickstrom explained that Lindental is one of many plats there were
approved by the County that abut the 277th Corridor project. These
plats are on 116th Ave SE. Wickstrom said that in the County' s
approval, they approved various right of way widths, and grades and
as a result, were the developers to build their individual sections
of 116th Ave. , they wouldn 't match vertically or horizontally with
each other. Wickstrom stated that the City was working with
Lindental, which is a major plat off of Kent Kangley and 116th; the
final plat had already been recorded and our approach was that we
wanted to get something that would fit with the future road, versus
various miscellaneous sections that didn't fit. Wickstrom said,
under the agreement we would be an agent acting on behalf of the
developer; the City would build a minimum road that would fit with
the corridor project and the developer would pay the City what it
would have cost him for his original road section. Additionally,
the City would buy two lots from the development for future
detention facilities, which we would need as part of our widening
process per the corridor project. Wickstrom stated that the total
package will cost us about one-quarter million dollars, but we save
that in terms of having to re-work the area when we actually build
the corridor. Wickstrom stated that the developer has signed all
the necessary agreements. Wickstrom requested the Committee to
recommend the Public Works Director to be authorized to sign this
agreement.
Committee voted 2 - 1 to recommend authorization for the Public
Works Director to sign the Lindental Plat Development Agreement.
Street Cleaning
Linda Johnson of the Downtown Partnership, stated they would like
to use the work release prisoners to keep the streets clean, until
the new contract is written. Committee reviewed a memo received
from Human Resources Dept. regarding the use of prisoners for
street cleaning, which stated that the use of prisoners for street
cleaning could cause some major problems with the Teamsters Union
who normally perform this job function for the City. Wickstrom
suggested contacting the street sweeping contractor and try to work
out a different schedule for the downtown area. Jim White
directed staff to review this contract and bring this issue back to
Committee with recommendations.
2
Downtown Infrastructure
Ramos stated that there are sidewalks in disrepair that need to be
addressed immediately, indicating on a map, those that qualify as
having the highest priority. Ramos suggested that during the first
or second week of April, actual repair should be underway.
Wickstrom stated once we get more details we can put together a
proposal; we can do work up to $35, 000 without going out for bids.
Jim White stated that Council had placed a high priority on
sidewalks around schools. Wickstrom stated that one of his staff
members is using our 188 aerials and plotting out where all the
sidewalks exist. Ramos stated that he has met with the forester
for Puget Power and they have agreed to do an assessment of street
trees for the downtown area and will provide us with information on
the most desirable trees and those that are most compatible with
businesses as well as sidewalks and power lines. Ramos stated that
the forester is reporting back in two weeks and has agreed to
present results of her assessments to the Committee.
Left Turns at Langston Landing
Ed White stated that staff has been requested to review the
driveway situation on WA Avenue between Meeker and Willis,
specifically as it relates to access for Safeway and K-Mart stores.
Ed explained that the option of restricting left turns would not be
received well from either Safeway or K-Mart. Ed stated that it is
staff 's recommendation at this point to proceed with removing the
existing bollards and install the c-curb and enter into some type
of negotiation with K-Mart and Safeway to eventually close off
those left turns, should additional accidents occur. In response
to Jim White ' s question of a traffic signal , Ed stated that this
would be extremely difficult for the City to install because this
is a State route and that the State has a set spacing for traffic
signals; 1/4 to 1/2 mile. Paul Mann stated that some action needs
to be taken on this situation even if the businesses may suffer a
loss.
Committee concurred that the bollards be removed and the
installation of the c-curb proceed, as a trial basis.
Bridges Avenue & Willis Street
Bennett stated that this is also a left turn problem area, similar
to Langston Landing. Bennett stated that the signs indicating
"left" onto Willis are not very visible. Ed White explained that
staff was trying to relieve a situation where accidents were
occurring with the signing, however Ed noted that he will have
oversized signs installed for better visibility.
3